All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 19, 2022 - MyronGainesX
02:27:45
Fed & Lawyer Explain Torey Lanez Trial! DAY BY DAY Trial Analysis w/ Time Stamps! Ft.@LegalMindset
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And we are live.
What's up, guys?
Welcome to FedE.
I'm here with Andrew from Legal Mindset.
Man, we're gonna be breaking down the Tory Lanes and Meg De Stallion trial.
Guys, it's gonna be the most definitive and comprehensive breakdown of this trial on the internet.
There's nobody else more qualified to talk about this crap.
Let's get into it, guys.
It's gonna be a good one.
I was a special agent with homeland investigations.
Okay, guys, HSI.
The cases that I did mostly were human smuggling and drug traffic.
No one else has these documents, by the way.
Here's what FedEx coverage.
Dr. Lafredo confirmed lacerations due to stepping on glass.
Murder investigation.
You don't know.
And he's positioning.
Raceteering and Rico conspiracy.
Young slime life here and after referred to as YSL to the 6ix9ine.
And then this is Billy Seiko right here.
Now, when they first started, guys, 6ix9ine ran with the five.
I'm upset.
I'm watching this music video.
You know, I'm Bobby Mahala.
Hey, this is lit.
But at the same time, I'm pausing.
Oh, wait, who this?
Right?
Well, who's that in the back?
Firearms and violence.
AKA Bush I see filed it.
So wondering to stay away from the traffic guys arrested after shooting at King of Diving Manuscript Club in 31%.
This is the one that that's gonna fuck him up because this gun is not tracing.
Well, it happened at the gun range.
Here's your boy 42 Doug right here on the left.
Okay, sex trafficking and sex crimes.
They can effectively link him to paying an underage girl.
And the first bomb went off right here.
Second down attack second explorer fired by Al Qaeda.
Two terrorists, brothers, the Zokar, Sarnev, and Tamar landed Sarnev.
And the cardell ships drugs into the country.
As this guy got arrested for um espionage.
Okay, trading secrets with the Russians for monetary compensation.
The largest corrupt police bust in New Orleans history.
So he was in this bad boy.
We're going to go over his past, the gang time, so that this all makes sense.
Thank you.
All right, we are alive.
What's up, guys?
Welcome to FedA.
I'm here with Andrew from Legal Mindset.
Don't demonstrate.
So, guys, quick announcements, real quick.
Uh fresh of fit.locals.com.
Check us out over there, rumble.com slash fresh of fit.
But without further ado, guys, today is a big day.
We're gonna go ahead and cover this case.
You guys have been requesting this quite a bit.
So I went ahead and brought in the heavy guns.
Andrew, Andrew, I know who you are, but the audience might not.
Can you do yourself to the people real quick, man?
Yeah, how's it going, everybody?
I'm Andrew Legal Mindset.
Legal Mindset.locals.com.
Get on that locals and rumble uh rumble train.
Uh but I am a practicing uh Florida attorney, got over 10 years of experience.
I've been covering cases uh like this type of case on my channel for the past for the past couple years.
Uh and uh, you know, I love diving into this and getting into the actual statutes.
A lot of jokers out there, they're not lawyers, they don't know how to read the statutes, they don't know how to go in there and look at police reports, look at cases.
But if you have an actual lawyer who's actually looking at these things, who's experienced with them, uh, which is me.
Uh, I love doing this, and I do it on a regular basis on my channel, uh, legal mindset.
So I'm happy to do that here with my good friend Myron, who has been my friend for a long time, and I'm always glad to come in and help him out with anything he ever needs.
Yeah, no, absolutely, man.
I'm uh and I'm really happy to have you here, bro, because um, this is a big one, and um, I've been getting an overwhelming amount of requests for this.
So, real quick, guys, I uh before we even get into this, I think it's very important that the person that's dispensing the information is qualified to give you the information.
So, let me give you a little bit on my background because I know we probably got some new viewers here, or you're probably watching this on the replay, which by the way, I'm gonna break this trial down.
We're gonna break this trial down day by day, witness testimony by witness testimony, and give you guys the whole breakdown on what's the Fifth Amendment is, what you know immunity really is, how it works.
We're gonna break down everything as far as how trials go.
Now, with that said, as you guys know, former special agent with homeland screen investigations.
I've been to several trials, and as a matter of fact, I've also done a trial where I was the lead case agent.
What does that mean?
That means that I have prepared for trials where I was the one gathering the witnesses, getting the reports ready, getting witnesses prepped up for trial, which we're gonna talk about.
That the prosecution here made some mistakes about now prepping their witnesses, and we'll get into that a little bit later.
But um, I have definitely uh done a trial before at a federal level.
And when it comes to the feds and trials, we don't fuck around.
There's a reason why the feds don't lose.
This is a state trial, guys, which is a little bit more of a circus.
I ain't gonna lie to y'all.
And you guys are gonna see some of the crazy things uh that's going on in this trial as we get into it.
But uh I've definitely been uh testified in federal trials, and I've been to several state trials as well.
I've never had to testify at a state trial, thank God.
However, I have been to them for other cases that I was involved in that might have been narcotics, whatever, maybe like that.
So um definitely very aware of how the judicial system works from the laws for law enforcement perspective, and also for preparing for trial because when you prepare for trial, guys, as the lead investigator, it is your job to gather all the facts and make the prosecutor's job a lot easier because the prosecutor can't prosecute the case without the evidence that you have to go ahead and gather, which we're gonna talk about some of the failures here by the police to gather the evidence.
Um, and some of the W's as well.
They did have some W's as well.
Um, but um, what about you, Andrew?
Can you give your background for the people real fast?
Yeah, no, like I said, I'm practicing attorney, 10 years of experience.
I've been to tons of cases, I've seen stuff like this, uh, you know, regularly as I go into court.
Um, I've covered cases like this.
This is a very interesting case, too, because it's a firearms case.
And whenever you bring in firearms issues, and this is something I cover a lot on my channel.
You obviously invoke the second amendment.
There's some of the charges here.
There's one of the charges particular that I think might be pushing up against that, but it's a very fascinating case.
And like I said, this is in my bailey week.
This is something I covered, something I know about statutes that I know.
Uh, I do not practice in California.
This is a California case, but when you read one statute in one state, they very much usually mirror statutes in other states.
The only difference is California has a a little bit extra because they like to regulate guns a lot more than my home state of Florida.
Uh, you know, and in our home state of Florida.
And I think an important thing as well is that you've litigated before, of course.
So and a lot of lawyers, guys, have not litigating basically means like arguing in court.
So Andrew understands completely, you know, the rules of procedure, how things work, etc.
So definitely you guys are gonna get some experts level stuff right now.
So um, anything else before we go?
So we spoke about our backgrounds, our qualifications, anything.
Did you want to go over what actually you know what?
This is what I'll do.
I'll go ahead and introduce you guys to who Meg The Stallion is, Tory Lanez, etc.
Because some of you guys might not be in the hip hop scene, some of you guys might not be aware of who these individuals are, which is totally cool.
We'll bring you guys up to speed real fast.
So, Meg DeStyleon, here she is, guys.
Um, Megan Javon Ruth Pete, born February 15, 1995, known professionally as Megan and the Stallion, pronounced Megan the Stallion, is an American uh rapper and songwriter, originally from Houston, Texas.
She first garnered attention when videos of her freestyle became popular on social media platforms, such as Instagram, Megan Style is signed to 300 Entertainment 2018, where she released the mixtape Fever 2019 and the extended play uh play Sugar 2020, both of which reach the top 10 of the Billboard 200.
So, and you guys most importantly, most importantly, she's got that WAP, right?
The number one, that number one song.
Well, everybody knows when I say Meg the Stallion, they immediately think wow.
And here, if you go here, she earned her first and second number one singles on the US Billboard Hot 100 with the remix of her song Savage featuring Beyonce and her feature on Cardi B's single WAP, the latter of which was her first number one in several other countries, as well as the Billboard Global 200 charts.
So, as you guys can see here, distinguished artists hit the boardboard uh, you know, top 200 and number one, which not many artists are able to um acknowledge, right?
Or not sorry, not able to reach.
Then you got Tori Lane's here.
They star Semuel Shua Peterson, born July 27, 1992, known professionally as Tory Lanes is a Canadian rapper, singer, songwriter, and record producer who received initial recognition from the mixtape conflicts of my soul, the full and six story released in August of 2013 in 2015.
Tori Lane signed to record producer Benny Blanco's Mad Love Records through Interscope.
Okay.
So he is the accused.
And uh, and then you got Kelsey Nicole, which she doesn't have Wikipedia page, but here she is, guys.
This is Meg DeStyle's former best friend slash assistant.
As you guys can see, she just had had a child, which we're gonna talk about that in the trial here in a little bit.
Um, but yeah, her and Meg have known each other since college, very close.
But this is her IG right here.
She is one of the main witnesses in the case.
And I do want to add that she is a prosecution's witness.
Okay.
So Meg is the victim, allegedly.
Tori is a perpetrator, allegedly, allegedly.
And Kelsey is a witness, allegedly, I guess, at this point.
And what one of the important facts, guys, we're gonna come back to this, is that uh Tory Lane's Uh Daystar Peterson, he is a Canadian citizen.
So we're gonna get into how that matters because legally that is something that does matter, and that's why you got to know the background of these people because some of these facts really matter a lot.
Something like that is very relevant in this case.
And it's a big reason why Tory guys can't take a plea.
I know some of you guys are like, Oh, why does a Tory just take a plea?
It's not that serious.
They could you probably could get uh a plea down to like you know aggravated us all and ain't that big a deal, he probably won't get that much time.
You want to talk about eight USC 1227, you know about that.
The reason why he can't take a plea, guys, and he has to fight this thing to the death is because he's a Canadian national.
Okay, so that means if he's arrested and convicted of this crime, what's gonna happen is immigration and customs enforcement uh office of up uh enforcement removal operations is gonna lodge something called the detainer, okay?
And this detainer means as soon as he gets out of prison, they're gonna go ahead and grab him up right as he's getting his bag, like, yeah, I'm free.
They're gonna get his ass right then and there, and a lot of times the jails will hold the prisoner until immigration comes on their release day, right?
As a courtesy, and then they'll pick him up, arrest him.
Now he's a federal custody, he's on a plane going back to fucking Canada, and he will be inadmissible and coming back to United States.
He will be something called excluded in immigration law.
So he can't afford to lose this trial, guys.
Because if he loses his trial, he'll be convicted of felony, he'll be deported.
And worse worst part, he's an entertainer and a musician.
We know the United States is one of the biggest markets when it comes to hip hop.
If he can't tour and do music here in the United States, it's gonna it's gonna hurt him significantly because most artists make most of their money from touring, guys.
All right, so this is high stake stuff here.
Um and uh okay, so um uh was there you can say something you want to come up with.
Oh, yeah, no, I was gonna say, I was gonna yeah, deportable offense under you know, eight uh under um, you know, eight USC uh 1227 is any crime which has a sentence of one year or more.
So that's a felony offense, right?
So essentially anything that's a felony offense is gonna get you.
That's an easy way to do it.
But even misdemeanors, like if they were to go past that for you know, there's not a lot of misdemeanors to do.
For misdemeanor, it's two crimes of moral interpretude will get you to more moral interpretude.
So um, so I think he already has the rest for other stuff.
So let's say he gets arrested for and he takes even a misdemeanor in this case, it could still mess him up where they're gonna be like, you know what, bro, you're a nuisance, you've been arrested before, you're causing problems.
We're we're just gonna remove you, we're gonna revoke your visa because he's probably here on an entertainer visa.
So yeah, they can just revoke his visa.
Like, I doubt he has a green card.
So um, green cards a little bit harder to take, but even then, if he gets convicted of two crimes, they get rid of him, and then if he's here on a visa, they can definitely yank that.
So people don't understand how hard it is, like, especially if you know I'm over here in Seoul, South Korea.
That's something I didn't tell you guys here.
You know, I'm living in Asia, you know.
When you're when you're living in another country and you don't got that passport, you don't got that citizenship, right?
You are on a thin fucking line.
You are on a thin line.
The the the excuses that they have to deport your ass are wide.
You don't have rights like a normal citizen.
Your rights are far diminished as a person who's just visiting a country who's just there on a visa.
Yep.
So yeah, and I don't know what Tory's immigration status, but more than likely he either has an entertainer visa or he has a green card, he has entertainer visa, they could take that for any reason, pretty much.
And then a green card, they could take it even if he's convicted of a of two misdemeanors and moral interpretude, or if he's convicted of a felony, definitely gonna lose that green card.
So um, there's a lot of writing here.
You know, he can't just plead guilty to anything, guys.
So for all you guys are saying you should just took the plea, can't bro.
Um, so I'll hit these chats real quick.
Uh, Christina, can you pull them up?
And then I'll go and then we'll go ahead and get into uh the first stuff.
Stopping by to show love.
Thank you so much.
Bat beats by ISO.
Uh, what else?
Anything else?
I saw that earlier one about uh how many states can regulate this the so the set the regular handguns.
Yeah, there you go.
How how are the states able to bypass the second amendment regulate handguns?
They just do it.
Let me explain this very quickly.
One of the charges in this is and this is one of the charges against Tory Lane's is possession of an unregistered firearm.
Uh, I I got it right here, I got it right here.
And this is under uh California penal code, uh, section uh part six, title four, division five, chapter three, carrying a loaded firearm, right?
So this is the one here.
You are not on your side, Andrew hit control.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Let me uh let me just get this thing real big for you guys.
Yeah, I know.
I got that laser vision.
I got those laser eyes, but you know, let me get down here for you guys to section six.
All right.
So you have to be the registered person with the department of justice listed as the owner of the handgun.
Right.
Now, this, in my humble opinion, is unconstitutional.
This is violative of this of the second amendment.
How do states do that?
Well, states can do whatever the fuck they want until you challenge the law.
See, this is how this is the frustrating thing with states, particularly states like California.
Governor Gavin Newsom has said on the record that he knows things are unconstitutional when he passes it, but he knows it is a tactic to delay because someone has to challenge that law to get overthrown.
We just saw a huge case in New York, uh, New York versus Bruin, where their registration requirement got overturned, got found unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The problem is it goes back to the same New York legislators, the same New York courts to reformulate that they're gonna do everything they can to stop you from legally carrying a firearm.
The people that are out there that want to carry firearms that are doing crimes that are carrying them illegally, they're carrying them regardless.
But they want to do everything they can to stop people from legally carrying firearms.
That's something I've been covering on my channel for a long time.
So I'm not surprised about this, but I will say if Tory Lanez was just convicted on this charge in this charge alone, this could go to the Supreme Court.
So wouldn't that be crazy?
Tory lanes versus the United versus California would be the case.
That would be fucking nuts.
But um, we'll talk about whether we think he's gonna get convicted on or not uh a little bit later in this.
Once we go through all the evidence, I guess that's a perfect um this case is the BET version of Amber Heard versus Johnny Depp.
No, okay, what else?
Anything else, Christina?
100 bucks.
These two guys analyze your case, you know you're in trouble.
Yeah, I brought the big guns in.
Yeah, if I brought Andrew and y'all know it's it's a big deal, and we're gonna go over this.
Don't worry, the timestamps are gonna be super fucking detailed.
So from this point forward, guys, I'm not gonna read chats unless they're 50 and up because I really want to get through this.
We got a lot to cover.
We're gonna go day by day.
Is there anything else, Christina?
Before uh okay, pull them up.
And uh, guys, do me a favor, like the video, subscribe to the channel, then also subscribe to legal mindset.
He's tagged in a title.
Uh, let's go ahead and get him to 100,000 subscribers, get him a plaque.
Almost there, baby.
Of course, my uh Osama bin Laden, aka Myron's grandfather goes, Black, glad to be back for your grandson.
Thank you so much, Bin Laden.
I appreciate it.
I thought you were dead, bro.
And then by one BBL Gillen Free goes, always wonder why the driver was not subpoenaed if he is the key witness and saw everything.
That's a good question.
We could we could give you guys theories on that as well.
Why why I think he probably wasn't subpoenaed.
Um, anything else?
Cool.
No, let's just rock and roll.
All right.
So uh with that said, guys, like I said, uh, like the video, subscribe to the both channels.
Um, and let's get into this.
So um, anything that you oh, let's go over the charges, Andrew, real fast.
Yeah, sure, sure.
Uh so we got uh we got three charges.
I already brought up the one for uh possession of an unregistered firearm, right?
A loaded unregistered firearm.
That's one.
Uh second is assault.
Um, well, it's under the assault statute.
Let me pull this up right here.
Yeah, um, and this yeah, this is under um chapter 246.3, which is accept as authorized by law.
This is 2463a here.
Um, except as authorized by law.
Any person who willfully discharges a firearm in a grossly negligent manner, which could result in injury or death to a person is guilty of a public offense and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or imprisonment, uh, pursuant through subsection H. So this is for discharging a firearm in a negligent grossly negligent manner.
Now, let me be fair very clear.
I know when some people hear negligence, they just mean, oh, that was something that a reasonable person wouldn't do.
No, grossly negligent is a high standard, something that you knowingly do, and you know it could cause harm to others.
Something like firing into a crowd, something like you know, uh Russian roulette.
That's grossly negligent, right?
If you know there's bullets in the gun and you you're passing that gun around, that's grossly negligent.
That's something you know is bad.
So it's a higher level than just hey, you know, I was driving down the road and I, you know, wasn't I looked at my phone and then I got in a car crash.
That's negligent.
That's not necessarily grossly negligent.
So this is a pretty pretty high standard, uh, not something that is uh the negligence standard.
Uh, that's one charge.
And the next charge we got against him uh is over here, which is 245 A1.
Any person who commits an assault upon uh a person of another with a deadly weapon or instrument other than a firearm.
Oh, this is for other than a firearm, sorry.
Um probably one of those two, two.
It's two, yeah.
Yeah, any person who commits an assault upon a person, um, upon the person of another with a firearm shall be punished by imprisonment in the state of two, three, four years, or in a county jail, not less than six months and not exceeding one year.
So boom, there you go.
Now, and I want to say these statutes, this is very typical.
Myron, I know you've seen this a lot where one statute will have it'll have a punishment for not for non-firearms and for firearms, right?
So, this is all under here, even below this.
You see, there's punishment for people with machine guns.
Yeah, so you've got everything covered in one statute, it's just subsections of that one statute.
Yeah, uh, and this is assault and battery.
So, this is a type of assault and battery charge.
And then there was was there one more?
Didn't they get him for that was the discharge or something like that?
The third one was carrying of a loaded firearm in public, the unregistered uh firearm.
So, unregistered firearm, discharging it in a grossly negligent manner.
I think they're on the day of the trial, didn't they?
Didn't they or a day before the trial they hit him with that discharging one randomly?
Yes, yes, they hit him with the discharging one.
This is the one over here, the grossly negligent discharge.
They hit him with this uh very, very, very shortly.
Uh, proximate to the to the to the trial, which means they're reaching.
That is actually a sign of desperation on the side of the prosecution.
If they thought they had it, they wouldn't be adding charges.
When they start adding charges, that means they think what they got isn't gonna stick.
Yeah, and to do it right before the trial is strange, extremely strange.
Yeah, um, but that's the state for you.
Yep.
All right, so um, okay.
So now that you guys know, so let's go over the facts of the case overall, and then we're gonna go ahead and get into each day of the trial.
This is basically what happened, guys.
They went ahead.
Uh, there was a party at um Kylie Jenner's home.
Meg DeStallian and Kelsey were present.
Tori Lanez came after the fact.
Um, pretty much everyone agrees that that they were at this party, it was going on.
There were some other slabs there, etc.
Then at some point in the evening, they left the party, and when they left the party, there was arguments in the vehicle.
The vehicle had stopped.
Um, Meg got out of the vehicle and she was shot by somebody.
Meg alleges that it was Tori.
Tori's saying he didn't shoot, or he's basically staying silent on the subject.
There's evidence all over the place that points to this and that, but no one really knows who shot Meg.
And uh Tori ended up getting charged because the weapon was sound found in the front seat when they got arrested.
He was also on the front seat.
So they went ahead and charged him because of constructive possession.
And as you guys know, on Fed it, right?
We were the first ones to show y'all that police report, which I'll go ahead and pull it out for you guys real quick.
And there's some really good facts in that police report.
And Myron went through and found the best facts here and circled them because these are the ones you need to laser in on.
Yeah.
So here's the police report, guys.
Here's the arrest report.
As you guys can see, day starting.
I got his get out to Christina.
She went and got the supposed police report first.
We're the first ones to break it.
Okay.
Um, this this police report.
It was a pain in the ass to get, but we're able to get it.
And um, so here's his booking uh documents and everything else like that.
So, as you guys know, this happened on the 12th of July, okay.
And uh, this is the charge carrying concealed weapon in a vehicle originally.
So they ended up arresting him, right?
And I'll go over the witnesses here a little bit later, but the biggest thing is um let's see here.
Uh, based off the location where the handgun was located and where Peterson was seated prior to being detained, officers formed the opinion that Peterson was in constructive possession of the handgun.
Okay, and that's why they ended up arresting him because he was in a front seat at first when they pulled them over.
But but let's be clear constructive possession.
What does that mean?
That does not mean actual possession.
That does not mean he actually had it on him.
He did not actually have it on him.
They would have said he actually possessed the firearm.
It was just within his alleged reach, which is why they say he was in constructive possession of the firearm.
Yeah, so and as you guys can see here, I'm gonna show you guys some footage of when they got arrested.
Okay.
So the DA's office says lanes, whose legal name is you guys can see right here.
Here's the escalade.
Here's lanes, right?
Proned out in the swim trunks because they had pool party at Kylie Jenner's place, they were coming back.
All right, man.
That sucks, but in the middle of the highway, like prone down for sure.
Right.
Um, and then Peterson.
So this is what you call a felony stop, by the way, guys.
Okay.
A felony stop is when you go ahead and you, you know, you stop the vehicle, they got lights on it, they're trying to see what the hell's going on.
Obviously, the police had information that a shooting had just occurred, they don't know what's going on.
So they have to take extreme procedures like this.
So here's Meg the Stallion now coming out.
And as you guys can see, she's hobbling.
Shot Megan's feet.
She's in the bikini, so they have they have her blurred during an argument in the Hollywood Hills, July 20th.
Eight year old's year old rather was arrested last night or the night of the shooting, but was released after posting bail.
He now faces two felony charges and is set to be arraigned Tuesday in LA.
If convicted, he faces and they got Kelsey out, and they pretty much took all of them into custody.
Okay, guys.
So that's the general facts of the case, right?
Because we don't know for sure who shot who.
This trial has raised quite a bit of questions, but there was a party, Meg was there, Tori was there, Kelsey was there, they're all left together.
There was an argument or a disagreement in the vehicle.
Meg ended up getting out, and she ended up getting shot.
There were five shots that were fired.
That pretty much has been the story between everybody, but no one can actually conclusively identify who the shooter was.
So uh anything you want to say, Andrew, before we get into the first thing.
No, I I think I think you know, this is the these are the facts.
Like when you go back and you look at it, you know, you have to reconcile these initial facts with what they're saying at trial.
And does this line up?
Does this line up with you know the police report, the things we know, the things we see from this testimony?
Does this line up with what they're saying at court?
Because the whole thing is you can say you can say one thing at court, right?
A year later, shit happens, things go down, you're no longer fucking the guy you were fucking a year ago, you feel certain way about it now.
You can change your testimony, and that happens a lot.
Uh, especially when you get something that happened a year, two years ago, and this is now two years ago, right?
My this is about two years ago.
Um, that's a that's a lot of time.
It's a lot of time to change your story.
Yep.
So, okay, so we're gonna go day by day here, guys.
So uh so day one of the trial is opening statements.
Andrew, you want to take it away and explain what opening is.
Yeah, so opening statements.
The point of opening statements is to lay out your theory of the trial.
Now, people human beings tend to pay attention to two things the most what you say in the beginning and what you say at the end.
So it really matters how you start out your case and how you end it.
You gotta start strong and end strong.
And what people are gonna check for in that opening statement is the theory of the case.
What's the story?
So the prosecution is trying to lay out their story.
Hey, here's our story.
Here's why Tory Lanez did this.
Watch us prove these crimes.
We're gonna show you these things, we're gonna prove these things at trial.
We're showing you how he had the handgun, how he shot it, how he injured Meg, how he assaulted Meg.
We're gonna show you that during this trial, and then you have to go and do that, and then your closing is saying, Hey, look, we told you we were gonna do this, and we did this.
Mic drop.
Bam.
And those two things need to be tight.
You cannot go and change your theory of the case or change your story during the trial.
You're gonna lose credibility with the jury, you're probably gonna lose some credibility with the judge, and you're just gonna completely flop.
So your opening needs to be strong, and it needs to line up with exactly what you're gonna show during the trial.
This this becomes relevant, especially for the prosecution.
Bam.
So now you guys know what opening statements are.
Very important because I agree with you 100% on that, Andrew.
The people remember what happens at the beginning and at the end.
You go back and you look at the OJ trial.
What does everyone remember?
If the glove doesn't fit, you must have quit.
Yep.
So they always remember the opening and the closing statement.
So um, so guys, opening statements.
The the prosecution always goes first.
I want to let you guys know this as well.
It is on the prosecution, aka the prosecutors and the detectives and the police to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Tory shot Meg the Stallion.
So you got to understand that the prosecution has got to put the case together, not the defense.
The defense is there to kind of question the evidence, but they don't necessarily have to put their own witnesses on, they don't have to really do anything, they just have to defend against the prosecution.
All right, yeah, So prosecution always goes first, guys, in opening statements.
And what the prosecution basically said in opening statements, they open up and they say, Dance, bitch, dance.
Okay.
They open with that, which is as you guys know what Tory Lanez allegedly said to Meg DeStein before he shot her five times.
And um, basically, they say there was an uh argument at the party about Tory's music.
Okay.
Meg was insulting Tori's music.
Um, Meg gets out the car, and Tori, out of anger of what she had said about his music, gets out the car, yells, dance bitch, and shoots at her.
Okay.
They said that there was fragments of bullet fragments in her foot.
And they also said an opening statement, which is gonna be funny later on.
Kelsey will come in and testify and show you guys that Tori was the shooter, and he shot her.
Okay.
They also show text messages between Tory and Meg and Kelsey, where he's apologizing profusely.
Um, and uh, and they basically use that to insinuate what is he apologizing for?
He's the shooter.
We have an overwhelming amount of evidence, etc., which is what you're doing a lot of the times with opening statements.
You're posturing to let the other side know we're gonna kill y'all.
Then the defense goes up and their opening statements and they say, Do you have anything?
Go ahead, Andrew.
No, one thing on the prosecution, real quick.
The prosecution, if there's a crime and there's elements of a crime, they gotta prove all of them.
They gotta prove every single element.
So if there's one thing they're missing, if there's a single thing, the prosecution cannot win, which is why they have to say exactly like Myron said, We have a bunch of evidence.
We're gonna prove this with overwhelming evidence.
Because they go, they do have to provide overwhelming evidence for every single element of the crime.
The defense just has to poke holes in one piece of that that tie.
They have to get one little hole in their theory of the case.
One little piece of evidence is broken.
That's reasonable doubt.
They're in it, they're innocent.
That's all they got to do is they're gonna muddy the waters a little bit, guys.
That's their job is to muddy the waters.
Okay.
So uh, so now the um, so now the defense, guys, says, okay.
Well, the prosecution isn't telling you guys about an eyewitness, okay, who saw them fighting.
Okay, and I know what they're talking about.
I could pull up the police board and show you guys here in a second.
Uh, and then also they said gunpowder was found on Kelsey.
They said the fight wasn't a fight between Tori and Meg, rather, it was a fight between Kelsey and Meg because Meg was sleeping with a bunch of guys that Kelsey had dealt with prior, to include Ben Simmons, uh, the baby, and Tori Lane.
Okay, so the defense goes in and kind of pictures shows Meg as a jealous, angry friend who backstabs her friend with men, and they also said uh and by the way, this is relevant.
This is relevant as the motive, right?
This is all very, very relevant as motive sex, relationships, these are the strongest motives.
When people end up getting killed, when people end up getting in altercations, it often is about I mean, Myron talks about this on both of his shows, is often involving a man and a woman for clear reasons we all know about in society.
Absolutely.
And then they also said that the gun was in the front seat.
Meg was originally in the front seat, and they theorize that Tory's in the shooter, Kelsey is the shooter.
Okay, now that's very important because they're gonna take this theory that Kelsey was really the shooter and run with it.
And you guys are gonna see how things unfold later on.
So those that's the opening statements, right?
Then uh the prosecution starts to call their witnesses, okay.
They called a police officer that was at this actually, you know what?
Before I could talk about um this uh this police officer, I want to show actually, no, no, I'll I can pull that up later.
By the way, the prosecution always goes first, sort of the order of operation for witnesses is usually prosecution, defense.
Sometimes the prosecution gets to open up again after that.
Uh, and then the defense may get to rebut that.
Obviously, within each witness, right?
Prosecution calls a witness, defense gets to cross, cross-examine or cross-examine witness.
That's the normal procedure for trial.
Prosecution goes first, then the defense prosecution can sometimes open up again if there's certain things they need to address.
Um, and then defense can rebut that again.
So that's typically how the Flow of the case goes.
Perfect.
Yep.
And that sets the stage because the first witness they pretty much call they were all law enforcement officers.
Now, what the so, as you guys know, the the just like Andrew described, the prosecution calls the witnesses typically first because they're the ones that are the burden of proof is on them.
So the police officers typically almost are almost always law enforcement officials, are always the prosecution's witness, right?
So they get one of the police officers that was actually at the scene on the stand that took the initial reports, right?
And he's on direct.
So when you're on direct guys, the prosecutors asking you leading questions, tell us about your training experience.
What did you see when you showed up that night?
Tell me about this, tell me about that.
The prosecutor's job is to kind of throw you some softballs, make you look good, make you look credible, and their job is to kind of you know nudge you in the right direction as far as like what to say, right?
Then the defense goes on cross-examination, which do you want to explain what cross-examination is, real quick to the people, Andrew?
Yeah, cross-examination.
So there's different rules for direct and cross-examination.
Direct examination is really you're supposed to be letting them tell their story, right?
Because they're a friendly witness, they're witnesses you've called up.
So you're kind of just letting them tell their story, letting them tell what they saw, what they felt, and what they maybe what they heard, but not what they heard from another person, what they heard in terms of things going on, right?
Because there's always something called hearsay.
Hearsay is statements proved uh made to prove the truth of the matter assertive, and you need to have the actual person who experienced the thing there in court.
So when they're on direct examination, they're trying to give their story of what they experienced.
Cross-examination on the other side is not friendly, it is against the interest, right?
So you're allowed to ask leading questions.
You're allowed to ask questions that aren't friendly.
You're allowed to ask yes or no questions.
You're allowed to not allow them to explain their story.
In fact, oftentimes it's better to just get a yes or a no, because if you let them explain, they're gonna say shit that they don't that you don't want them to say.
So you want yes or no, and what you're trying to do is usually, usually in cross-examination, the goal is to show that that witness is full of shit in one way or another, either because they're lying, either because they don't have the expertise, you know, the proper expertise for training if they're an expert or whatever.
You're trying to discredit that witness to impeach that witness, trying to catch them saying something that they said before that is different from what they're saying now, and therefore say they're not a credible witness.
This person is here, they're talking to you, they're not a credible witness.
You, the jury cannot believe them.
So that is the chief role of cross-examination.
Thank you very much, Andrew.
And I see you guys are not gonna get a breakdown like this anywhere else on the internet.
You got two experts in the field breaking down this trial for you guys step by fucking step, explaining what each term means.
Now, the other thing I also want to say with the cross-examination, when you guys are watching law and order and all this other stuff, and the lawyers are getting animated and like, is it true that my client did this, blah, blah, blah.
Typically, that's on cross-examination.
You're grilling the hell out of that witness to make them shake them up, catch them in a lie, discredit them, or best yet, get them to lie under oath.
Okay.
This is what the defense was able to successfully do with the OJ Simpson trial with Mark Furman.
Okay, as you guys know, detective Furman, they had went ahead and they cross-examined him and made him look really bad, and he actually had to take the fifth, okay?
Which we're gonna talk about the fifth here in a little bit, but that's the point of a good cross-examination, okay, guys, is you're gonna you're grilling that witness to destroy their credibility.
Now, so now that I set the stage there, the defense goes in to cross-examine this police officer.
And I ain't gonna lie, guys, they fucked him up, okay.
Basically, what they find is the police didn't properly mark evidence at the scene: the bullets, the blood, the pendant, the nail that was found, everything there was not properly done, where you're able to accurately assess the movement of the victim.
Now you're probably wondering, well, Maya, why the fuck is that relevant?
Well, when you're talking about a case here where every second counts, you need to know the exact path of the victim, the bullets, and everything else, so you can match things up and make sure uh stories corroborate because you got a three drunk people that are given crazy stories that contradict each other.
Well, the only thing that's gonna be able to tell you the truth is the evidence, but the problem is that the evidence wasn't marked properly with markers, so there's no real, there's no definitive answer to the victim's movement pattern because the evidence wasn't properly um marked and tagged appropriately.
So, and you guys got to remember, I want to make this extremely clear for you guys.
The prosecution's job is to go in there, show definitively this is what happened.
You cannot refute this evidence.
This is why DNA, this is why ballistics, this is evidence that doesn't necessarily need anybody uh besides the expert witness, right, to explain it to you.
But it speaks for itself, all right?
It's self-standing evidence.
Go ahead.
And let's look at some of the evidence they got to prove here, some of the basic evidence.
Number one, the first thing is they gotta prove Tory Lanez is a shooter, right?
So number one, they gotta prove that.
That that's that's one thing that people forget.
You gotta prove this.
This is the guy that fired it.
Remember, there's four people in that car.
His security guard is in that car, right?
You got you got Harris in that car, you got Meg Disdown in that car.
So you gotta prove that it wasn't any of them that fired that that gun.
Definitively, then you got to point prove that they fired it at Megan.
And then beyond that, there's the actual injuries to Megan.
You gotta prove hey, those are attributed to Tory Lane's personally firing it at Megan.
You got a lot of things here that they've gotten approved.
Now, some of the some of the crimes, like for example, just possession of the loaded firearm, um, that one a little bit lower.
You but you still gotta prove Tory Lanez had the gun and that Megan the Stallion was the one he was aiming it at or pointing it at.
So you've got all those things you've got to prove.
That's actually these are actually major things that in this case where you need evidence like that.
And they they really fucked that up.
And Myron, if that happened to you, if that happened in in your experience as a law enforcement officer, what would happen to those officers who fucked that up?
Man, um see at the federal level, they wouldn't even if if if there was if the evidence wasn't marked properly at the scene where you were able to, you know conclusively say this is the wood, this is how she walked.
We could tell from the blood pattern, the shell casings are here, which means the firearm was fired from here.
If you're native not able to, you know, you know, ABC 123, line that all the way up, the the prosecutor's not even indicting.
You know what I mean?
Yep, yeah.
We're gonna talk about that here in a second with our theories as far as like why they indicted this case, why they decided to take this thing in the first place.
But uh, but this is not the first time that uh the Los Angeles uh prosecutions uh team is thinking taking uh cases, a trial that they may have should have, may have not should have.
Um, so anyway, so the defense goes after the the how the police marked the evidence at the scene, okay, which you know is not a good thing.
Now, the prosecution also I want to say this, they use Tory's jail call where he's apologizing profusely during the calls for hey, I was drunk, I'm really sorry, blah, blah, blah, right?
Um, but the jail calls don't admit that he shot anybody, okay.
And the defense goes ahead and says, Well, this could be him apologizing for putting Kelsey on the spot about the sexual relations.
Exactly.
Boom.
It could have been anything, right?
Yeah.
And the other thing, too, I want to let you guys know is the detective that brought this jail recording in.
Because typically, when you bring in uh a jail recording or whatever, you have to bring an investigator in to tell you, hey, this is where I got it from.
This is how he sees this evidence, this is why I got it from show the chain of custody, all this stuff.
The detective that brought it in had only listened to it a week or so prior to the trial.
He had never heard it prior.
Okay.
Which also I want to make you guys aware, the lead detective on this investigation, it's a guy named uh detective um Stogner, okay.
He's on admin leave and or getting terminated right now.
He's not tested.
Okay, which is a huge fucking.
So it's very obvious to me that the detective that they brought in, right?
To uh talk about this jail call isn't the lead, he was probably assigned this case out of emergency because the lead detective is in trouble.
Okay.
So anytime you have issues like this where the lead investigator is being investigated, or they might get terminated, or there's some kind of misconduct or whatever, this is a big problem because this is the guy that's responsible for gathering all the evidence.
Okay, guys.
Anytime an investigation like this happens, where there's a shooting, it's going to trial or whatever, it's not the police officers that are gathering the evidence.
They show up to the scene, they kind of mark it off, whatever, but it's the detectives that take lead in the investigation and run the case.
So the lead detective Is responsible for getting all the witnesses for getting all the evidence together for running the test through ballistics for getting the experts together, they're responsible for it.
So the fact that the lead detective is under investigation and may or may not get terminated is a huge L for the prosecution.
Now, here's the other thing too.
I want to let you guys know this comes from me preparing for a trial.
When I had my trial, okay, the prosecutor gets every single witness and debriefs them and prepares them for the trial.
And prior to him bringing in these witnesses, especially the law enforcement witnesses, they ask, Do any of you guys have giglio issues?
What is a giglio?
Well, giglio guys, can you talk about it real quick?
Andrew, I'll pull it up for the people.
Yeah, sure, sure, sure.
Um, you know, that that specific.
Well, actually, no, hold on.
Let me make sure I got it.
Giglio is basically when you have a character issue.
Okay, okay, yes, yes, yes.
So if you have a particular issue that's gonna be impeachable, right?
So you're gonna be able to impeach you based on character, they're gonna see there's some sort of uh problem with your credibility, right?
So you're gonna have a credibility lapse, so they're gonna attack you on that, because that's impeachment, right?
Once again, going back to the core point, finding out you're a lying piece of shit, right?
And there's lots of reasons why you might lie, and there's lots of reasons why, for example, when he goes back to the recording, the jailhouse recording, what that pops up into my head, right?
Is yo, this fact that at the time of the of the shooting, right?
And I'm putting that in air quotes because it's fucking alleged, right?
At the time this allegedly happened, they didn't know that they were both fucking the same dude.
I think I think Meg said that she knew that Harris like was like into um into Tory Lane's, but they didn't know, like and Harris certainly didn't know that Meg was fucking fucking Tory lanes.
So this is like these are major issues, there are major character issues.
So when you hear somebody apologizing, like that could just be like, yo, sorry, I was fucking your girl and I didn't tell you, you know.
Oh, by the way, that's what happens in the industry.
So whenever you have a trial, right?
You as a lead investigator, you got to get all the law enforcement personnel that's gonna testify, which in this case the lead investigator himself is in trouble, which is a big problem.
A giglier or brady list is a list compiled usually by a prosecutor's office or a police department containing the names and details of law enforcement officers who have had sustained incidents of untruthfulness, criminal convictions, candor issues, or some other type of issue placing their credibility into question.
And guys, when it says candor issues, or or like um, you know, they call it uh conduct unbecoming a lot of the times.
Yeah, basically, if you get in trouble for some shit where you know you mishandled evidence, or you get into a domestic violence argument with your wife, or you go ahead and you you get a trouble uh where you get a DUI or you get any any of this stuff, this all can make you considered a bad witness for the government and the prosecutor might not put you on the stand.
Okay, so and this is what they do before every single trial where they ask questions, which is probably why they disqualify this investigator where he's not gonna testify.
But the fact that it's one thing if a witness on the case it has issues with you know uh giglio or Brady or any of this other stuff, but when it's the lead investigator, oh man, that's together.
And here's the thing, guys, it all goes back to due process because all like Giglio, Brady, all those cases, they go back to due process.
There's a duty on the prosecution to turn over all evidence to the defense that uh pretty much proves the accused is innocent.
So if there's anything that proves the accused is innocent or reduces it or or you know makes him look more innocent, they have to turn that over.
They've got a duty to do that.
So that's where this stems from.
They have to disclose.
There's a duty to disclose, a duty of candor.
You have to be honest, you can't be a dirty prosecutor.
Now, are there dirty prosecutors out there?
Absolutely.
I've seen them all the time.
There are dirty prosecutors out there.
However, on the books on paper, you are supposed to do these things, you're supposed to turn this over.
So that's why uh it's so important that you get your witnesses straight.
So um, so the first day was all law enforcement.
So, what do we got here?
So, we know uh one of the police officers from the scene testified, they attacked how they carded off the according off the area, how they marked the evidence.
The lead detective is under investigation, has giglio and brady issues, they couldn't bring them on, um, which is a huge problem, right?
Um, and then which I'm actually shocked that they even still went to trial with the lead investigator uh being in trouble like this.
That that actually I was very shocked because normally when you have a Brady or Giglio issue with one of the witnesses, that in itself is bad.
But for the main lead detective To have it and have to be off the case when he probably dealt with a majority of the evidence, majority of the interviews, most of the uh evidence.
Um he gathered everything, that's a problem.
So now we're gonna go into day two.
Okay, did you have anything before day two?
No, no, hit day two, run right into it.
So, day two, guys, is Meg's testimony.
So, Megna Stallion herself goes ahead and takes the stand.
Okay, now since she's a prosecution's witness, prosecution hits her with the direct, as like you guys said as you guys learned from Andrew before.
Direct typically is more friendly, they're a friendly witness, they're going to ask them questions to get their side, they want to get the entire story.
Now, I also want to say this too, and Andrew, I want you to time in on this.
Typically, when witnesses, like the the witness that was the most affected, whether it was someone that got shot, stabbed, or whatever, their job is to go on the stand and make you feel bad for them.
Their job is to appease at the heartstrings.
That's what they're going there to do.
They're there to cry, they're to kind of create this aura of look at me, I'm the victim, feel sorry for me.
Because you guys gotta remember, all of this is being done in front of a jury.
Okay, yes, boom.
That's it.
And people do not like juries, do not in general.
If you said uh random person off the street, do you like throwing people in jail?
They're gonna say, Fuck no.
People do not like putting people in jail, and you know what they don't like?
Victimless crimes.
If the and especially if the victim doesn't give a shit about the crime, they're like, Why are we putting someone in jail for this?
Why are we sending somebody to jail for this?
Our human nature is not to throw people in jail, despite what people may think, it is not to throw people in jail, and especially with a jury, you've got lots of different people.
Remember, there's a jury process, there's jury selection.
So typically it's a pretty fair jury.
Maybe it's a little bit more defense bias or prosecution bias, but typically it's a pretty fair jury.
So there's gonna be some people that really don't want to convict on that.
Their inclination, their natural state is not to convict.
So if you get up there as a witness, as the person who's supposed to be injured, and you're not sympathetic, or even worse, if you come off as a bitch, if you come off as a liar, they're not gonna be inclined to convict.
Yeah, so keep that in mind, guys.
So so go they ask her on direct, you know, how long have you known Tori?
She says for a short amount of time, and they ask her, did you have sex with Tori Lanes?
And she says, Yes.
Okay.
Finally, she says that she hooked up with Tori Lanez, which if you guys don't know, okay, and I'll share a screen with you guys real fast here.
Okay, because that's not what she said a couple months ago when she went on this interview with Gail.
Okay.
Uh, so we'll go ahead and play it real quick.
I think I had it right here.
In this interview, guys, they asked her, Did you have sex with Tori?
And she basically dating.
What was the nature?
Okay, so what was the nature?
We're not dating.
We were really close.
We were friends.
We hung out and his mom passed too.
So when I felt like we were bonding over the bat, and did you have an intimate relationship with him?
Oh, okay.
Oh, look at her eyes.
Byron, read that fucking body language.
Look at that.
Look at that shit.
I watch out of pay attention to what she says.
Did you guys have a relationship?
Okay, this is what she says.
Like sexual, yeah, yeah.
Did you have yeah?
Stupid, yeah, sexual.
Did you Megan?
Did you have a sexual relationship with Tori Lynx?
Yes.
That's that is a direct question, my friends.
Okay, and she look at her body language.
She's looking away, she's closing her eyes, she's looking down.
She this is this is this is some bullshit right here.
This is some bullshit.
And what does she say?
Um, have a sexual relationship with Tori.
So what bruh stop the cow?
Yeah, she only counts it as sexual if it's like in the poop shoe.
I'm like, I don't know.
Like, well, like what is like like like what is she trying to define here?
You know, it's a whole like a blowjob isn't sex, you know.
Like, you know, if I if I only have sex with them wearing a condom that doesn't count, it wasn't sexual.
Like, come the fuck on.
When she said bonding, when she said bonding, it was clear they were fucking.
It was clear.
I mean, Myron, this is the the perfect point.
You know, when you got these thought crimes out here, you can call this shit right away.
You see this lying, you see, you know it.
And by the way, why wouldn't she own it?
She owns the lot.
Why wouldn't she just say, Yo, I'm fucking this dude?
Like, how does that hurt her?
I don't know.
Like, from from like you know the other thing that like boggles my mind.
If I was the prosecutor, right, on this case, I would tell her, don't talk about this investigation anywhere.
Like, I am shocked that she actually gave an interview and talked about the case on a national television show.
Incredible.
Like, like, what?
I mean, yo, what would you say?
This is admissible, by the way.
This is admissible.
I what would you do if you were the prosecutor on the like?
Would you be shocked that yo, your star witness goes on a television show and says all this stuff about an active investigation that's gonna go to trial, right?
And then on top of that, she gives contradictory statements on a television show versus in trial.
Incredible, guys.
So she goes on trial and she pretty much contradicts herself and says, Yes, we did have a sexual relationship, right?
And everyone in the audience, like, oh shit, because this is the first time she's actually admitted that she hooked up with Tori because she didn't want to say it for all these months for obvious reasons.
She didn't want to hurt her image, she didn't want to look like a whore, etc.
And now that it's all coming out in the trial, and we've talked about this on Fresh and Fit, guys.
All the guys that she's hooked up with, because this kind of came into it, her sexual past and her testimony.
How long is that list, my right?
I'm just curious.
How long is that list for Megan's talent?
I'm sure it's like fucking going on like legal size paper, you know.
You should have it up, I think 10 different celebrities is what fresh when we were on the show.
If I recall correctly, because we broke this down on Fresh to Fifth, you guys want to go and break that down.
We're keeping this on the legal side, but uh, this all came out during her testimony how many people she was hooking up with.
But we know the baby, Tori Lanez, and Ben Simmons were some of the prominent ones that came out during this trial.
But it's relevant.
And see, the thing is this is the crossover, right?
Because it's relevant as to her motives and as her credibility.
Like these things are relevant.
If she's known to be a person who does this, she's known to have a past with other celebrities.
Why did she choose to lie about this one in specific?
Why is she lying here?
This doesn't, it doesn't make any sense.
I mean, if I was the defense, I will play this clip and be like, you can't believe her.
Like, what the you know, but um, so anyway, so she admits that she had sex with Tori, right?
Then they ask her about Kelsey.
She's been friends with Kelsey since uh freshman year in college, so they known each other for a while.
Um, she got to the party first.
She says that there were a lot of people there, okay?
And she said she invited Tori after the fact.
Then at the end of the party, it was just her, Kelsey, and Kylie Jenner.
All right.
She said it got late.
She wanted to leave because her wig was coming off.
Okay, and I'm not that yes, guys, that is that that is what she said.
All right, she felt comfortable, she wanted to go home.
So she didn't want um Tori, however, didn't want to leave, right?
So um they left and they argued in the car, all right.
And the argument ensued after Tori says, uh, why are you snaking your friend?
Okay, and that's when Tori drops the bombshell that him and Megan had been hooking up.
Okay, so everyone's arguing in the car, or she says a fight occurs, right?
Then she says, Um she gets out, looks back, and sees Tori shout, dance, bitch, and then he shoots.
So he says dance, bitch, and then she looks back and she sees him.
She, however, did not see Kelsey, only Tori.
And then she says, Torre was shooting over the window from the driver's side, may have been standing on something.
Now, just for you for reference purposes, guys, Tori is somewhere between five foot three to five foot six.
Okay, so he's not that tall.
Escalate is a big ass car.
Okay, so that was a little strange.
This it didn't make too much sense.
And then also there's a discrepancy here because keep in mind, guys, when the prosecutor illustrated the story in opening statements, they said uh Kelsey went to Meg after she was shot, okay?
And then Tori approached after, beat on Kelsey, which is why her chain and her nail fell off, as he was trying to get back to get to Meg after he shot her.
But Meg said she got shot, and then Tori and Kelsey came at her together.
Which uh there's you know which one is it, right?
Um, and then also they asked her why didn't you go to the police before?
Why did you lie and say that you stepped on glass?
And she said she didn't want to go to police before because of the George Floyd protest.
Because as you guys know, we talked about the George Flip case as well.
Back in May of 2020, in case you guys were living under a rock in the United States here, George Floyd had been killed and um in Milwaukee.
No, no, um, Minneapolis, I'm excuse me.
Minneapolis.
In Minneapolis, and uh he got he got killed, and there was a bunch of race riots all over the United States at that time.
This only occurred about two months prior after.
So she did it to protect Tori from getting killed, and she was scared of the police.
That's why she didn't go to the police and tell the story straight in the beginning, is what she says.
Well, and and the thing, but that that's kind of I'm calling bullshit on that, because here's the thing.
This is that's complete bullshit because she was literally interviewed by police and gave answers.
So instead of lying during that interview by by police, because she did talk to police, so her being scared of police is fucking irrelevant completely to her lying on the police report.
If you want to pull that, I don't know if you still got that one up.
Uh her statement that she gave for the police report.
And so she was sitting in front of a cop.
And and by the way, that cop didn't kill her.
That cop was was perfectly fine with her, let her go, had a nice day, walked out just fine, right?
So here I highlighted for you.
Yep.
P was transported to Cedars.
Go ahead.
No, no, no.
Okay, okay.
Pete was transported to Cedar Cyanide.
By the way, it's the best uh the best hospital in uh LA uh for lacerations to her left foot.
Well, at the hospital, Pete advised Officer Gomez and Majija that she was involved in a verbal argument with Harris.
She stated that Smith Peterson Harris herself left the location.
She did not give officers a specific location and did not give any other information regarding the incident.
But she was right in front of the cops, and boom.
You know, she said that hey, there's a verbal argument here.
And uh, I believe I believe it goes down to say that her um that right there on uh up there, up a little bit right there in the middle, injuries and mt.
Uh Pete was transported to Cedar Sinate and was treated by Dr. Lafredo for lacerations on her left foot.
Dr. Lafredo confirmed the laceration due to stepping on glass.
Yep.
That's big.
That's big right there.
So you got a doctor.
This is the presumptive cause until now, until just now, that the presumptive cause was stepping on glass.
Yep.
And at no point did Meg correct the doctor on that and say, no, Doc, this is me getting shot.
Yeah.
Yep.
She because she said I stepped on glass, and then the doctor actually confirmed it because he said there was lacerations.
Which do you want to tell the people real quick as far as like yeah, laceration typically means something like a cut or some damage to the skin?
It does not mean gunshot wound.
If there was a gunshot wound, they would clearly label that like the vic the that she had a gunshot wound to her left foot.
They would have made that very, very clear in the police report.
The doctor would have made that clear if there's a gunshot wound.
I mean, y'all have seen the TV shows where they're like, I got a gunshot wound.
Don't take me to a hospital.
Yeah, you know, because they don't want it to go down as gunshot wound because they tracked that shit closely because it matters.
And don't worry, guys, we'll talk about uh because the doctor did testify at the trial, so don't worry.
But this is the original police report that we're talking about, and I'll cover that as well.
I think he testified on day five, but one day two right now.
So, okay, so now that we covered um Meg on Direct, here's Meg on Cross, okay.
Um, so on cross guys, oh my bad on cross, which is you guys remember, cross-examination means the defense is now asking Meg questions, which means they're not gonna be as nice with her.
Okay, which is which is by the way, not hard because she's clearly lied at this point.
So their job is actually kind of easy with Meg because she's already been out there and lying, she's already made contradictory statements.
So she tells the defense she denied uh she denied Kylie told her to leave.
Uh security didn't want to leave, but she admitted that she wanted to leave with Tory, right?
So she kind of contradicted herself.
Uh, she denied Kelsey and Tori had a relationship to a degree.
However, she admitted that Kelsey did confront her in the vehicle about said relationship.
Then when she asked about the snaking comment, right?
With as far as like her having sex with other dudes, she just said, I don't know, right?
For you know, embarrassment reasons, I'm sure, right?
And then Meg was in the front passenger seat, gets out of the car, walks in front of the vehicle, and then this is what she said happened.
So So just so you guys know what the seating arrangement was in the vehicle prior to the shooting.
You got the security guy in the front.
I well, I think it was Tory security.
Then you have Meg the stallion in the front seat, front passenger seat.
Then you have Kelsey directly behind her, and Tory was behind, was to the left of Kelsey.
So Tory was sitting behind the driver.
So one more time because you got this very important, guys.
Security is driving.
Meg is in the front seat.
Meg decides in the front seat where the gun was found, by the way.
Kelsey is behind her, and then Tori is in the back seat behind the driver.
So Meg exit the exits the vehicle, and she's saying this under oath of the defense.
She says she gets out the vehicle, right?
Um, and Tory gets out of the front passenger, out of the back seat behind the driver, gets around the vehicle, goes into the front passenger seat, gets a gun, and shoots her.
Okay.
And she said this all happened in a matter of seconds because when she gets out the vehicle, she walks in front of the vehicle, and then she's directly in front, and then she hears dance bitch, looks back, and she says Tory is shooting at her over the glass.
Okay.
And she wasn't sure if he was standing on something.
Now, guys, mind you, from like a leg logically from a logical standpoint, right?
That's pretty quickly for quick for him to get out the car, run around, pull the gun out, which was in the front seat, put point it at her, dance bits, and shoot.
And also, she said that Kelsey at this point is still in the car, or she didn't know where she was, but she didn't see her around.
Okay.
So it's very, it's very hard to believe those facts.
And once again, this goes back to why facts are important.
Like when you start trying to make shit up, you know, and you're starting to be like this guy did this, this, and this, and this in like the span of a couple seconds.
You're like, all right, I'm calling bullshit on that.
It needs to be something that people are gonna believe.
You need to have a credible story that people are gonna believe actually happened.
And then the other thing I also want to say is she denied that her and Kelsey had an altercation, right?
But there was jewelry on the finger and a fingernail on the floor, right?
And uh this all occurred in a few seconds, all right?
Of her getting out the vehicle and walking in front and then her getting shot at, right?
So there's some discrepancies here, of course.
Um, let's see here.
Let me just make sure.
Okay.
So now that we went over, so Meg's testimony uh was pretty much uh finished there, right?
And she gave Hartfield testimony saying she got shot at, you know, she wished she had died instead versus going through all this stuff.
Um, and you know, she did her job.
Her job is to go up there, kind of, you know, take the victim narrative, get the jury to feel for her.
That's what you got to do in a trial, guys.
You know, it is what it is.
And obviously, the prosecution is gonna prepare her for this, right?
So now we get into day three.
This is where it shit starts to get crazy.
All right.
Uh, anything you want to say, Andrew, before I get into day three.
No, no.
I mean, once again, you've seen this, you've seen a story that's that's constructed that's looking bad.
So the prosecution's chase.
We're on day day fucking two.
And usually it takes a couple days for the prosecution to fall apart, but they're already hurting at this point.
This is not looking good.
So always imagine what a jury is thinking as they're watching this shit.
Are they saying, is this believable or not believable?
Can I get behind this or not?
And the prosecution, if they don't start out strong, they're gonna lose that jury quick.
Yep.
Now, guys, real quick, before I get into this, I'll go ahead and give you guys a quick recap, but we got 5,000 plus of you guys watching.
So do me a quick solid like the video, guys.
Get us up to like, we should be at like 4K likes because we're giving you guys a really in-depth breakdown.
So let me give you guys a quick recap for some of you guys that have just joined us in the show.
So we went over the intro.
We went over our qualifications, our background, as you guys know, I used to be a special agent uh with Homeland Security, done trials, uh, went to trial on one of my own cases, and I've also been a part of several trials, testified many times.
Uh, Andrew, practicing attorney, understands the rules and procedures of how the law works, etc.
He's litigated before, unlike a lot of you attorneys that call yourselves lawyers.
You guys have never stepped in a courtroom and actually litigated, which means argue a case.
Um, we went over the days of the trial.
Day one was opening statements.
We broke down what an opening statement is.
The prosecution went up there, said, Hey, dance bitch, and they went over how Tori was is uh culpable.
He shot Meg five times.
There was an argument.
Kelsey was assaulted by Tory during the process of this, and they said that Kelsey is gonna go ahead and testify on behalf of the state.
Then the defense went up there and they said that Kelsey was the shooter.
Uh, they theorized that she is a shooter.
They said that there's not enough evidence to go ahead and go after Tory, and there's residue on Kelsey, and it's not clear that Tory was actually the shooter.
And this is an opening statement.
Day one, the the process, the police get basically this all law enforcement that goes on day one.
Um, the defense, you know, is able to go ahead and attack the police's evidence saying, Hey, you guys gonna properly mark the blood, the bullets, and everything else at the crime scene, so there's no clear path of what the hell actually happened, who was where, when the shots were fired, etc.
And you know, as you guys can see, we got this testimony that's all over the place because all three parties were drunk, right?
And the evidence is at the scene wasn't properly documented.
So defense attacks him on that prosecution kind of counters.
Hey, we got a jail call where Tori is apologizing profusely for um for the for the shooting, but the defense comes in and says, Well, we don't necessarily know what he's apologizing about.
Keep in mind that Tory had outed Meg for having sex with a bunch of guys that Kelsey had hooked up with in the past, and this was a lovers' feud.
Um, then on day two, Meg DeStaya takes the uh stand.
She says basically that she finally admits that her and Tori had a sexual relationship.
She says that her and Kelsey did not have an altercation.
Um, she says that the argument was predominantly with her and Tory.
Um, she also says that she got she got she heard she walked in front of the vehicle and Tory got out of the vehicle, got into the front passenger side area where she was originally sitting, a gun comes out of somewhere, he yells, dance bitch, she looks back, sees him shoot, but at this time she did not see Kelsey shoot.
Okay, which kind of contradicts the prosecution story because they're saying that um the prosecutor said that Kelsey went to Meg after she was shot.
Um, which the story is kind of all over the place.
So, yeah, you see, this is the problem.
We're creating two different stories here, like there's two different narratives or two different timelines.
There's people that are involved, people that are not involved, and this is how you know okay, one of two things is happening here.
Either somebody is lying or memory, which is very true.
This does happen in trials after two years is kind of suspect.
They're either remembering it wildly wrong or somebody fucking lied.
And then on Meg on Cross, basically, what the police was able, what the defense was able to gather was um Meg denies that the altercation was there on cross.
Um, however, even though there was Julian fingernails on the floor, um, and then they're able to assess that Meg walked in front of the vehicle, she heard Dan uh dance bitch gets shot five times.
Um, and she said claims that Tory was sitting in the back passenger seat, and this all happened within a matter of seconds.
Okay, so that's the story from Meg's side, right?
Now, let or a summary.
Now we're gonna get into day three of the trial.
All right, guys.
Now Kelsey takes a stand.
Okay, and who is Kelsey?
Kelsey is Meg's assistant slash best friend.
And keep in mind, guys, that she's the prosecution's witness.
So, as we discussed before, when the uh when a prosecutor prosecutor's witness comes up, prosecution gets first crack at them on direct.
So as soon as Kelsey sits in the chair, she goes ahead and takes the Fifth Amendment.
One, two, three, four, fifth.
Yeah.
Now, Myron, Myron, I think you've got the Fifth Amendment pulled up, my friends.
Let's give everybody a little quick refresher on the Fifth Amendment.
Yeah, the Fifth Amendment is stem in our constitution.
Yes, it is.
It's a great amendment.
Great, great, great amendment, right?
Um, all right, so you've got the fifth amendment here.
You know, no person, hold on, let me blow this up here.
There we go.
Okay, no person shall be held to answer for capital or otherwise infamous crimes unless a presentation or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the naval land or naval force or in the militia when uh actual service of time award danger, by the way, that's why military does not play by the same rules as people not in the military, they don't have the same rights.
Nor shall any person be subject to the same offense uh to be put twice in jeopardy of life or limb.
That's double jeopardy.
You cannot be charged the same crime Twice, but by the way, it only applies uh to each particular uh jurisdiction.
So a state and the federal government can charge you with the same crime, but a state can't do it twice.
Um, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.
Boom, there it is.
So the fifth that we're talking about, there's a lot of rights in here, but the fifth we're talking about is you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself.
What does that mean?
If what you are saying is gonna force you, if saying something in court is gonna implicate yourself and open you up to a potential crime, you can plead the fifth.
Bam.
And mind you, there's a lot of different crimes you can be opened up to, even for example, perjury, right?
Perjury is something you'd be opened up to.
Absolutely.
So you just you say, Hey, listen, if this is something that can get me in trouble, if this is something that you guys can come and come after me for, I'm pleading the fifth.
Now, Myron, as an LEO, yeah, what do they typically offer their own witnesses when they need to plead the fifth?
What do they do?
What do they throw out there as a bone?
Now, they go ahead and they offer her immunity.
Okay, guys.
Which let me tell you guys this uh and I want to make this very clear.
If you're the government and your witness gets on the stand and says, I'm taking the fifth, that is fucking crazy to me.
Because when you have a witness for trial, guys, you prep your witness, you get them ready.
Okay, this is the testimony that we're gonna uh, you know, here are the questions.
Here's what the defense is probably gonna ask you on cross, etc.
You got to prepare your witness because you guys got to remember that regular witnesses don't understand how the judicial process works.
They don't understand how questions work, they don't understand the severity of lying under oath.
You have to explain all these things to them before trial.
So the fact that she was a prosecution's witness and took the fifth.
I was like, what the fuck is going on here?
Like that that's unheard of.
Okay.
So she takes the fifth.
So the prosecutor offers her something called use immunity.
Okay.
Uh, use immunity is under 18 USC 6002.
Um, but Myron, what what is the difference between use immunity and the other type of immunity, which is transactional immunity?
So the use immunity, guys, right, is when they basically can't use anything that you say in the testimony you're about to give against you.
All right, particular to that testimony, right?
They can't use any of the statements you make against you in that particular testimony.
Transactional though covers you even more, and that's basically they can't charge you with anything on that crime on that day, essentially.
It's kind of like almost like a like a give full protection.
Now, just so y'all know this happened in the middle of the trial.
So there and the prosecutor gets caught with his pants down.
So he's like, What the hell are we gonna do?
So they have a sidebar, which do you want to explain something like that?
Yeah, so sidebar is you go talk, the lawyers come up, the judge comes up, you talk about it, right?
But you're not in presence of the jury because it's stuff the jury doesn't really want to hear.
And by the way, this looks really fucking horrible because they did see the jury did see her plead the fifth.
They got her up there on the stand, she gets there, sits her ass down, she pleads the fifth.
That looks horrible to a jury.
That looks absolutely insane to a jury, and they're gonna understand that there had to be some wrangling to get her back in.
It's doesn't, it's not a good look.
It's really a bomb against the prosecution.
And so when they're going up there and they're they're doing a sidebar, they're negotiating this out, saying, Hey, we're gonna offer her this, you know, we're gonna move on with this.
Because otherwise, if they didn't offer her that and think she was gonna change her testimony, she's gotta get off the stand.
That's it.
They can't have her up there just pleading the fifth.
Yeah, and she's done.
You cannot do that.
You can't put somebody back on the stand unless you know they're gonna accept immunity, they're gonna proceed.
So the sidebar we're saying, look, we're offering immunity, she's gonna proceed.
Um, and one clear thing, let me let me just explain this very quick about the use immunity.
So they may not be able to use your testimony, but you know what they can do?
They can go out and find other evidence that you committed that crime and use it against you.
That's why you should always, if you're ever in this situation, and I hope you're never in this situation, but you should always go for that higher level so they can't actually charge you with the crime because they can go and say, Oh no, we're not using your court testimony, we're just using your text message and your emails and the stuff we found over here and these other witnesses that we find over here.
Oh, we're not using the testimony, we don't need that.
We're gonna use this other stuff to get you.
I'm really glad you said that because if you do right get the use immunity, and we've done this before on proffers, right?
Especially like when you're debriefing an informant and they're kind of they're protected of for what they say.
A lot of the times, if you lie, right, when you get that protection, they're gonna come after you.
And what you've essentially done is though they can't use that testimony against you.
You give them a good point to go in ahead and subpoena certain things, maybe get a search warrant here, get a search warrant there, or request it, get a witness here, get a witness there, and they can build a case around that evidence that you gave, even though they can't use that particular testimony against you, they can find corroborating factors to come after you later on, which is why her attorney, after she said, I plead the fifth, and they said we'll give you immunity.
He argued use immunity is not enough because he knows this.
They can still use this against her and come back later on and get corroborating factors to come after her.
So he says, I want transactional immunity.
Well, I'll tell you guys right now the uh uh ADA can't sign off on transactional immunity.
That's gotta go up to the highest level.
That's the district attorney that's gotta sign off on something like that, because that's essentially protection from everything.
Okay.
So since they're sitting there in the trial, they need the testimony, they don't got time like that to go back to the fucking DA and be like, yo, I need a transactional immunity approval, blah blah blah.
Because then you've got to ask permission from the judge to delay the case, and the judge is gonna be like, Nope, we gotta go.
They might allow you to move the witness later, but they're not gonna, they're not gonna let you delay the trial.
Nine out of ten times, they're gonna say, yo, we're moving.
This is on the docket, we're going now, you cannot delay this trial, we're in.
So you either gotta drop that witness or figure the shit out, right?
And they don't have time to do that.
So they go on the record and they say, We will not prosecute her, which is pretty damn good.
They go on the record and say we will not prosecute her, she has immunity, and you know, they're on the record saying that.
So Kelsey's like, okay, and she decides to testify, all right.
So remember, guys, you can only take the fift when you're gonna be prosecuted.
But if you're not gonna get prosecuted, you are compelled to testify now because you no longer have the fear or the potential to be went after or are charged.
So she's she has immunity now, so with that immunity, now she is compelled to testify, all right.
And I also want to say this too.
You can only take the fifth if you're criminally culpable of something.
So the fact that she took the fifth, I mean, that's pretty self-explanatory in itself, right?
So you know, you know, and she's not on trial here.
This is not the trial of Harris, this is the trial of Tori Lane.
Which is great.
Yo, I this is wild.
But anyway, so she goes, I don't want to be here, right?
And she's triggered.
And they say, Why?
And she said, Because of lies from Megan, and you know, basically she says, I never took any hush money, and Meg is trying to say I'm a bad friend.
Then they asked her, Did you shoot Meg?
And she goes, No.
Um, how'd you meet Tori?
She said she met him at a rock nation event.
Um, she said that Meg hooked her up with Tory, and then Kelsey uh Meg hooked Kelsey up with with Tori, and then Kelsey got COVID and went to Texas.
As you guys know, her and Meg the Stallion are from Texas, and then Meg started smashing Tori while she was away in Texas, sick with COVID.
Now, this is all unbeknownst to her, by the way.
Okay, she did not know any of this stuff was going on.
So she also says that they were really drunk and that it wasn't a big party, as Meg had stated in her testimony.
It was a small party.
Uh Tori didn't want to leave because he was flirting with Kylie, okay.
And then she also says that they got there around 3 p.m.
So they had been there all day.
Um, and they left first.
So this is interesting because Meg didn't still say this in her testimony, but Kelsey says in her testimony that they left first.
Meg and Kelsey left, but then they went back because Meg was mad and she wasn't too happy about Tori and Kylie.
So she goes ahead and says, Yo, I left my slipper at the spot.
So they go back to Kylie's house.
Kelsey's in the car, Meg goes inside.
Short time later, she comes out with Tori, and Kylie's escorting them out.
Okay.
And Kelsey says that Meg told her that Kylie basically kicked him out.
All right.
Then they get in the vehicle, and at this point, all three of them are arguing with each other, and everyone's intoxicated.
So you guys can only imagine, right?
So Tori was trying to get it on with Kylie.
He's got to come out.
He got kicked out.
They're arguing.
And then Tori, right, drops the bomb.
Yo, you're gonna you're snaking your friend, blah blah blah.
Kelsey, did you know that I was fucking with Meg.
Meg fuck with Ben Simmons.
She fucked with the baby, who Kelsey had also messed with as well.
Which is all facts.
That part is facts.
Yes.
So Kelsey guys had never heard this information before.
So now everybody's arguing.
All right.
So she gets the drive.
Someone's in the chat said, Poor driver.
Yeah, poor driver, bro.
How having to be there for that bomb when you realize like your bestie is fucking the dude that she put you with, right?
And when she she suddenly she set you up with this dude, she was fucking him.
Yep.
At that time.
And you're just finding this out from him, not from her.
And you're drunk.
So emotions are like extra highlighted, right?
So they're all arguing.
And and also Meg had this Tory saying that his irrelevant, he only got popping because of a Jack Harlow feature, etc.
And then Tori should shoot you know it talks back to her, like fuck you, blah blah blah.
So they're all shitting on each other.
All three of them are arguing.
And Kelsey confirms this that all three of them are arguing.
Okay.
And then a key moment, they say they ask her, did Tory make a threat to shoot?
She responds, yes.
And then they ask for context under which Tori made the threat to shoot.
And what does she do?
She invokes the Fifth Amendment.
There you go.
There you go.
Why?
Why did she invoke the fifth there specifically?
That is not just a reasonable doubt.
That's a crater.
That is a crater.
Why did Tory Lane did um did Harris invoke the fifth at that specific moment when asked for context on why he threatened to shoot Meg.
He's willing to admit that he threatened to shoot her, but why?
Yep.
And it gets hold on, but it gets better.
So then, right?
She confesses, guys, that she lied to the police to protect herself.
All right.
So the prosecutor obviously is like, whoa.
Because guys, you gotta remember, this is their fucking witness.
They're direct, their direct examination.
This is supposed to be a friendly witness to them.
So the prosecutor, shocked about this, is like kind of caught with their pants out.
So what do they do?
They play a portion of the interview from September of this year, 2022.
That when they when they interviewed her, where she said Tori was a shooter, etc.
All right.
And Kelsey says she lied in that interview.
All right.
So um, yeah, wild.
So her and the prosecutor, then at this point, go back and forth.
The prosecutor keeps asking her, why did you lie?
Is this true that such and such happened?
Why did you lie?
And she keeps responding to protect myself.
When she goes deeper, protect yourself out.
She says to protect myself.
She didn't want to get beyond anything else besides saying to protect herself, right?
And this is on direct, by the way, guys.
She also acknowledges that Tori Lane's offered her one million dollars, but she didn't take it.
And she said, Tori said don't say anything, but she didn't specify what she didn't want her to say, what he didn't want her to say.
Um, and then also Kelsey sent a text message to the security saying uh Tori shot her.
Um, and then Kelsey denies seeing the shooter.
Uh she just heard shots, and then Kelsey also said that both of them were outside the car when shots happened.
However, Meg said Kelsey was in the car, or she didn't see her at all, right?
But Kelsey confirmed that both of them were actually outside the vehicle when the shots happened, right?
So, yeah, the crazy stuff.
So then now on cross, so the defense goes ahead.
So now this is see once again, she's countered herself.
She's literally pointed herself out as a liar, she's already destroyed her reputation before cross-examination.
That's supposed to be what you do on cross-examination.
She's already done it to herself.
It's like you played yourself, meme, you know, you 100% played yourself.
So the cross-examination, frankly, they've got a pretty easy job here.
They do mess it up a little bit, though.
We'll get to that.
Yeah.
So this is on direct, and she confesses she lied to the police, etc.
Right.
And remember, I want you guys to make this clear.
Kelsey only did one interview with the prosecution, and she did it in September of this year.
Mind you, this event happened in July of 2020.
So she didn't actually come in for an interview until September of 2022, almost over two years later.
All right.
So the defend the defense now they cross-examine her.
And they say, You got immunity.
Have you been paid off?
And then the defense actually makes a good point here.
They say she didn't make a statement until September.
So how did she accept the bribe money that the prosecution is alleging that she took and goes ahead and gives incriminating statements against Tory?
All right.
So guys, uh, let me slow it down here.
So you guys understand this.
The prosecution was saying that Kelsey, even though it's their witness, after all this craziness happened, they made allegations that she potentially was paid off by Tory Lanez and his legal team.
All right.
Then the defense comes in and says, Well, how is that possible that she got paid off by the Tori's Lane's defense team when she had not been interviewed until two years later in September?
And when she came in to do her interview, she went ahead and gave you guys incriminating statements against Tory because when she went to the police, guys, she said that Tory Lanez was a shooter.
She said that Tory Lanez assaulted her.
She said that she went to go console Meg after she had been shot.
Tory Lanes gets out the car and she gets in between Meg and him, and she's fights Tori off, and Tori beats on her, messes up her weave, her chain falls off, her nail falls off, etc.
Okay.
That's what she originally told the investigators when she went, or not the investigation.
She this is what she told the prosecution, right?
Then the defense asks her, which I guess this is a pretty good line of questioning.
Why did you lie?
Was there pressure to lie?
And she did we pressure you to lie?
Did Tory or his team pressure to lie?
She says no.
Then they say, Did the prosecution pressure you to lie?
She says yes.
Oh shit, there you go.
And that little bit, that little bit there, it's a huge win for the defense, but it did open the door to them bringing in the full recording of the previous interview with uh the prosecutors.
Now, um, what is opening the door mean?
Let me explain it a little bit.
So typically you only allow evidence in, like I said, if it's uh with somebody actually testifying to that evidence and the very the verifiability of that evidence in court.
So typically recordings are not allowed in, particularly if you can just ask the person yourself directly, right?
If if Meg, if you can just ask Meg or ask uh Kelsey Harris or ask Tori Lanez, you just ask them directly.
You don't have to bring in other evidence.
However, because they mentioned the prosecution and mentioned this uh this note about them asking them to lie, they brought in the recording, the previous recording, in order to what they wanted to do was show context and what they wanted to should to show was that they didn't do anything dirty.
That is a major accusation, by the way.
Whether it's against the prosecution or defense, you cannot pay somebody or tell somebody to lie.
You will get disbarred for that.
As an attorney, I can tell you we do not take that lightly.
If you are caught paying off a witness or telling a witness straight up to lie, no, that's it.
That's that's a wrap.
That's a wrap.
Now, lawyers have very creative ways.
I know lawyers that have creative ways of talking about this of not telling them to lie, but telling them to be careful about stuff.
Yes, lawyers can do that, but you cannot tell somebody to get up there on stand and lie.
Not permissible.
It's a huge ethical breach.
Yeah, and not to mention criminal.
Uh, you could definitely get some criminal charges for that as well, besides getting this barred.
Um, so uh okay, so she goes ahead and she confirms that there was a physical altercation between her and Meg, but she said it was only a bump, which I mean, okay.
What are you talking about?
Shoulder bump, like what I'm talking about here, which is kind of strange because a bump would knock your nail off and your chain on the floor, and you know, there's clearly a physical altercation.
So basically the story she said before about Tori Lane's assaulting her and Shooting, you know, shooting at Meg or whatever, she said all of it was a lie, guy.
So all of that testimony is basically thrown out now.
Okay.
So uh she also says, um her and Meg haven't spoken since that night.
And then they the defense asked her, Did you hear dance bitches?
She said, now where do you think that came from?
Right?
Which you could take that for a face value, what is it, what it is.
Yeah, and then the defense asked her.
Um, they the defense asked her about uh Tory Lane's having a deal with Rock Nation and that falling falling through before the incident happened.
She did not know about it.
And then Kelsey confirmed that Meg was mad about um the Jenner situation.
Um, she also said that Meg was mad when she left and they went back for the sandal.
And then she also said uh Meg got out originally the vehicle in a bikini and they coaxed her to get and she sat at a bus stop and then they coaxed her to get back into the vehicle, and then they stopped again, and that's when the shooting happened.
Um and Meg had denied this in her testimony.
She only remembers getting out one time.
Okay.
Um, and then the prosecution is gonna, and then okay, so day five now, right?
So that was day four.
So um obviously Kelsey had two days of testimony, guys, because she threw a wrench and everything.
And and honestly, the prosecution now at this point, they're throwing anything at the fucking wall because she kind of messed with the procedures, and the judge isn't too happy about her recanting all her statements and saying I'm gonna take the fifth and you know, delaying the trial or whatever.
So now the judge is like, all right, I'm gonna let anything in as far as like you know, because now the the prosecution said, Oh, we got some other text messages we want to bring in.
Oh, we got a detective that can verify that Tory Lanez was doing some things on Instagram, and normally this stuff would never be allowed into trial.
But since Kelsey kind of came in and went back on her story, he's like, bro, we got to get the truth.
So basically, he's allowing in other pieces of evidence that otherwise may have never been able to be allowed in.
What's your thoughts?
Quick point on this, quick point on this.
This is I think this is a sign of desperation on the part of the prosecution.
And understand, we always think about trial as trial, but a lot of lawyers forget, and even people out there forget the appeal is very important as well.
And the judge letting each piece of evidence, each single piece of evidence they allow in that they previously didn't they're making a judgment call to allow that piece of evidence in, whether it's a single text message, whether it's a video, a recording, whatever, each piece of evidence is something that's potentially impermissible and giving them another grounds for appeal.
So if let's say hypothetically, Tory Lanez is convicted here, all these things they're doing, all these things that normally wouldn't come in that they're allowing in, these are all appeal points.
And honestly, each one of them gives Tory Lanez a huge chance to recover, even if he's convicted.
So, frankly, the defense, through the prosecution's desperation, has actually got a big win here.
Even if they were to lose at trial, I think they have a massive chance to win any appeal, even if he was convicted, because they're allowing evidence in that they shouldn't have to allow in, but they're only doing that because they're fucked because Meg the Stallion and Kelsey Harris did not give the prosecution what they needed to convict Tory Lance.
And also something that I found we found this interesting right before uh the pod, and I'll show you guys this as well.
Is that um hold on one second?
Um, if you go back to the police report, guys, all right, I'm gonna and I highlighted this for y'all real fast.
Um here is after the incident, right?
My partner admonished Harris per LAPD form uh 1503.
Their their LAPD form, guys, is the Miranda rights, okay?
Because remember, they're showing up on the scene, they just know someone had been shot, they don't know who the shooter is.
So to be safe, they're gonna mirandize everybody, right?
She goes, she responded yes, yes, and yes, and yes.
When asked if she wanted to talk about what happened, Harris said, I really want someone to represent me.
Why is she saying that?
Now I'm what I'm saying.
This is a relevant question.
Like, why is she why does she need that representation right away?
Now, the other thing, too, is that our investigation revealed that on 712020 at approximately 430 hours, a physical altercation between Harris and Pete.
Remember, guys, Harris is Kelsey.
Pete is Meg The Stallion.
Yep.
Occurred at 1841 North Nicholas Canyon Boulevard.
An unknown suspect fired approximately five rounds.
Smith Peterson, Pete, and Harris entered the black escalate and flee southbound on Nicholas Canyon Road based on Peterson's seating position and the position of the firearm.
Peterson was the last person to have constructive possession of the firearm.
And as you guys know, when they fled the scene, he just jumped in the front seat.
And when they stopped them, he was in with the he was with the gun, which was in the front seat underneath like a Gucci bag.
If I'm not mistaken, some kind of bag.
And once again, this is like you're playing musical chairs.
He just happened to be the guy that was sitting there next to the gun.
That does not imply he's actually the one that that fired had possession of the gun.
And from what I understand, there's not enough proof.
They haven't they never presented or the case in trial has not presented uh evidence that he's actually the one that fired him.
Conclusive evidence.
Testimony is one thing, but actual fingerprints on the gun, other things that might be able to say, hey, he's the one who uh fired this gun at that point.
And I got evidence for that one as well, which I'll share with you guys here in a second.
But also, I want to point out that this witness, Kelly Sean, advised he lived on 1841 Courtney Ave.
He stated he heard arguing outside his bedroom.
He looked outside and observed a black escalade.
He stated the passenger door was open and observed four suspects, two females and two males.
Kelly stated one male was heavy set, and the second was a thin build.
He stated the rear passenger exited from the vehicle, one of the females, and began fighting with the other female.
Boom!
So we have a witness, Sean Kelly, who is saying that these bitches were fighting.
And and once again, this is something that you're getting from a neutral party, you're getting it from somebody who doesn't have an interest here, who's not screwing somebody else who's not involved here.
There's no emotions, there's no politics.
A neutral observer who says this, and and they give some pretty good details.
I mean, they and they're accurate about them.
For example, the fact it was a black escalade.
They notice these details.
So this this witness actually seems pretty reliable here.
So, and I think this is the guy that they're probably gonna call, by the way.
Um, because they are gonna call one of the witnesses, and I think this is gonna be the guy.
They didn't name him, but I'm pretty sure this is gonna be him.
So at one point, Kelly observed one female crawl out of the black escalade and onto the driveway of 1841 North Nichols Canyon.
Kelly heard approximately four to five gunshots.
Kelly stated both males were punching close fist one of the females and dragged her into the vehicle.
The vehicle fled southbound on Nichols Canyon Road, briefly stopped at a driveway and continue southbound towards Hollywood Boulevard.
So, hey, you know what I mean?
You got an eyewitness saying that the two females were fighting, even though Meg was saying that there was no physical confrontation between her and then Kelsey said there was a physical confrontation, but she downplayed and said that it was just a bump.
So it's probably somewhere in the middle here, right?
Um, okay, so let's go ahead and get into day five of the testimony.
And this is where the DNA experts come in, guys.
All right.
So day five of the trial, just like Andrew said, they played the entire interview with Kelsey and the prosecutors, okay, where she gave the testimony about Tory Lane shooting, assaulting her, being the bet the main guy, etc.
Right.
From hold on, Mary.
This was a little bit weird, wasn't it?
The recording was a little bit weird because it was recorded with prosecutors, but not with law enforcement, right?
Yes, there was no detectives during this interview, which uh I don't know what the hell they're doing over there with the Los Angeles district attorney's office, but the fact that they went ahead and conducted an interview with a witness without an investigator there, baffles me.
Because I'll tell you guys this from my personal training experience when I was an agent.
Prosecutors aren't involved in interviews until after the judicial process is kind of underway, and there's always an investigator there because you typically don't want prosecutors to be direct witnesses.
You cannot make the direct witnesses, you cannot make the person who is prosecuting the case a witness in the case.
You've got to remove them from the case.
So, are you gonna remove that prosecutor so you can put him on the stand to testify to the recording to testify to that that you know interview?
No, you of course you're not gonna do that.
So, this this move by them, it was either brain dead or I mean, I don't know what's going on in LA.
Utter incompetence, LA tax dollars at work.
I don't know what to tell you guys.
And and the other thing, too, is there wasn't an investigator there.
The prosecutors did it.
The only time I've ever seen prosecutors like run interviews, typically, is if it's like a deposition, which this to my knowledge and understanding was not a deposition.
It was not a deposition, otherwise, it would have been emitted.
It would have been admitted if it was a deposition.
You should tell them what a deposition is.
Yeah, so deposition is a is a on the record under oath, you know, transcription.
there's case, there's questions that are asked by both sides for a witness.
It is on oath, it is immissible in court, it's part of discovery.
You sit someone down, usually for multiple hours, sometimes the entire day, you're peppered with questions, you're grilled with questions, you have to answer.
Now, your counsel can make objections, and those objections are ruled on later as to what is admissible and inadmissible.
But generally, you're asked questions, you have to answer, and then you go through it from both sides, and that is admissible in court.
This recording was not a deposition because it was previously inadmissible in court, but only later, only because the prosecution's reputation was attacked, their credibility was attacked, the system was attacked.
Did the judge say, Okay, now we're gonna let this in.
Yeah, and not only that, you know, now that I think about it, yeah, because a deposition can be used without the person even being there.
That's the whole purpose of doing the deposition.
You do it, so it stands by itself, and you don't even have to bring that witness in because that witness was cross-examined by defense as well, because the defense has a right to be there at that deposition.
Think of it as kind of like a recorded portion of the trial, right?
And typically you do depositions when someone isn't gonna be available in rare situations where you think witness might die because they're old or sick or something like that.
Also, to impeach a witness, right?
So if you think a witness is gonna lie, you depose them under oath, and you're like, okay, what is the truth?
And what you're trying to do, particularly on cross, is get them saying something at trial that is not consistent with their under oath deposition, because then by the way, they're committing perjury.
Now, I will say one thing about perjury really quickly, because I get a lot of questions on this.
This is one of my most frequently asked questions about trials.
Andrew, are they gonna charge them with perjury?
Okay, on the books, they could.
Are they gonna in reality?
No, perjury is rarely ever charged against witnesses because the general principle they don't want to discourage people from testifying.
If the law enforcement, uh, whether it's state, federal, whatever, was known to go after everybody, there would be no witnesses.
It's gotta be egregious for them to go after you for lying under oath.
You know what I mean?
It can be done, but it's gotta be pretty egregious.
Most can be done, it's gotta be really bad.
Um, like Martha Stewart, or when they don't have anything else, then they'll come after you for false statements.
That's why they got they were gonna get Martha.
Martha was going down no matter what.
They're like, Fuck that shit, bro.
We we know you we know you were inside of trading.
We got you.
1001 18 USC 1001, false statements.
All right, so day five, guys, they play the full interview, okay?
Um, because Kelsey Royally fucked up as a as a witness for the prosecution, right?
And in her pro in her interview was very detailed.
She gave you know details about the party when she showed up, um, it's intricate details of who was there, etc.
Right.
Um, she told them Tori uh hopped in the front seat and shot Meg.
Um, she said that Julie on the floor was because Tori attacked her, right?
When they asked her about the jewelry and the nail on the floor, and then uh she didn't say that Meg and her fought, which, as you guys know, when she came in the second time at the actual trial, she said they did have an altercation, okay, even though she downplayed and said it was a bump.
Then the DNA experts came in.
They said that um the magazine was tested, and four DNA profiles were found on the magazine of the firearm.
However, Torres was not on it, which is a W for him.
Then huge that is a massive W, by the way.
That's a huge W. Then they said the gun had four DNA profiles on it, but it was inconclusive.
But the DNA experts did say, because remember, there were two there's two DNA experts.
There was one for the state and one for the defense.
So Tori hired his own independent DNA guy, and then the state had their DNA guy, but both DNA experts concluded, right?
That um, if Tory shot the gun five times, it would be probable that his DNA would be on the gun, which they weren't able to conclusively prove that guys, that is massive.
If your own expert that you're putting on the stand is not giving you what you want, that that's that is that is a for trial, that is horrible.
That's gonna look terrible to a jury right there.
That alone could be the fact that sinks it in the eyes of the jury.
Because typically, here's what happens the Prosecution has their witness, and they'll say, Well, this DNA looks good.
It matches Tory Lane.
We have it on here, and he's one who could be the shooter.
He could possibly be the shooter.
The defense comes up and says, Nope, there's not enough DNA on here to prove that.
Uh, I use this method to an out to analyze it, and it's some competing valid method.
And hey, there's not enough to analyze this, and you can't conclusively say that he was the shooter.
And you get a war of the experts.
Your expert says one thing, their expert says another thing.
That happens at a lot of trials.
However, when you have your own expert that doesn't tell you what you want, it's devastating because we found at trials over centuries of looking at trials of experts versus late witnesses.
People, particularly juries, put a crazy amount of trust in experts.
I don't know why you guys trust the trust people with degrees like doctors, lawyers, whatever.
Apparently, you trust us.
I don't know why.
But it's your mistake.
But the point is is that people will really, really, really trust that testimony more than even Meg or even Tori, they'll say, Hey, the expert says there's no DNA on here.
So it must not be him.
That to me got that is huge.
That is massive.
So, and I and I found that interesting because both both of them are like, hey, it it's probable that if he shot the gun five times, right?
As alleged, his DNA would be on it.
And then the Tories guy took it a step further.
He said, Tori's DNA guy said, if he fired it five times, it should be conclusively on that his DNA should be on it conclusively.
Which at that point, the prosecution right did their job and they went ahead and said, Well, how do you know that?
What's your uh, you know, or aren't you a Tories witness?
Blah blah blah.
But even their def, even their DNA guy said that, yeah.
I mean, if someone shot the gun five times, it would be probable that you would be able to find their DNA.
But Tory's DNA guy said no, it would be conclusive if he shot it five times.
So that's when the DNA pushed him a little the prosecution pushed him a little bit and try to discredit him.
However, their own witness even said, Yeah, it would be probable that there'd be DNA on it.
Because you guys gotta remember when you fire a gun, there's recoil, okay, there is residue coming out, etc.
Right.
Which also I want to let you guys know the defense when they went after Kelsey, they said that yo, you had gun residue on you too, right?
So that's another interesting point.
Uh okay, what else here?
And then uh also on the last day of trial, Meg Security Guard went missing, they can't find him to testify.
And to be honest with you guys, weird.
It's weird.
That's weird.
That's a weird fact, man.
It's a weird fact, weird timing.
But to be honest with you, I don't think he's that important of a witness because all he really got was he got the text message from Kelsey saying that Tori shot her.
So all he would do is come in, kind of come in and be like, on this day and time, did you go ahead and get a text message from Kelsey saying that Tori shot her?
Yes, I did.
Okay.
So I don't really know how that would help too much, but whatever.
Um, and then also um I talked about earlier that it wasn't the police, it was the prosecutors that went ahead and did the interview, which was weird.
And the cross-examination actually talked about that.
Why was it only lawyers interviewing her and why wasn't an investigator there?
Um, and the other thing, good point that defense made was um she didn't have immunity back in September of 2022, so she was more incentivized to lie.
One more time for y'all.
She did not have immunity in September of 2022 when she went in and did the interview, so she was more incentivized to lie.
So when she comes in under oath, she takes the fifth.
Whoa, what the hell are you taking a fifth for?
We already talked over this, and then she goes ahead and says, Oh, I want to take the fifth.
Okay, we'll give you the immunity.
Then she says, I lied to y'all back in September.
That explains everything that fits the theory of the case.
Is that especially the theory of the case that Harris is culpable here, that Harris had a key in this, and once again, line it up with that motive.
She just found she's drunk, emotional, and she just found out her dude that she's fucking with is fucking all these other people.
Wild.
So that is what happened, guys.
Summarized over the five days, pretty much.
So Andrew, but your expert, what do you what do you think with all this so far?
Looks really bad for the prosecution.
There's almost none of these cases that they can the none of these charges that they can Get him on definitively.
If they can prove that he actually touched the gun, which doesn't seem like there's any proof here, maybe they could get him for carrying a loaded firearm and not being the registered owner under California law.
That one law that I said is probably violative of the second amendment, which is by the way, why they had those laws so they can get you on something.
But other than that one, which I don't even think they can get because they lack the DNA evidence to prove you ever touched the gun.
I think this entire thing gets thrown out.
I think this is a giant L for the prosecution based on what we've seen so far.
Unless there's something else they're pulling out in this final week, this looks like a giant L for them, in my experience.
And once again, you're gonna have to convince the jury.
It was the prosecution's duty to convince the jury.
Did they do that?
I don't know where.
Where would they do that in this case?
Yeah.
So guys, there's 6100 plus y'all watching right now.
I need you guys to get us up to at least we should be at like three to four K easily, guys.
If you guys want me to give you my prediction on what I think is gonna happen, I need you guys to like the goddamn video.
And I hate asking this.
And I also need you guys to go ahead and take this time to subscribe to the channel and also subscribe to Andrew's channel, legal mindset.
He's uh tagged in the in the uh in the title.
Subscribe to the channel, let's get him to 100,000.
Guys, almost there, baby.
I need you guys to like the video.
I'm not gonna go in and give you guys my prediction until I get this thing to at least 3k likes.
We got to get the goddamn likes up.
It's it's very easy.
We gave you guys a whole bunch of sauce.
While I wait for you guys to get the goddamn likes up, I'll go ahead and give you guys a quick recap on what happened.
All right, everything for the people that are so first week of the trial, trial began last Monday, guys.
Okay.
So day one, they went ahead with opening statements.
We describe what opening statement is.
The prosecution opened up painting Tory Lanez is the alleged shooter, right?
And they opened up with dance, bitch, and then which is allegedly what Tory Lane said when he sh before he shot Meg.
Then the defense went in with their theory that Kelsey was actually the shooter.
There was gunshot residue on her as well, and that this wasn't necessarily an argument between her and Meg.
Sorry, between Tori and Meg, rather an argument between Kelsey and Meg over the fact that Meg had had slept with men that Kelsey had been involved with prior to include Tori Lanez, the baby, and Ben Simmons, and maybe some other dudes, right?
So Meg's sexual history definitely came into this.
Then on day one, the law enforcement were pretty much brought in the on direct, you know, everything went smooth because the prosecutors asking them questions.
Then on cross, right?
The defense basically were able to illustrate that the police did not follow standard evidentiary procedure correctly, and they didn't mark the evidence appropriately with the bullets and the blood at the crime scene.
So there was there's no real definitive pattern, right?
Or movement that can be proven of the uh of the witness and slash victim in this case, so they don't really know who shot who, okay.
So they attacked the evidence in that perspective, right?
Which is the defense's job.
Then the prosecution was saying, hey, we got jail calls of Tori Lane's profusely apologizing when he was in prison.
And you know, the defense's argument to that.
Well, you guys know now that he could have been apologizing for outing Meg's sexual history to Kelsey, which started the whole altercation of them fighting.
So they created some more plausible deniability that he might have not been apologizing for shooting because he never said I uh sorry for shooting.
He just said I'm sorry, and no one really knows for what.
And the defense say it's could could be from outing Meg.
Then on day three, right?
This is day one.
So day two, excuse me, Meg the Stallion goes in and takes a stand.
She gives her story, powerful testimony.
I'm the victim, blah blah blah.
She did a good job of getting the pulling at the heartstrings.
Um she gives some uh she gives a story that to be honest with you guys doesn't make too much sense.
But go back in the video, I'm gonna put timestamps up that goes exactly over what she said in her testimony.
Then on cross, um, she also had some testimony that was questionable, but guys go back and watch it.
I'll put the timestamps up for you guys on the on the show.
So don't worry.
And then day three, obviously, the explosive testimony from Kelsey, where she takes the fifth before she even gets on the stand.
Well, as soon as she gets on the stand, she admits that she had lied to the prosecution uh back in September when she had come in for an interview when asked multiple times why she said to protect herself.
Um, and this obviously builds more ammunition for the defense's argument that she could have been potentially the shooter.
Um, and when she was asked if Tory Lanez threatened Meg to shoot her, she says yes, and then they ask, well, under what context, and then she takes the fifth again, which we went over the fifth amendment.
You only get Fifth Amendment privileges when what you are going to say is more than likely going to incriminate you, which she ended up getting immunity.
So yeah, the the the prosecution can't really go after her.
And then on cross, she went ahead and um contradicted a bunch of the things that Meg said, which you know will be in detail in the timestamps.
And then uh we went on to day five where the DNA experts confirmed that Tory Lanez's DNA was not on the magazine, and that the gun itself had four different DNA profiles, but it was inconclusive.
And uh the DNA experts also say that if the gun had been shot five times by Tory Lanez, his DNA more than likely would be on it uh or should be on it conclusively, according to the other DNA expert from uh Tory side, but both DNA people to note from the state and from DN uh Tory's defense team both concluded that hey, it was inconclusive and it should be there if he should fire it five times.
And I guess that's the general overall summary.
Yeah, what's anything else you want to say?
And we're not we're not at closing arguments yet.
So we're not there yet.
So we still got another.
Yeah, we probably got I think my my over under Myron is I think they wanna, and let me tell you about judges, they like to finish things before Christmas.
They likes, god damn it.
Sorry, go ahead.
They like to finish things before Christmas.
So I do not think this thing goes longer than the end of this week, including closing arguments.
Uh so that judge has probably told them, listen, Muslim motherfuckers, I'm not going out here and unboxing some shit with some whiny ass kids and then coming back here into court.
The judge is probably because the judge is the real people, the jury is real people too.
And the jury is gonna be pissed off if this thing gets dragged out.
Mind you, the longer these things go, it's probably worse for the prosecution, particularly if the jury perceives the prosecution as drawing this thing out.
So I think this thing wraps this week.
I think we get a verdict this week, uh 100% in this case.
That's where I'm at.
I agree with you 100% on that.
I want you guys to know, like when when trials occur, the judge, their main focus is getting the jury to not be agitated, annoyed, and for them to be able to, you know, process the case, understand the case, and most importantly, make their ruling on the case as far as who they think is you know culpable in in the crime or not culpable in this case, potentially.
So the the judge's oh prime concern is always the jury, guys.
I mean, when I went to trial, the judge will yell at the prosecutors and or the defense if they if they um stall the trial, because he looks at it like yo, these jurors are here on their free time, they're you know, they're missing work, they're they're not watching television, they're not watching certain coverage on this case, they're missing a lot of stuff for this case as a civil duty.
So we need to go ahead and respect that.
So the judge uh always wants the tr the jury to not be agitated and annoyed.
Good.
And another thing too is this has all been the prosecution's case.
Mind you, the defense, they can put on a case, they can bring up witnesses, but they don't have to.
All they gotta do is poke holes, and they've already done that.
And in fact, the prosecution is probably its own worst enemy at this point.
So the defense doesn't need to get up there and give a lot, they just have to go up there, poke a couple holes in the story of the prosecution, and that's it, they're done.
They can sit down and they can rest their case.
So I think we're gonna see not too much from that.
And also remember, and this is very important, is that Tory Lane is probably not gonna testify in this.
He's probably taking the fifth because in this case, as his attorney, if I was Tory Lane's attorney, I would say, do not get up there, take the fifth, sit down.
There's no reason to get up there, it's just gonna look bad.
They're just gonna be able to ask you questions, attack your credibility, get into things that might make you look bad, do not get up there.
So I expect that Tory Lanez will take the fifth and will not get up there to testify.
Good point.
You know what?
Since we're on this topic, let's talk about potential witnesses that they're gonna bring in.
They talked about potentially bringing in Kylie Jenner as a witness, they cut they which would be bombshell.
I mean, that would take that would put some napalm on this bitch if Kylie comes in.
They they they talked about obviously that witness that saw the fight, they're gonna bring him in, the security guard, and then the defense wants to bring back one of the police officers, which that's not a good thing.
They probably want to um cross him some more and attack the prosecution's case even more so.
Um, they also want that detective to come in, but that's not gonna happen.
The the one that's under investigation at run uh stalking or stacknon, whatever his name is.
I I would love I would love to see Kylie come back in and be like, yo, these hoes were mad because he was just trying to smash me.
Like, I mean, that I mean, that would be that would be the nuclear bomb on this case.
Yeah.
So those are the the witnesses that are more than likely gonna come in.
But I agree with you, Andrew.
They're 100% gonna want to wrap this up before Christmas.
He's not gonna want the trial to lag on beyond Christmas.
I think they're gonna go at what they'll probably do is they'll probably finish all the witnesses by this week, get the jury to deliberate, and hopefully they can go ahead and get some kind of um decision by the end of the week and you know, be done with it for Christmas because Christmas is is this weekend.
So yeah, it's coming up.
So I mean that they don't want to be they don't want to be doing that, and they don't want the jury out there.
They usually promise the jury to be keep it as quick as possible.
And mind you, the jury is gonna make their decision quickly if they push it closer to Christmas.
So they know if this thing wraps on Thursday, that jury is coming back by the end of Friday with a verdict.
They're not going out there over that weekend and saying they got to come back the next week.
Mind you, you're paid a very low amount for this.
This is not uh a profitable venture for you to be sitting in court.
You are not paid a lot of money.
This is not fun, this is not cool, it's a pain in your ass.
Nobody wants to be there, they all just want to go home.
So they are not going to be favoring the prosecution if the prosecution pushes this towards the weekend.
They might just if this wrapped on Friday morning, they might walk back in there before lunch and give a verdict saying, Look, we already decided this guy's not guilty.
So here's my prediction on it.
And guys, get the likes up.
So we went over everything.
At this point, I would be shocked if Tory Lanez was found guilty.
I I would honestly be shocked because you guys gotta remember, like I said at the top of the podcast, it's the prosecution's job to prove a beyond a reasonable doubt, not probable cause, which is all the way down here.
They need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Tory was the shooter, Tori was in possession of the firearm, Tori discharged the firearm, etc.
The DNA evidence alone is inconclusive that he was the one that shot the gun five times.
Okay, and you got witness testimony that contradicts itself all over the place.
Everyone was drunk.
You got Megda Stein, the primary witness against Tori, lying on random interviews, giving contradictory statements to what the prosecution's even saying.
Then the person that was supposed to be the prosecution star witness gets on the stand and takes the fifth and then admits everything she told uh the prosecution was a lie.
And then she goes ahead and says, I'm taking a fifth, and I can't I have to protect myself.
Well, what the hell can that be insinuating?
Well, it can insinuate that you her and well, we already know that her and Meg were actually the ones arguing and fighting, right?
And to include Tori as well, and there was a physical altercation.
So now it's probable or possible that Kelsey shot Meg.
Now that that is a legitimate theory now at this point.
And guess what?
That does that creates a magic term, which is reasonable doubt, my friends.
And once there's reasonable doubt, which is the defense's job, you can't convict somebody because we don't know if he was a shooter definitively beyond a reasonable doubt.
And uh, and I agree with you, uh, Andrew, at this point, because some people said, Oh, Tori's gonna take the stand, Tori's gonna take the stand.
I mean, I've I any time I've ever seen a defense attorney put their uh their witness on the stand, it's always been an L. It's it almost never works.
Um I mean, would you do you think it's you think they're gonna put it?
But I think the only cases in which you have to do it are cases where it's self-defense.
So uh we've looked at that in some of the officers' situations.
Kyle or Kyle Rittenhouse.
You have to go on there to establish certain facts if it's a self-defense case.
If it's not self-defense, if you're not up there asserting that I was in fear for my life personally, and that is why I killed somebody.
If it's not self-defense, there's no reason for you to be getting up there on the stand.
None whatsoever.
Especially in this case where one of the prosecutions' witnesses did the work for you.
Yeah, so I only see it as problematic because it's not like Tori was sober, you know what I mean?
And and he'll he remembers everything clear, like, no, uh, like I remember this and that.
He was drunk too.
So yeah, his testimony is is not, I don't it like Kelsey already did the work for him, to be honest with you.
So I if I would be shocked if his defense put her on the stand at him on the stand at this point.
Yeah, Tory Lanez would not be well served to be on the to be on the stand.
Yeah, And frankly, you know, I don't think even the bodyguard that was there that night, uh, I think Jaquan Smith, uh, I don't think he would be a good witness either.
I think you just kind of want to have both of those guys off the stand.
Yeah, yeah.
And and and uh and he, you know, I'm surprised they didn't call him, but I mean, probably because uh he's a part of Tory's team.
Yes, he's an employee of Tory's team, so they know there'd be you know potential conflict there.
Um, also, I mean, he could probably plead the fifth as well because he's implicated in potential crimes there or as an accessory to potential crimes as an agent of Tory Lanes.
Exactly, which is why I think that the prosecution was like, No, fuck no, we're not they're dumb, they're not dumb, they're not dumb, they're not gonna call it.
Yeah, they're not gonna bring him on as a witness.
The defense might put him on, and that now now with with with all the the craziness going on, and all like all the defense has been able to create a uh a circus here to some degree, and their theory that Kelsey is the shooter now actually can stand because Kelsey's saying, I take the fifth.
Well, what would a rational person think?
Why is she taking a fifth?
Was she the shooter?
You know, and then and then the way that she took the fifth was problematic because they're like, All right, did Tory threaten Meg to shoot her?
Yes, okay.
Under what context did he threaten her?
I take the fifth.
What?
Well, yeah, the context, because you need the context because the context matters, it's motivation.
You need to prove motive.
Why did Tory Lanes shoot you know, shoot uh Meg the Stallion?
It's it's it's crazy, man.
But uh my prediction is there is no way at this point that he's gonna get convicted.
And let's say he does he does get uh found guilty.
He has appeal upon appeal that he could file on this thing.
This thing is was was a clown world circus, which is in state court.
And by the way, not just for trial, but throughout the whole process of how the interviews were conducted, how things went down, evidence per preservation.
There's all sorts of issues with this trial.
I think he would he would definitely win a uh appeal, uh, which is why I think he probably doesn't have to worry too much about being deported.
I think that he's he's probably all right on that, uh, because it probably would be his deportation, I imagine will be stayed pending the appeal.
Um, I don't I think they would let that resolve.
What do you think was the biggest mess up from this overall uh whether it's be from the defense or from the from the state?
Well, I think I think number one, having an expert get up there and testify against your interest, that is a massive fail.
That's one.
And the other one is is obviously what happened with Kelsey Harris.
You to have somebody get up on the stand and drop that, and you haven't negotiated that beforehand, looks horrible to a jury.
That looks like that person has is guilty and they have something to hide.
If the first word remember what I said, what do they remember?
The first thing and last thing.
So same thing for a witness, they remember the first things the witness said, and the last things the witness said.
So the first thing they remember is I plead the fifth, and the last thing is, did the prosecution ask you to lie?
Yes, yeah, that's what they give from Kelsey Harris, just those two things.
That's that's not looking good.
Even though she didn't say that the prosecution made her lie, the fact she said, Well, the prosecution basically she said the prosecution pressured me.
Yeah, so you know what I mean.
Like a jury can look at that because you guys gotta remember the jurors are regular people, like every day, like they're kind of like they're like, like to them, they're looking at this like what the hell?
This is weird.
So can you convict a man, right?
With all this evidence that shows that he might have not been the shooter, and you guys got him up for that.
Tori gross negligence.
Uh and once the standard for a lot of these is gross negligence, and you gotta prove that beyond a reasonable doubt.
So you've got to prove that he was grossly negligent beyond a reasonable doubt, so that he was acting in a way that was you know wantonly uh malicious almost.
You're you're acting away that, like I said, firing into a crowd, doing something really reckless beyond a reasonable doubt.
They haven't even come to like greater, they haven't even beat 50 percent, right?
They haven't even beat probability, flip of a coin that it was Tory Lane.
And at that point, that's not criminal, people.
That might be civil and ain't criminal.
It's definitely not criminal.
And by the way, I think they lose in a civil suit.
I think Meg would never take him in a civil suit because I think even there, he cannot she cannot prove that he was the proximate cause of the damage.
Oh, I'll tell you this.
If if he wins this thing, he has a defamation suit coming for her so bad.
Oh bro, if he gets uh acquitted of these charges, Meg the Stallion, not only is she gonna get ridiculed, but she is going to get destroyed by Tory Lanez's defamation lawyer.
She could, she could.
Now, it might be the bigger law, might be in the media, the bigger la L might be in the media, right?
She's probably gonna take a bigger L in the media that you wouldn't defamation court.
You're seeing even now in defamation court with Johnny Depp versus Amber Heard, Amber's appealing that already.
So that's all that's all cut up in the in the weeds for a while.
It doesn't hit them right away.
So they've got that delay built in there, and they also have potential to reduce the amount of the damages.
But I think the amount that she's taking an L in media and people like you that are putting out the truth on this, it's helping because there's people out there that are focusing on this story.
And when I read about this online, all I see is shit like, oh Meg Meg the Stallion is subject to so much online hate, this and that.
They're not talking about the facts of the case, they're not talking about the facts of the incident, they're out there spouting bullshit, and there's certainly a lot of these people are not lawyers, and they're certainly not former law enforcement agents, so they don't know what the fuck they're talking about when they talk about this.
And I'll tell you guys this.
So I wrote down some of the mistakes that I think the prosecution's done on this thing.
Number one, they clout chase this thing, man.
Let's just keep it a thousand.
You know what I mean?
Like, if this was just a regular situation with some regular people with these facts, I don't think the DA would go as hard as to take this thing, but they took it because obviously it's high profile.
You got a black woman being shot by a black man, and it's like, let's go ahead and you know, prosecute this.
Meg is the victim, etc.
So it's a clout chase, and this is you know, failed Los Angeles before.
Obviously, look at the OJ trial, which is probably one of the biggest black guys in Los Angeles prosecution prosecutor history.
Then you got um they interviewed Kelsey way too late.
They interviewed her two years after the fact, which to me is in fucking sane that investigators didn't go ahead and get an interview from her right after, okay.
Then you got the the lead detective is on admin leave or potentially getting terminated, which to me is crazy, bro.
Like, if you got if you had a federal case and the main case agent was in serious trouble like this, bro.
I mean, you'd be damn near close to like, can we still do this thing or whatever?
But obviously, at this point, it's a high profile case.
The DA can't dismiss the case, right?
So they had to see it through.
That's why you got a detective that comes in.
Oh, yeah, I listened to the jail calls a week ago.
What the fuck?
Yo, this case has been going on for two plus for two plus years.
You're telling me that you just listened to the jail calls a week ago when this stuff when this shit happened back in July of 2020, what the hell are you talking about?
That is sloppy.
That is sloppy for the first, especially when you have somebody that's of the profile of Tory Lanez, you need to take this shit seriously.
You can't just half-ass this, like that's not possible.
So, one of the detectives, yeah, I listened to it last week.
Incredible.
So that's how I knew that they just brought some random guy in to take over this case because this other guy got in trouble.
And let me be honest with y'all, anytime you absolve a case from someone else and it gets dropped on your lap, you're not gonna take it a serious because it's not your baby.
If anything, I guarantee you the LAPD is like, fuck, bro, I don't want to do this shit.
This is a pain in the ass.
This is bringing all this media scrutiny, like this is annoying, you know.
Um, and then also uh the police that arrived on the scene, not properly um cornering off the area and marking the bullet cases and everything properly, big fucking L for them as well, you know, because the number one way to destroy a case from the police is to attack the evidence and attack the way in which the evidence was gathered.
In this case, you got a detective that's in trouble administratively that has giglio issues.
Now you also got police officers that showed up at the scene that didn't gather the evidence properly, so that you can have a clear picture of what the hell happened.
You got DNA experts saying, yo, we can't conclusively say that Tory Lane's uh DNA is on the gun, okay.
But if he did shoot it five times, we should probably see his DNA on the gun.
None of this is uh W for the prosecution, it's a big L all together.
So this all together put it, you know, Kelsey going ahead, their primary witness taking the fifth, and the inference that she could have been potentially the shooter, all of this is created reasonable doubt that Tory Lanez is innocent, and I would be shocked if they found him guilty.
There's no way that there's no way, and and uh from what people I've seen, the jury's already kind Of been like, what the hell is going on?
When Kelsey took the fifth and gave contradictory statements, they were like, whatever.
And then you got Meg De Stallion lying on other interviews and then coming in uh under oath and then giving another story.
So what's brown?
Literally, the prosecution, the prosecution does not have a single credible witness.
Single credible, especially the eyewitness testimony.
It doesn't have one.
This is a case where, frankly, I am shocked they brought this based on the the lack of credibility for these witnesses.
You're you gotta have one.
You don't have one.
Yo, now that you say that, prosecution does have one credible witness.
Even the detective that ran this case is under investigation.
What the fuck is going on, bro?
You're right.
They really don't even have a credible witness.
No, no, no, not even there, and their expert didn't even help them out.
This is so bad.
This is like uh, like literally, are you guys making a mockery?
Like, is this a game to you guys?
Like fucking with somebody's life, like the ability to get him deported.
Is this a fucking game to you that you brought this?
And that's why you guys say there's definitely political pressure, there's some sort of some there's something going on here to bring this case because this is just absolutely a clown show.
This would not be brought in most jurisdictions where I've you know litigate where I've you know served, where I've been.
Um, it's been it's been something that really hasn't come up in anything I've seen based on this lack of evidence.
They wouldn't even indict.
No, no, I don't even think, or if they did indict, they would dismiss the indictment after after shit like this.
And and and the other thing, too, by the by the prosecution that really shocks me.
Do you guys not fucking prepare your witnesses?
Like what the hell is this?
If you go to trial, you gotta prepare your witnesses.
Like, how do you have a witness come in and take the fifth?
That tells me they did not prepare her.
That's crazy to me, bro.
That is crazy to me.
This is just sloppy police work, inexperienced prosecutors, cloud chasing DA's office, trying to go ahead and get a profile high profile case, regardless of what the evidence is.
Like you said it perfectly, they don't have one credible witness on the prosecution side.
And guys, trust me, I looked at this case like, okay, let's see what Meg got to say.
I did look at it impartially, but as I continue to go through the evidence, listen to the testimony, everything else, bro.
This is a fucking L for the prosecution all the way.
Like, and that's how, and that's how I started too, Myron, because we all come in with our opinions, right?
And we all have our our biases, right?
And but I come in like, okay, let me look at the legal perspective, which is agnostic to you know, biases and prejudice and whatever, and let me look at the jury's perspective.
How is this jury gonna view this?
And it doesn't look good.
I don't give a shit whether they've listened to WAP or not.
This does not look good.
This is not sound good, right?
Don't die there, Myron.
But it does not matter, it literally does not matter because this looks like this looks like they're a bunch.
There's a bunch of liars for the prosecution, and they've really not got shit on this guy, they've got accused, and they're trying to lock him up for a long time, a significant period of time.
Rory has a lot to lose here, man.
Because not only is he gonna go to prison, he's gonna he's gonna get deported.
If deported, he's gonna get deported, he'll never be able to come back to the United States again.
He will be an excluded alien, right?
Which means he can't come back, which means he can't do shows in the US, he can't perform in the US, he can't do anything.
And for anyone that knows anything about the music industry, most artists make most of their money from touring and doing appearances and doing club uh walkthroughs.
That's especially in the US, especially in the US, like definitely in the US.
So he would have to rely on the Canadian audience and being international, which you would still do okay, but he will lose a significant amount of money.
And here's the thing, y'all don't know, too.
Tori's already been blackballed by the industry, like significantly since this because like Meg, right?
Is smart, she went ahead and took the victim route.
And now does she take the victim route?
Yeah, I'm a black woman and I was victimized.
Yeah, that's double.
That's two points.
Yeah, immediately she's gonna get public synth sympathy.
We live in a world nowadays where it's believe all women, you know.
We saw the same thing happen with Johnny Depp and uh Amber Heard, right?
And and um, hey man, we're seeing and Myron, the thing is like you know, and I know you you try to keep the two things separate, but the thing is we're seeing more and more bleed over this into the courtroom, and we're seeing more and more how mainstream media and pop culture is trying to literally impact the courtroom, they're trying to lay down cover fire, they're trying to lay down a narrative, and they're also trying to tell you as the case is going on, as we're literally seeing these facts, they're trying to tell you, oh, but Meg is still the victim here, guys.
It They're literally trying to gaslight you live and pretend like everybody is an idiot who can't just pay attention to the trial, watch, see what actually happens.
They're just lying and lying and lying, and we're seeing this on a regular basis, which is really that nexus of law and pop culture, which I'm always here for.
Uh, because it's infecting all aspects of our life.
Yeah, because that's the that's the one place, Myron.
I think where we can say, hey, the process is pretty fair, and the fact that it's fair, the fact that it works out, not all the time, not all the time.
Sometimes it's unfair, but the fact that it works out, at least more often than not, they don't like that because in the courtroom, it's facts over feelings.
Big facts, man.
In modern day America, modern day Western Europe, you know, Canada.
We can't deal with that.
Not we, because obviously Myron and I can deal with it.
But most people out there cannot deal with facts over feelings, and courtrooms get rid of that.
They get rid of the bullshit, they get rid of the lies, and they call you out.
If you've said something that's a lie, they call you out on it.
That's something mainstream media doesn't do.
It doesn't happen really anywhere, except for in the courtroom.
Absolutely, man.
And that's that's why rule of law and you know, you got to come in with facts enough feelings.
It's so important.
I mean, we live in a world now where you know that woman, what's her I forget the lady's name that was writing a book, but she came out of nowhere just accused Brett Kavanaugh of like assaulting her like 30, 40 years ago.
And I was like, what the hell?
And the dude had to actually take the stand.
He had to um he had to go ahead and give a whole uh testimony under oath about I didn't do this, blah, blah, blah.
And and off of an allegation with zero proof.
We live in a crazy world now, guys, where it's believable women or whatever.
And I'm glad that these cases are kind of coming being, you know, brought out into the limelight, and you guys are being you guys are seeing, yo, women are capable of lying too.
Oh, yeah.
We got this case.
Shit.
I'm I've been covering Courtney Clenty.
That one got bumped, but that one's gonna be big when it goes down.
I mean, you're seeing update on that one, Courtney Clenny.
Yeah, it got bumped.
They it got bumped.
Uh for some guys, just see y'all know this is the OnlyFans girl that stabbed their boyfriend right here in Miami up the road.
Uh uh, Andrew's been following that one very closely.
We should probably do a breakdown on that one, actually.
Oh, we definitely we definitely will, especially when it gets closer to actual trial.
It got bumped till February.
I'm not sure whether trial's gonna actually go in February or not.
There's a hearing then, so they'll probably set it, they'll probably set it either uh near you know Florida takes them forever, bro.
Florida, California, and Texas are the worst fucking states, bro.
They never go tell you.
I'm gonna tell you one thing.
If you wave your right to a speedy trial in Florida, you are fucking waving your right.
You're giving the media ability to extend that thing forever, and a lot of defense attorneys, a lot of defense attorneys will tell you to extend it.
Three or four do not do it.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Like Melly's been in jail since like 2018, 2019, dude.
Yeah, he starts with the trial, they've been pushing back that trial.
That's what happened.
You wave your speedy trial, they're like, Oh, okay, we're just gonna drag our feet on this thing.
Yep.
Why should we?
Why should we care?
We got 500 cases right back here.
We got a process, yep.
And and and uh she got denied bond, too, right?
Yes, yep.
Yeah, she got denied bond because she's clearly a flight risk.
She she transferred a million dollars to her dad, you know.
She literally was up in up in Hawaii, and her dad's been there, by the way, the entire time on the footage.
If you look through the footage, been simping for the entire time that dad's been enabling her bad behavior, right?
Uh, you know, so her testimony, like much like this testimony, is kind of changing, right?
She went from hey, I threw the knife to oh, now it's self-defense, and now okay, maybe I did actually stab him, right?
So the story is changing over time.
You're seeing with these girls a little bit of a trend here, but the problem is it's hashtag believe all women.
It's oh my god, look at this poor girl.
She was taking advantage of her by her boyfriend, forcing her to do OnlyFans, forcing her to do porn, you know, same thing that Mia Khalifa.
It's the yeah, yeah, yeah.
Well, it's gonna enforce her.
It's it's building in that direction.
I'm seeing it going that direction.
Similar to Mia Khalifa, right?
Right, Mia Khalifa's story right now is that she was, you know, this is what she was pushed into when she was young and vulnerable.
This is where we're going.
And and once again, this is coming from pop culture in the mainstream into the courtroom.
Yeah, and people are getting mad because we're spitting facts, dude.
You know, you know what's crazy about this Courtney Clenny story?
Because I remember she originally said she threw the knife, and then they're like, Nah, that doesn't make Sense because the force at which the knife hit him is indicative of someone actually stabbing him.
There's no way you could have thrown it with that much force to hit him for worse than that, Myron.
They said it's not physically possible for anybody to sink a knife in that deep from that distance.
They said it's physically impossible.
That's what the MLB pitcher couldn't have done it.
Nope.
Nope.
Not with a not that deep of a cut, not that deep of a wound from that distance with throwing arm.
Doesn't matter if you're in the Olympics, you're not making that happen.
Bro, it's a hit with that much accuracy in that area where he would bleed out.
Like, bro, it is crazy to me.
Like the like, and here's the other part too.
I'm really glad that you mentioned that self-defense uh people that self-defense defendants typically have to hit the stand.
That means she's gonna have to testify.
Yes, she's gonna have to get on the stand in order to prove self-defense.
So you're gonna get a great case there when that ever, whenever whenever that actually goes, it's gonna be a great case.
Um, so I'm gonna be covering that one.
And that's the type of stuff I like to cover on my channel, like legal mindset.
And I like to give you guys a little background, like Myron does, and then cover it through the case.
If it's a case like that, I may actually be watching the whole trial on my channel just streaming a lot.
What do you what are your what are your predictions so far just off of the evidence you have?
Oh, she's not on everything I have.
I'm not getting her, I'm not getting self-defense off that.
You know, I'm not getting self-defense off that at all.
In fact, I think, based on the evidence, um, you could even get malice off of this.
Really?
From her.
Um, I I do I do think that she was so that so they understand like the so malice and malice can be formed in a second, but malice is knowingly and intentionally doing something.
So I'm killing them with malice aforethought, meaning I thought about it and I did it, right?
So I picked up the gun and I shot him.
I picked up the knife and I stabbed him, and you did it knowingly.
It wasn't involuntary movement, it wasn't a reaction.
It was I picked it up and I knowingly went over there and got him.
And this isn't to be confused with pre-meditation, guys, where it's like, I really planned this shit out.
You know what I mean?
And and now I don't think that's gonna be the the I don't think it's gonna be what's levy.
They can probably get her on manslaughter or something less, and I think they will charge her with something less and get her on something less.
But I'm saying that I think even this one you could if you wanted to get her on that.
I think she was definitely um, you can see from her previous videos and looking at even some of the calls and other evidence that she was uh intoxicated, whether she was drunk or on drugs, I don't know.
We'd have to see toxicology, but uh definitely a lot of factors in that one.
That point is it true that he actually physically assaulted her, like she claims.
Uh, there was no no proof of that.
I don't think that I've seen so far that I've seen so far, unless they got evidence that we don't know about, and they've got their own medical expert, they're gonna enter, right?
These are all things for trial where they might get their own expert in there and say, Oh, look, she had this and this on her, which were indicating physical abuse, and then the prosecution could get up their witness and say, Nope, uh, this could be this dumb hoe falling drunk down the stairs, and this is why she got this injury, right?
So uh, there's video of her assaulting him in an elevator, and then on top of that, I heard friends.
I mean, correct me if I'm wrong here.
I heard there was friends that had seen her beat on him, but never him beat Yes.
Yes, there's friends that have testified that have come out and put that out there that they've seen her beating on him, her taking advantage of him, and that she targets uh rich black simps.
That's literally what the words were from the friends.
Oh god, uh yeah, there's a lot of stuff going on there.
Yeah, um, yeah, because he was like a crypto trader or something like that.
If I'm not mistaken, it's something in that field, dude.
I mean, look at this is uh this is an L all around.
I mean, at the end of the day, it sucks because the guy lost his life.
But this is this is why I tell y'all, man, you got to be careful with these women sometimes, man.
Like, this is wild stuff.
You got Amber Heard lying on Johnny Depp saying he did all this stuff to her, all of it was false.
She ends up uh uh taking the L. Now you got Meg Meg De Staya saying Tori Lane shot her.
Nothing to corroborate that.
She's over here lying in interviews.
Her account her testimony is contradictory to her best friend's testimony.
Um, you got Courtney Clenny over here saying she threw a knife at her boyfriend with perfect precision and hit him in that in that aortic valve, and he bled out.
Uh you know, meanwhile, a fucking MLB pitcher can't even throw it that hard.
Like, bruh, what the fuck is going on here, man?
With these girls, it's it's wild.
It's a lot, and the last thing you want to do is lose your life, right?
You want to lose your life simping.
You want, I mean, look, because at the end of the day, look, at the end of the day, even if she's guilty, a human life was lost.
Like, that's not coming back.
Like, a guilty verdict doesn't resurrect this guy from the grave, right?
He died for this, yeah.
You know, so you don't want to be out there simping or white knighting or whatever and ending up dead.
Because yeah, we'll take we'll we'll hear your case, we'll cover it.
I'll come out there and push for justice, but it's not gonna bring your life back.
So the best thing is preventative medicine if you're watching this.
Yeah, you guys just gotta be careful, bro.
Like you got three instances here.
This is 2022 is about to be the year of the L like 2020, like 2022, like going into 2023, 2024, because Clenty's probably gonna go on trial.
Yeah, it's gonna be the year of just exposing girls that lie on dudes, bro.
Yep.
This is crazy.
This is about to be three L's back to back to back.
But uh the pendulum is swinging back the other way, and the truth is swinging back the other way.
Because people are out here spitting truth on a regular basis, and you all know that Myron is always willing to do that, and that's why I'm always willing to come on with him uh at any time.
That's gonna say that's all I'm about.
We would tell you if the guy was in the wrong, we would tell you, yo, this guy uh he fucked up, blah blah blah.
If Tori really shot her, I'd be here like, yo, yeah, he yo, he more than likely shot her, but guys, with the evidence at hand right now, because these are all the main witnesses that went.
Everybody at this point, guys, is gonna be what I call like an accessory witness.
The star witnesses are done, bro.
All right.
So off of this, the main testimony.
What's the witness gonna say?
Oh, I saw the dude, the the girls fighting.
We know that already.
You know, what's the other police officer gonna say?
Well, the defense are gonna come in and tear him up.
That's only gonna help the defense.
So, who's the prosecution gonna call they have no one else to really call?
That's pretty much it.
You know, and we and just like Andrew said perfectly, they don't have one credible witness, man.
So uh anyway, it is what it is, man.
We'll see what happens this week.
I think they're gonna wrap it up.
We'll see what what happens.
Uh, but Andrew, where can the people find you?
Dude, you guys can find me on my channel, legal mindset on YouTube and on Rumble.
Uh, I do put some exclusive content out on Rumble sometimes as well.
Also, more importantly, legal mindset.locals.com.
That is my exclusive community.
I put exclusive content out there almost every day during the week.
I have after parties after my uh after my shows.
We just talk, get drop the suit, top completely unscripted, unfiltered, 100% uncensored.
Uh, so that's a great place to find me as well.
Legal mindset.locals.com.
Otherwise, subscribe to my channel.
I'm almost to 100k.
So we're on the push to 100k.
Well, the next uh I want to do it in the next couple months.
We can do it.
And you know what?
Just because I love you, I'm gonna run through these super chats real quick before we get off.
All right, so I got here, buy one BBL, get one free.
Always wonder why the driver was not subpoenaed if he is the key witness and saw everything.
We went answered that already.
Why we you know, of course, that's speculation why we think he wasn't called, but that's why the prosecution is is smart enough to understand.
We're not gonna bring in someone from Tori's team to testify.
Uh cool Bree C V goes, this child became peg the meg for real.
Okay.
Uh Roy Little Page goes, just watch the Zodiac, bro.
IHOP stands for International House of Pancakes.
Enjoying this breakdown, keep it up.
Thank you.
I appreciate that.
Matty Cessia goes, Tori should have chose the other lane, SMH.
Yeah, it happens.
Uh just came from the Rolo, but I've been wanting to hear about this.
Got you, Christopher Harris.
Timestamps will be back.
I'm gonna put detail stamps in this for y'all, by the way.
Who needs a British black single mama who won't listen when you got a Latina in America that will W Christina?
Oh yeah, shout out to Christine, she's helping out behind the scenes.
Can you break down the Stuart Rhodes and Oath Keeper case?
He just convicted of sedatious conspiracy for the Capitol Riots.
I was one of the jurors.
Heard of this?
Whoa.
Uh uh the Capitol Rights, yeah.
I mean, obviously, there's the the J6 stuff.
Uh I mean, that stuff is still very spicy to talk about on YouTube.
That that stuff that might have to be a rumble exclusive.
Because when you start talking about J6, people get people get really, really triggered.
And right now they're actually going back and doing a lot of I don't know if you heard about this, Myron, but a lot of people are getting strikes for old stuff they're talking about, uh, like around J6 and around Rona and stuff like that.
So I I know about it, but I try to keep it uh pretty close to the vest because if you get into the facts about that stuff, people get very, very angry because there's a certain narrative, and whenever you disrupt the narrative, people get angry.
Damn, all right.
Fair enough.
Uh King Life goes, Can the prosecutor just rest the case and dismiss at this point?
No, they're too deep, bro.
They're gonna have to hold this L. Uh, three Diglits, Megan the Stallion is my queen.
I know he's trolling.
Hey, Mark, love this channel.
Can you do a breakdown of killing of Don Henry and Kevin Ives case?
Uh never heard of it.
Uh maybe uh maybe I will down the road.
Uh Christopher Harris, fire emojis.
Thank you so much.
I mean, Daniel goes, Another killer collab coverage of another Amber Turd type trying to destroy this man's life.
This expose is very important.
Thank you guys.
We got you guys.
Uh, the this is better than corn P. Okay, that's from Monkey D Usop.
WRDA goes, I think Meg shot herself, just saw the gun in the car.
Uh Tori came out the car to call Meg down.
Meg Was the one saying dance bitch dance?
Okay, that's I guess your I don't think so.
But I will say this too.
Oh, important thing.
They didn't collect DNA from Meg or from Kelsey, guys.
Weird.
Weird that they didn't do that.
Weird that they didn't do that, right?
So I was so convinced that Tori was the shooter.
So they did not collect evidence.
Uh sorry, the DNA from those two.
But there were four DNA profiles on that firearm.
So I would not be surprised if everyone in that vehicle touched the gun at some point, potentially.
Uh let's see here.
Uh, the truth will prevail from Charles.
Tori is not guilty.
Myron, and this is why they deserve less.
Yes, book coming soon.
White women deserve less.
Kelsey shot Meg, and Tori said, damn B. Okay.
Meg put the beats on Kelsey.
Kelsey pulled the burner.
Okay, Osmosis, and then Meg built like Bojack Horseman.
Meg built like big game James Worthy.
Oh my god.
And then these Meg, dude, these Meg built like in the chats are like destroying me, man.
Like they're so they're so good, man.
I shout out to the chat.
And then someone said here from Terry Brown, Ebro and Maul should be embarrassed.
I don't know why.
Uh, I don't know if they they uh I don't know why they should be embarrassed.
Maybe they said something to the contrary of what we said, but uh y'all got the facts now, man.
Pretty much.
This is the testimony from five days of trial.
Um, the main stuff was covered this week, guys.
Anything else at this point, uh I the witness put all their best stuff out there, and it was an L. I'm just gonna be sitting with popcorn waiting, waiting for the closing argument.
And I'll I'm gonna cover that.
I'll probably do that whenever it comes out because I just want to see what they have to say.
Like, what shit are they gonna try to say to salvage this?
Like, what are they gonna say at the closing?
When you do make this look yeah, I'll let you know.
I'll let you know.
We'll react to it together and and uh see what happens.
Yeah, that that could be a great one because I mean, like, honestly, like shit.
It's this at this point is insane.
It's really insane.
Absolutely.
Um, guys, I hope you guys enjoyed this stream, bro.
This was probably the most definitive, most comprehensive breakdown on this trial on YouTube because you got two experts, someone that's been to trial before in a criminal case and ran a trial as a lead investigator.
You got a practicing attorney who's actually litigated.
A lot of you attorneys have never argued in court before, which is a big fucking problem, right?
So um, guys, hope you enjoyed that breakdown.
I'm gonna put detailed timestamps in here day by day, witness by witness, you know, portion by portion, definitions, all that stuff is gonna be in the description box.
So this will be your one-stop shop to get the stuff.
Make sure you subscribe to legal mindset, okay?
Get them to 100,000.
I want you guys to prioritize his channel over mine.
I'll give even give a fuck out him 100k.
Help him hit 100,000.
Like the video.
Hope you guys enjoyed this one.
And uh, Andrew, I'll give you the last word.
What do you got to say to people?
All right, man.
Come over there, guys.
Make sure you're subscribed, make sure you're checking in.
Also, subscribe to Myron and uh make sure you're staying tuned with all your favorite creators because guys, a rising tide rises all boats.
We all grow together and we all come together to give you facts over feelings.
Bam.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Peace out, guys.
I'll see you on the next episode of Fed it probably on Thursday.
BTK, I'm thinking later.
Okay, guys, HSI.
The cases that I did mostly were human smuggling and drug traffic.
No one else has these documents, by the way.
Here's what Fed it covers.
Dr. Lafredo confirmed lacerations due to stepping on glass, murder investigation.
You don't know and he's positioning on February 13th, 2019.
You're 182 counts of litigating the racketeering and Rico conspiracy.
Young slime life here and after referred to as YSL to the sentence.
6'9, and then this is Billy Seiko right here.
Now, when they first started, guys, 6ix9ine ran with the.
I'm upset.
I'm watching this music video.
You know, I'm bothering my hella.
Hey, this shit lit.
But at the same time, I'm pausing.
Oh, wait, who this?
Right?
Oh, who's that in the back?
▲
Export Selection