All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Dec. 1, 2022 - The Megyn Kelly Show
01:35:58
20221201_explosive-new-casey-anthony-allegations-and-import
|

Time Text
Holding Accountants to Account 00:10:20
Okay, so fantastic me losing stream flex.
HBO Max, Prime Video, Sky Showtime, you name it.
The foreigner or the funk net bill is Chromecast Potel Teva Transstrandag for Granca.
3 months, 79 kroner per month, 0 binding, just TV and streaming, just like you want to have it.
Go on to alente.no and test it in summer.
To give you the price of 79 kroner for you in 3 months.
Thereafter it takes a normal price of 499 kroner per month.
FIKEN is a super simple program for the company.
But did you also start your own business with FIKEN?
Gjør som tusenvis av andre og registrerer AS og enkeltpersonforetak trygt og enkelt ved å fylle ut skjema på FIKEN.no.
Vi hjelper deg hele veien til ferdigregistrert bedrift.
Du trenger ikke være kunde av FIKEN fra før og velger helt selv om du vil bruke renskapsprogrammet vårt etterpå.
Tjenesten koster heller ingenting ekstra.
FIKEN.
Start din egen bedrift.
Superenkelt.
Welcome to the Megan Kelly Show.
Your home for open, honest and provocative conversations.
Hello, I'm Megan Kelly.
Welcome to the Megan Kelly Show.
Casey Anthony, the mother acquitted of killing her own daughter in 2011 in a trial that made international headlines, is now making a series of new claims.
Against her family as she continues to try to convince the world she is innocent.
Now, her father, George, is reportedly considering taking legal action against her.
In just a bit, I will be joined by Casey's former lawyer, star trial lawyer Jose Baez, who is the man who won that acquittal for her, joins us for a wide-ranging conversation.
When you hear the cases Jose has represented, folks, in his legal career is absolutely stunning.
He was on the Harvey Weinstein case for a while.
In fact, he was co-partners.
Remember that Harvard Dean who got basically drummed out of his position at Harvard because he spent some time representing Weinstein?
It was so unfair.
It was ridiculous.
Hello.
What do you think criminal defense attorneys do?
They don't just hang out with the angels.
Anyway, Jose and that guy were partners on the Harvey case.
He represented Aaron Hernandez, the football player who was accused of killing a bunch of people.
I mean, we're going to go through it all.
Jose is fascinating, and we will get to Casey Anthony with him as well.
But we begin today with Vinny Politon.
He's the lead anchor of Court TV.
He covered the trial of Casey Anthony when it happened over a decade ago.
Vinny, thank you so much for being here.
Great to see you, Magdalen.
Can we really call Casey Anthony a mother, though?
Should we call a mother?
You're so right.
I almost stumbled on it.
You know, it's like, what is a mother?
Certainly not what she is.
You know, if you consider a mother, somebody just gives birth to a child.
But no, there's much more in the term than that.
Okay, but wait, let me pause the Casey Anthony discussion for just one second because I gotta ask you as a fellow lawyer about this Sam Bankman Freed speaking to everybody.
He's basically on the top of the Empire State Building talking to anybody who wants to about his alleged crimes.
This guy's looking at a very real possibility of getting charged and going to prison.
And yet he appears at some summit yesterday with some anchor from CNBC, answers all sorts of questions.
This morning he's on with George Stephanopoulos, answers all sorts of questions, and made all sorts of admissions.
I'm going to give you a flavor.
We'll spend a minute on that before we get to Casey.
Here he is with Stephanopoulos this morning.
Carolyn Ellison says, you knew that FTX funds were being funneled to Alameda.
Did you know that?
I knew that there is an open margin position there and that that involves something beyond a large, I believe, the overcollateralized margin position on FTX.
It was only in the last month that I put together the magnitudes of everything.
So if she's in court and you're in court and she's under oath and you're under oath and you're asked, did you know that these funds were being funneled to Alameda?
What is your answer?
I did not know that there is any improper use of customer.
The digital assets may not be loaned to FTX Trading.
They can't be loaned out.
There existed a borrowed lending facility on FTX.
And I think that's probably covered.
I don't remember exactly where, but somewhere else in the terms of service.
I wasn't spending any time or effort trying to manage risk on FTX, trying like, and that obviously stunning admission.
Yeah, I mean, I don't know what to say.
Like, what happened happened?
Are you worried about going to jail?
There are a lot of things that are worrying me right now.
I'll bet.
Yeah.
He must have been living in this fantasy world of his so long that he is so detached from reality and life and consequences.
I mean, this is unreal.
It's absolutely unreal.
Let's just hope that there's a true investigation and that people will actually take a look at him and treat him like anyone else would be treated, despite the fact that he, I guess it has access to lots of money and has given lots of money to many influential people.
Right, which he admits now was all part of a scam just to woo people into supporting his company, that none of that was real.
He was trying to buy their buy-in to his company so that they wouldn't criticize him, presumably when the chips came tumbling down.
He's been accused of basically fraud, of taking his crypto exchange, FTX, and taking investors' money and using it to cover losses on his hedge fund called Alameda, which was run by his girlfriend, who's about four years old from the pictures.
And that's a no-no.
That's a legal no-no.
You're not allowed to take funds for the one exchange and use it to cover losses on another company.
And that's where he was sort of trying to hedge his bets on Stephanopoulos's questions, like, I never use money improperly.
It's kind of where he landed.
And then admitted I never managed risk at all, at all.
The lack of sophistication with this guy for someone who had, who obviously is bright to a certain extent, but there's got to be like something that blocks his brain to understand that there are consequences for what you're doing.
The legal ramifications, I mean, everything that he is doing is the opposite of what anyone with any level of common sense would do in his position, knowing what is at stake, which is your life and your liberty, your freedom, right?
Your ability to do what you want to do when you want to do it.
You could end up in a prison cell.
I mean, this is unreal what is taking place, but I guess that's how he got to where he is.
I mean, it's that mentality and it's that haircut.
You just put the two together and he is what he is.
It's so dumb, though.
Like there have been others with this kind of hubris.
I'm thinking of Alec Baldwin who just think, I know better.
I know better.
Trust me.
You get me in front of the camera.
I can sell my story.
This guy could be going to prison for decades.
He needs to keep his mouth shut.
And he was asked by the CNBC moderator, what do your lawyers feel about you being here?
And he was like, yeah, they're totally against it.
You know, but I don't see much good in me hiding and pretending that the world is not out there.
No, that's not the point.
It's not, that's not the point at all.
It's like, don't make any more admissions.
Don't make it any worse for yourself than it already is.
So, and that's what he's doing.
And I mean, good in a way, because if he defrauded a bunch of investors, we want to see this guy held to account.
But I will say the one thing, as I just mentioned, I appreciated hearing was him just calling a fraud on all this like, you know, this sort of social justice giving that these companies do and the attempt to manipulate people into thinking they're good people.
Those are the ones that need to have red flags on them.
Those companies who are engaged in that are doing it for a reason.
Here he was talking about that yesterday at SOT6.
There is a bunch of bullshit that regulated companies do to try and look good.
And these are things that everyone who does them basically knows they're kind of dumb, that these are not things that are making large impact on the world.
I mean, he gives it up right there, Vinny.
It's like, when these companies are doing this, there's even more reason to look into them because they're trying to buy your willingness to look the other way.
Absolutely.
Look at this.
We're really nice.
We do all these great things over here, but whatever you do, don't look over in the other direction.
I mean, that's what's going on.
We see it.
We're living it.
We'll see if anything changes.
But I don't know.
I don't know if things are going to change because they invest enough time and effort in that shiny object to make, to divert everyone's attention that all of a sudden they get a pass.
And maybe this is the case, though.
Maybe this is the case with the spotlight on it that maybe starts to pull back on what's really happening.
And let's just hope so.
And Megan, please don't speak so loudly in giving advice to alleged criminals.
The Liar's Tale 00:14:42
We want them prosecuted.
We want them locked up.
We want them to pay a price.
I always have to be careful on court TV because sometimes I start doing that and I'm like, well, hopefully they're not listening tonight, right?
Yeah, exactly.
Actually, talk all you want because it's fascinating for us as journalists.
And I don't really care whether he goes to prison or not.
You know, it's like, great.
If you did it, I'd love to see you go away.
You heard a lot of people from what I read in the papers.
Now it's actually kind of interesting to hear people like Jim Kramer.
He was on CNBC this morning like, oh, he's, it's not alleged.
He's a fraudster.
I'm just going to call it.
Meanwhile, he's featured in an ad for the guy's company saying like, they're amazing.
Like all these people who helped build him up are now like, oh, you know, he's horrible.
Well, why didn't you look into it more before you endorsed him?
Okay, let's switch gears.
So the biggest story right now in terms of legal cases in the country is not this guy, Sam Bankman Fried or FTX.
It's Casey Anthony, this case from 10 plus years ago.
And she's finally speaking on camera with her alleged story.
She's never done that before.
I think that she may have said some things here or there on print, in print.
She has never gone on camera and told her story.
She finally chose to do it.
And though I've now watched the documentary, it's quote unquote documentary.
That's a very loose term for what we saw.
It's the rebuilding of Casey Anthony is a better title, rehabilitation of.
The filmmaker clearly believes her and is trying to paint a very sympathetic picture of her as this abused woman.
The villain is George, Casey Anthony's father, according to this film, who allegedly sexually abused Casey Anthony from eight years old to 12 years old.
And then at that point, her brother got in on the act, Lee Anthony, and suddenly abused her from 12 years old to 15 years old.
And the mother may or may not have known.
And poor little Casey Anthony, who you and I believe killed her daughter, Kaylee, was just this innocent victim of all these terrible men in her family.
And then when the dad, George, killed her child later, Kaylee, she just went along with it because abuse.
You know, she's an abuse victim.
This is so insulting to real abuse victims everywhere, who, notwithstanding the horrific nature of abuse, would have zero problem coming forward and saying the person who abused me just killed my child, right?
Like the whole thing is so nonsensical.
So what was your biggest takeaway in watching the three hour piece that's airing on Peacock, which is an NBC?
Yeah, well, my takeaway, I took notes.
I have like so many notes from this thing as I was binge watching it in the middle of the night.
But for me, it's the fact that this is the first time she's telling her story because you watch this series.
She's sitting down with her investigator who never heard the story.
Some of her attorneys, not Jose Baez, because he wasn't interviewed in this, but her other attorney saying, I didn't want to, I didn't want to ask her what really happened.
So are you telling me you're facing the death penalty, the death penalty, and you are factually innocent and you know who committed the murder and you don't tell your defense team what actually happened, but you wait until 11 years after the trial to tell a producer from Peacock what really happened?
Come on.
To me, the premise of everything is ridiculous.
It's utterly ridiculous.
I'm facing the death penalty, but I'm so afraid of my father that I'm just going to keep my mouth shut and let Jose Baez get his defense elsewhere because Jose Baez, and you're going to speak to him.
I'm glad you're going to speak to him.
His opening statement is different than what Casey Anthony says happened.
Yes.
Okay.
There's like one little kernel that's sort of similar, but it's completely different.
It's completely different.
And I know Jose Baez is not going to make it up out of thin air, right?
He has to base it on something.
So he's either basing it on other facts not given to him by anyone else or Casey Anthony's another one of her lies about what happened.
So either way, to me, that's the shock that you are facing the death penalty.
You say you're 100% innocent.
You know who did it.
And you don't tell your investigator, your mitigation team, or your defense lawyers what really happened.
This is a good point, especially because she did accuse the father of sexual abuse in connection with the time of the trial.
She didn't take the stand and do it, but Jose said that in his opening statement and the dad denied it and was and really never made anything of it.
You know, it was one of those things he just threw out there so the jury would hear it.
And in Jose's opening, he argued that the baby drowned, that little Kaylee drowned in the swimming pool, that it was an accident.
And so now she's telling a very different story.
And you're right, there's a pretty wide delta between what her lawyer said at trial and what she said in this quote unquote documentary.
Here's a sample of what she is now saying happened, SAT1.
And I was awoken by him shaking me.
Her dad.
And asking me where Kaylee.
And I immediately start looking around the house.
By the time I came back around from the left side of the house, they came back around towards the front porch.
He's standing there with her.
She's soaking wet.
I can see him standing there with her in his rooms and hand her to me and telling me that it's my fault.
What did she feel like?
She was heavy.
She was cold.
He takes her from me and he immediately softens his tone and tells me it's going to be okay.
He took her from me and he walked away.
I know he went back and through the screen doors and he went back into the house.
I don't know where she went.
And I don't know what he did.
I just want her back.
Oh my God.
Yes.
The fake crying.
This is.
And the other thing she says is that for like, you know, the 31 days that we always talk about where Kaylee's missing, she does nothing.
Well, she's for 31 days, she's like meeting George in all these secret places and he's telling her what to do and how to act.
And it's, it's, it's, it's absolutely bizarro world.
But here's the thing that I want people to do when they watch it, if they watch it, because I kind of picked up on this.
There's a little tip that she has that you can tell when she's lying.
Her lips move.
So if you're watching this docu-series and you see her lips moving, that is an indication that it's pretty likely that Casey Anthony is lying at that moment.
You have to be sophisticated to really catch it.
But if you could pay very close attention, you're 100% right.
And as for the claim made by Jose that the child drowned, it was an accidental drowning.
And, you know, this is basically nothing more than an accident.
Here's what she says in response to that.
And again, Jose's coming on, but he did not participate in this documentary.
Here it is, Sat too.
There are too many scenarios of what could have happened, but her drowning in the pool is not one.
It's possible.
In most scenarios, it would be plausible.
Not in this one.
The ladder wasn't on the pool.
It's the only way in or out for her or for me.
So why let Jose Baez and your defense team make that argument again and again?
My mom was the first one that floated the theory that she could have drowned in the pool.
He went with what my mom said.
He had to explain something.
Can't just tell the jury she doesn't know.
So what was your thought on why she was wet?
Something I still can't piece together.
I wasn't the only one home.
I'm not outright accusing him of murder, but it wasn't an accident in the pool.
And by the way, now she's also, she intimates in the video that maybe her dad abused, sexually abused Kaylee and then intentionally drowned or put sort of, I can't tell her whether she smothered her with the pillow and then threw her in the pool to make it look like a drowned.
Here's the problem.
Here's the problem, Megan, with what she just said in trying to justify what she's saying now with what Jose said in the opening statement is that Jose Baez had like direct quotes in his opening statement.
And that can only come from one place unless they have a video of this.
And that's where Jose tells the jury that George came in.
He was angry.
He said, look at what you did.
You know, your mother's never going to forgive you.
I mean, those are like quotes.
And there's only two people who that quote can come from, George Anthony, obviously not him because he says it didn't happen, or Casey Anthony.
So I think what happened here, and Jose will know, but he probably can't reveal it because of attorney client privilege, is that Casey told him one story and he based his opening statement on that.
And now she's coming up with a completely different story for whatever reason.
But to your original point you made, she was so terrified of her dad who had allegedly abused her for all those years that she couldn't tell Jose or the police.
He hurt Kaylee.
He came to me with my daughter's dead body and then told me not to tell anybody and then told me for 30 days to keep my mouth shut until my mom found out and then the jig was up.
She was too terrified to say that, but she wasn't too terrified to say, he sexually abused me.
He sneaked into my room.
He hurt me for years.
Like, so he's terrifying enough to like hold back the murder claim, but not the disgusting sexual abuse claims that she did somehow find the courage to make, Vinny.
I mean, this the absurdity of, you know, where she draws these fake lines.
Yeah.
And but here's the, here's the danger with these types of documentaries is that there's a whole generation of people didn't watch the trial, didn't live through it like we did.
And they'll watch this.
And I work with some people who watch this, didn't see the trial, and they come away with it with George Anthony is evil.
He is the villain in all of this.
And that's going to be the takeaway.
That's why I'm glad I heard you say that George Anthony now is considering some legal action.
Let's do it.
Let's make that lawsuit in Florida and let's put cameras in the courtroom and let's make Casey Anthony get up on the witness stand and testify.
Yeah, why?
Could they do that?
Could he cross count?
Could he countersue for wrongful death in the way the Goldmans did?
And let's have it out.
Let's have a civil verdict on it.
Yeah, I was thinking about defamation, but because I love defamation trials.
I saw one in Virginia that was really good.
And people now understand how that works.
And you can win a defamation trial in this country these days.
So that's what I was thinking.
That was the problem with this case, though, right?
The wrongful death, because in the O.J. Simpson trial, there was still a victim's family that was going to go forward.
Here, the victim's family is the defendant directly, and then the grandparents indirectly.
And so we never got that civil case, but maybe a defamation suit at this point could bring the truth out a little bit more clearly because it would force her to testify.
She, I mean, she says so many horrible things about her father, the sexual abuse.
I should state clearly he denies all of this.
And the brother Lee denies her terrible allegations about him too.
Although they didn't speak to this quote unquote documentary filmmaker.
But she says the dad had multiple affairs on the mom.
The dad stole $60,000 from the mom.
The dad was a serial liar.
They play a clip of the couple arguing, the dad, George, and the mother of Casey Anthony.
I think 2018, it was years after the fact in an interview with Elizabeth Vargas, in which the mother's like, she learned how to lie from you.
She does say to George that Casey Anthony learned how to lie from you.
They have an argument on camera.
It's actually kind of uncomfortable to watch.
So look, there's no question that Casey Anthony is a very damaged, effed up person.
Like that's, it's very clear.
It's kind of the way I feel about the Menendez case.
Like, you know, your sons kill you as a parent.
It is the ultimate F in parenting.
Like, I don't know that the dad was abusing those two boys, but clearly these were bad parents because both of the boys wound up murdering them.
And I kind of feel the same, like I'm going to guess George is not going to win parent of the year if we actually put him under a microscope.
But none of that excuses what she did.
Say there are sadly, millions of sexual abuse victims, even at the hands of their own family members, who would never, ever excuse that.
Abusing parents murder of their own children yeah it, and and that's with this, the docuseries.
There's such a focus on that part of it that that gets lost, I think, a little bit, by people who are coming across this story and this case really for the first time.
Maybe they heard the name or something, but oh, i'm going to watch this series so I can find out what happened.
You're not going to find out what happened by watching this.
Um, it's fascinating to hear her weave these lies um, and and the bottom line is and I always compared her to Jodi Arias right, because Jodi Arias was a notorious liar as well Casey Anthony was just a much better liar.
She could, on the dime, just on the dime, like make that that, go into that mode and just completely make something up.
It's fascinating in the documentary where they talk about how she's there with the officers going to her, her office at Universal where she didn't work, and she's walking through the office waving hello to people going to an office that she doesn't work in.
I mean, she is just unreal in the way, she can very easily do it.
So at the end of the day, knowing all that, why would you believe anything she ever says?
Why would you believe anything that she ever says?
Smothering the Baby 00:09:48
You mentioned, in passing, the 31 days, and for the people who aren't familiar with this story, that's a critical period to understand, because let's take it as true for the purposes of argument, that she, she took a nap with the baby and she wakes up and the little girl's gone and she runs around the property, as she now claims, looking for little Kaylee.
Can't find her.
Then she sees her dad come up with the baby, who is wet and heavy, and says, you did this, this is because of you.
And then, you know, she holds her, but then the dad takes her back, the baby back, and walks away and says she's going to be okay, according to Casey Anthony.
Casey then left the house, went to stay with her boyfriend and for 31 days went to clubs.
You know now she says, I wasn't partying, I wasn't drinking, I was working to help my boyfriend who is a promoter at nightclubs.
That's all I was, that's all and, as you pointed out a second ago, it was all under instructions from my father.
You know, if you look at my phone records, I was talking to him every day and now she wants us to believe.
In those phone calls they weren't just talking about life father, daughter.
He was like, be quiet, play it cool, all's well.
And all the time she's like, how's Casey or Kaylee, how's Kaylee.
Because now she wants us to believe.
The whole time she thought the baby was alive, and and somehow the father just I don't know where did she think the father was keeping her?
What did the mother have to say?
Like nothing adds up, it doesn't.
And and and she's telling us in this docu series that she believes Kaylee's alive the whole time.
She doesn't, doesn't know she's dead, until the day when they find her behavior.
She has to cover her partying behavior somehow.
Here's the.
Here's the other part of the docu series that I think is significant though, because they go after George so hard and then, while they give, GIVE the investigators a voice.
By the end of the docuseries, they try to make them look like cartoon characters and like buffoons, the documentary makers.
And you're left with, well, why didn't they investigate George?
Well, there was no reason to.
The reason you would investigate George is if Casey Anthony, when she's interviewed by investigators and they say, where's your daughter?
She would say, well, my father took her.
That's how George would get investigated, but she never said that.
Why?
Because it never happened.
It never happened.
She was locked into the Zanny the Nanny.
It's like, it's like, and she kind of blows off Zanni the nanny and like criticizes people for trying to figure out why she beat up the story about Zanny the nanny.
Like, we're supposed to understand her lies.
It's just to interject, that's what she originally.
I want you to finish the topic.
Just so the audience understands, she originally told the investigators that she gave the baby to Zanny the nanny.
And then when she went to pick up the baby, Xanny the nanny was gone.
The phone had been disconnected.
And Zanny the nanny.
She did not say, my dad hurt the baby.
My dad's been telling me to be quiet all this time.
Now she admits Xanny the Nanny was a fabrication.
She did not, she did not have Kaylee.
And so she cops to that.
But she attributes her lie to just, again, my abuse.
And I've really spent all this time in therapy trying to figure out why I'm such a liar, but it's because of my abuse.
Can I just ask you, though, because this is one of the weirdest lies.
I think it relates to the Google search, full proof suffocation that we later found out from Jose's book was found on the Anthony computer on the day the baby went missing or, you know, disappeared.
Here's what Casey's now alleging her dad used to do to her when she was little and he was abusing her.
Listen to Sat three.
I'm still laying there acting like I'm asleep.
Henny starts to touch me.
Slowly move my hair off of my neck when his hands down my back, underneath my shirt.
I remember the first time he put his hands down my pants.
Slid from the back first and then went around the front.
I was never able to push him off of me.
Pillow goes over my face.
What do you mean by pillow goes over my face?
He smothered me several times.
Smothered you say he would pass out several times.
He smothered her several times to the point where she would pass out several times.
Now, explain why she's saying this.
Tell the audience why she feels the need to say this.
Here's my take on that, okay?
Because she is now going to allege that that's what George did to Kaylee.
So he's abusing Kaylee.
She's not cooperating.
So he smothers her and ends up killing her.
There's also the search on the Firefox search engine for a fullproof suffocation on the home computer.
Now, what's interesting about the Firefox search engine is that she's the only one in the house that uses the Firefox search engine.
And the search that was done after foolproof suffocation was back to my favorite old website, MySpace, which Casey Anthony was on.
So she's trying to say that her dad was on the computer looking up fullproof suffocation because he was going to commit suicide because he had just murdered his granddaughter and then went on to MySpace.
Yeah, okay.
Okay.
Yeah.
So she's she and Marsha Clark pointed out that the day that Casey got interviewed by the police for the first time and then dropped off back at home after they had discovered that the little girl was missing.
The first thing that she appears to have done was to go on to the computer and delete the search history.
Now, who would delete the search history other than the person who had done the search and knew that they didn't really want the cops finding foolproof suffocation on there?
Jose, I believe, is going to come on in a minute, Vinny, and say that was George who did that search, that he also searched up gardening information about how to kill a rhododendron in 10 different ways.
That he logged in under AOL Messenger.
That actually, who knows, but that he logged in under AOL Messenger and he was the only one who used AOL Messenger.
He's going to say all that was clearly more in line with a George type search than a Casey.
Yeah.
Here's one other fact that came out that, and I don't know if we knew this before, is that how Kaylee was conceived.
She told the story of the docu-series that she was given a date rape drug and then she passed out.
She woke up.
Her clothes were pulled over her head.
Her breasts were exposed.
And then she was pregnant.
So she had no idea who the father was.
Third time she'd been sexually assaulted, I guess.
Her father, her brother, and the father of Kaylee.
Right, exactly.
We had not heard that before.
That was new information.
I'll get a last question for you because she, as we discussed, really went after the dad.
And one of the, I'm going to give her this point.
She talks about what the dad said about the baby when he eulogized her.
It was a little weird.
I remember at the time being like, it's a little off what he's saying.
Now, who the hell knows when you're grieving the loss of your granddaughter and your daughter's accused of killing her and all this?
But here's her talking about watching her dad's eulogy of the baby saw four.
To be the grandfather of Kaylee Marie Anthony, who not only meant the world to me, but meant the world to my family.
And so many of you that never got a chance to actually hug her.
Smell her hair.
Smell the sweet sweat when she came in from outside.
Are you fucking kidding?
To hear her call me JoJo.
I miss that kiss on the cheek, that special hug that I tell everyone it's so great to get a hug from someone, but to get a hug from a small child, that gives me energy like you couldn't imagine.
That's not normal.
Nothing about that is fucking normal.
You're outright telling the world that you're a pedophile.
I'm not going to say how much I'm going to miss things that I won't be able to do with her because someday I'll be able to hold her hand again in God's heaven.
I'll be able to take her in wagon rides.
I'll be able to kiss her.
I'll be able to smell her again.
A lot more things make sense.
That's not necessarily a good thing.
Yeah.
At least you was able to produce actual tears in that moment.
What did you think of it?
Well, the music helps make it even creepier, right?
Yeah, the smelling thing, I don't get.
We may need an expert witness.
Do you know anyone, Megan, who likes to smell children's hair?
Is he in the White House right now?
So it may be very innocent.
In both cases, or just the one?
I don't know.
I'm not saying, I'm just saying you would need an expert witness to fully understand that issue.
So it's not something I'm familiar with.
I'm not a sniffer like that.
I got to say, I don't know what happened between Casey Anthony and her father, George.
I really have no idea.
Innocent People in Jail 00:05:06
But I do know that she's a liar and that her inconsistent stories prove she lied about this case over and over and over again.
And there's only one reason why she would have lied and behaved the way she did for those 31 days when she knew her daughter, at best, even under her version, had been severely injured.
And that is because she understood that her life, in her view, was going to be better without that kid.
And there had been lots of testimony at the trial to that extent.
She didn't like being a mother.
She wanted to be footloose and fancy-free.
She was 19 years old and she wasn't ready for it.
And that little girl was the victim of her immaturity desires and pathological lying.
Vinny, so good to see you again.
Please come back often.
It's been a pleasure.
And I'll speak to Jose next and get his take on this and then on some of his other big cases because Jose's been, like I said, he's done a lot of fascinating stuff.
The Aaron Hernandez case in particular, I'd like to get into with him.
We continue to discuss the latest on Casey Anthony with our next guest.
It was this case that made Jose Baez a household name.
He's fascinating to watch in the courtroom.
He's been very successful there.
And he is truly one of the most skilled defense lawyers in the country.
Welcome, Jose.
Great to have you on.
Great to be here finally.
I love your personal backstory.
You know, you struggled, you sort of pulled yourself up by your bootstraps, and now you've become this very sought-after criminal defense attorney teaching at Harvard Law.
I mean, you did it all on your own.
So good on you.
Well, thank you.
I appreciate it.
Yeah.
I love anybody who didn't have a silver spoon.
Say again.
I said it was the road less traveled, but I got here nonetheless.
Yeah, that's right.
Now, that is all separate from the fact that people hold this acquittal against you because you were the lawyer, but that's what criminal defense attorneys do, right?
If there's somebody to blame, if you think Casey Anthony is guilty, it is her.
It's not the lawyer.
We want good criminal defense attorneys to hold the state to account.
We don't want a state that gets all the presumptions and doesn't have a talented lawyer on the other side trying to test it.
That's how innocent people go to jail.
So just to start with that, because it annoys me when people blame the criminal defense attorneys.
That's literally what you're supposed to do.
So let's go back to the Casey Anthony case.
Is it true you were only three years into practice at the time you took on that case?
Yes and no.
I had in my career.
So basically, what I did was when I got out of law school, I went straight to work at the public defender's office.
And then I had an issue with the Florida bar because of past financial troubles where I was denied admission initially.
So that literally took me eight years to recuperate from that issue.
I can tell you there's nothing, there was nothing more challenging or there was no more challenging time in my life that after scratching and clawing my way after dropping out of high school in the ninth grade and going back to school and struggling to make it all the way through law school to be finally there and then told you can't practice law because you were financially irresponsible.
It was a quite devastating time for me.
And I think it served me well because you learn a lot through your challenges and you learn a lot through your own injustices.
And I utilize that every day.
So well, I know, I know you're a big believer in second chances and in the underdog.
Are not unusual traits in criminal defense attorneys.
There's a reason it resonates with you as a profession, and it would come to help a lot of people.
Let's talk about this.
I know you did not participate in the documentary and you didn't watch the documentary, which I think is reminding me of the Herb Brooks story, you know, the miracle.
And that, and it ends with saying Herb Brooks died before it hit the screens, starring Kurt Russell.
They said he never saw it.
And then they write, he lived it.
And that's kind of, that's kind of how you are in this documentary.
Right.
I really, you know, I can't speak intelligently about it.
I didn't see it.
And I didn't see it where it's in context.
And, um, you know, to me, I'm a terrible businessman because a lot of my colleagues are telling me you should be going out making the rounds.
And the reality is, I don't need to do victory laps on a case I won 11 years ago.
My most important case is the next one right in front of me because in this business, nobody cares what you did in the past only when they're hiring you in hopes of what you're going to do in the future.
So for me, right now, my main focus is what's in front of me and what I have, the current cases that I have, which are very dear and important to me and very important to the families of the folks that I represent.
Hiring for Future Potential 00:14:53
So, yeah.
So was there, I'm trying to figure out whether there was a falling out because she says in this documentary that she's very close with several members of her defense team who she describes as her new family.
Obviously, she's not close with the first family.
And she lists them by name and you're not listed.
So was there a falling out?
No, there's no falling out.
I mean, it's just been 11 years and I've moved on with other cases.
And I have clients that I represented three years ago who I'll hear occasionally from, but we're not friends or family.
They are clients who are all very special to me and very important learning experiences in my life.
But it's not something that I hold on to because I have what I do, you have to be all in or not in at all.
And I'm, I guess, one of those true believers that believes you have to be all in.
So, you know, I wish nothing but the best for Miss Anthony.
And I really hope she finds peace in her life and all of those other folks who are also involved.
But I know I've got, as you know, from even this interview, we've been trying to set this up for six months, but my work schedule has gotten in the way forever.
Like every case you take on is in the headlines.
These are big cases with big stakes.
So I do get it.
I mean, it's hard for me to think to feel as you do that I wish her the best.
You know, I wish her peace.
I don't feel, I confess I don't feel that way.
You heard me say in the first segment, I don't, I definitely think she did it, like most of America does.
And I know you may disagree, but I really believe as a Catholic, I believe she's going to go to hell.
I believe she will meet her maker and she will be held to account for what I believe she did to her own baby.
And to listen to her tell these obvious lies, Jose, was somewhat infuriating to me.
It was as a lawyer, as a mother, I'm, you know, I get why they did it, why they put it together, but I don't think it was a fair piece at all.
It did not include the prosecution's arguments or rebuttals to what she was saying.
And it really gave her a pass on the toughest evidence against her, just a big platform to spew what appeared to me to be blatant lies, lies that didn't even comport with your argument at the trial.
Like, let's just deal with that first.
Deal with the emotion in this case because you know I speak for millions of people who hate her, right?
So, to those people who feel as I just outlined, I feel.
What say you?
Well, it's interesting because you and I haven't spoken for years.
Um, I think the last time we spoke was back when the case was going on, yeah.
So, um, and I can tell you back then, no one knew what happened.
And the evidence in this case is one that we're never going to have all of the answers.
And people have a hard time with that.
People need finality, people need to know certain things.
And I think that that's a big problem when it comes to talking about people in their lives of whether they did something or not.
Here you are saying you wish she goes to hell.
I think she is the reality is, you know, I understand how you feel.
There's certainly a lot of folks who agree with you, and there's certainly folks that agree on the other side.
So, the one thing that's certain, and I knew this case back in the day better than anyone, and the one thing that is certain is that we're never going to really know what happened.
And I can say this much: the evidence was extremely weak when you got past the noise.
Now, the noise is still there, and that's why people still feel the way they do.
But once you got past the noise, there was no evidence for us to really understand what actually happened.
That was the central theory.
You're not wrong about that.
You're not wrong about that.
That was the prosecution's biggest challenge: they couldn't tell the jury exactly how she died, they didn't know.
And by the time they found little Kaylee's remains, there was no way of proving it.
The remains were too decomposed.
You were not able to determine the specific cause of death.
And so, that was really a problem because you're right, juries, Americans, and juries in particular, they want to know what happened.
They want the prosecution to be able to say she did it, and this is how she did it.
And they couldn't.
That was a major challenge that you exploited well, that you took proper advantage of.
Well, you know, I don't believe I exploited it.
This is our constitution.
This is our system of justice.
And, you know, we like to judge people in life and we like to judge them, especially in the media and in the courtroom.
And I think what you have to do when you set up a system of justice is it has to be in line with what actually occurred so that we don't have the flip side of wrongful convictions, which run abundant in our system.
I mean, you know, rather than get on, I'm not trying to get on a white horse of justice here, but the reality is people gripe and complain about and get outraged over Casey Anthony, but you don't see that type of outrage when someone spends 30 years in prison.
You hear about one story when they get out, and that's the end of it.
Nobody cares about them after that.
Nobody cares about those responsible for putting them there.
And no one goes after those who put them there.
And there's hundreds and thousands of cases going on every single day where that occurs.
And for that reason, we need these safeguards in place.
And if you don't believe in the bell free before, one innocent man goes to prison.
Well, you will if it ever happens to you or someone you love.
I hear it.
I hear you.
I always say that criminal defense attorneys are like guns.
You may be averse to them until you need one.
And then you pay anything to have one.
But I do, I do, you know, I don't think she's an innocent person.
I think she's one of the rare people who is guilty and managed to just find a great lawyer who got her off.
And so good on you, but not good on her.
I mean, most of us can see with our own eyes.
There's just not a sane person in the world who behaved the way she did.
If she had gone in, you know, under her story, the day her dad allegedly said, oh, here's a wet Kaylee who's not moving.
And I'm calling 911.
And she called and said, oh, my God, you know, my baby, something happened.
No, of course.
I would believe her.
There was a terrible accident.
Maybe it was the dad's, you know, his fault.
Maybe it was her fault.
Who knows?
It was the 31 days after.
The fact that she never called 911.
She went partying in the nightclubs.
She got a Bella Vita tattoo, which she tries to explain away in this documentary as an FU to her family.
She told police lie after lie when they finally came into her life because her mother called the cops because she said the car that my daughter had been driving smells like it had a dead body in it.
Finally, the cops found Casey Anthony and she lied, la She didn't say George had the baby.
She didn't say he's been coaching me for 30 days to keep quiet.
She's like, it was Zannie the nanny.
Let's go to Universal Studios where I work.
And she had to admit during the middle of this wild goose chase, she didn't actually work there.
It was just on and on.
And Jose, for her to now be like, it was all my trauma.
That's literally what she says.
It was the result of trauma.
No one asked why I lied.
That's what she said.
I want to get it exactly.
I lied, but no one asked why.
No one asked, no one cared why I lied.
But I have a voice now and I am not afraid of my abuser.
Why did you lie to police?
I was doing what I was told to do by my dad.
I mean, do you believe that?
Well, there's a lot of criticisms of Miss Anthony's defense and her position.
But if you want to say she's guilty, I would flip it on the other side.
And I know you, along with a lot of folks, say, I know she's guilty, but okay, so what does she do?
Explain it to me.
How does she do it?
I don't need to know the positive.
The evidence.
I'm just saying juries may.
I don't need to know exactly how she did it.
I just know she did it.
No, I agree.
You don't need to know.
But so then, you know, how much stock can we put in that?
And that's a whole bunch.
There's a dead baby.
It's not like we never found the body.
We found a dead baby with duct tape on her mouth and thrown away like trash in a garbage bag in a wooded area 14 houses away from Casey Anthony's.
We know somebody hurt that child.
That's a horrible.
Yeah, that's a horrible, outrageous thing.
But that's not, we're not talking about a murder there.
We're talking about something, some incredibly huge immoral act that someone, and I've never been, I've never hidden it from the fact that I curse whoever put her there and whoever did that to her.
And I think it's disgusting.
And I certainly hope that someday we'll know.
Let me just jump in because we're going to hit a hard break.
And I don't want the computer to cut you off.
So I'll pause you.
We're going to come right back in a couple of minutes and resume our discussion that Aaron Hernandez and a fascinating medical case Jose has been handling.
Let's talk about the opening statement.
You heard Vinny mention it, your opening statement.
Many believe it's what saved Casey Anthony in that trial.
In the opening statement, just so the audience knows, they call it an opening statement and a closing argument.
In the closing, you're allowed to argue.
You can argue the facts that the jury has heard.
In the opening statement, you're only supposed to be stating what the facts will be when you get the witnesses on the stand, what you will prove to them.
And what was controversial about your opening statement is you did not wind up proving.
You did not submit the evidence that was in this opening statement, but it was in the jurors' heads.
And many believe it saved her.
So let's talk about that after I play a little bit of it.
Here's what you said in SAT 8 about little Kaylee and how she likely died.
Kaylee Anthony died on June 16, 2008 when she drowned in her family's swimming pool.
She saw George Anthony holding Kaylee in his arms.
She immediately grabbed Kaylee and began to cry and cry and cry.
And shortly thereafter, George began to yell at her, Look what you've done!
Your mother will never forgive you and you will go to jail for child neglect for the rest of your freaking life.
So why did you never introduce any of that evidence at trial?
Because I didn't have to.
Our system of justice requires the government to prove your guilt beyond to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt.
As a defense lawyer, it's your job to point out the reasonable hypothesis of innocence.
Everything I said in there, I had a good faith basis based on the evidence and based on what I anticipated the evidence to show.
At no time am I required to put Casey on the stand and at no time was she required to be put on the stand.
But there's a lot of things that prosecutors sometimes argue in their cases that they don't get to prove.
And they certainly didn't prove a murder.
So no one's going back and asking them, why did you say this and this not come out or anything like that?
I can tell you, every single word I said in that opening statement, as in with every opening statement that I give in my career, it is based on a good faith basis, based on a lot of what I know that goes around in the background of the evidence.
And when I get asked about this case in particular, the very first thing that I tell people is if Casey told me at any point during that trial or when it was asked upon her whether she would take the stand, hey, I want to testify.
And I tell her, oh, no, you're not.
It doesn't matter what I say.
She's going to get up there and testify.
And it's her constitutional right.
So for me to exclude things that I have a good faith basis may come out should either another witness testify to it or she testifies to it.
It has to be put out there.
Otherwise, I'd be facing malpractice.
Imagine all this comes out at the last trial.
Well, where did you get your good faith basis?
Never happened.
I get that, but where did you get the good faith basis that she drowned in the pool?
That she saw, that the mother, Casey, saw her dad holding little Kaylee in his arms, that she immediately grabbed Kaylee and began to cry.
This is very specific.
She immediately grabbed her and began to cry.
And that George yelled at her with the following quotes.
Look what you've done.
Your mother will never forgive you and you will go to jail for child neglect for the rest.
Where'd you get that from?
Well, you know better than to ask me those questions.
I mean, you know, there's a thing that I respect incredibly, which is the attorney client privilege, as well as other evidence in the case.
You just finished talking about with Vinny Paulitan about potential lawsuits.
You think I want to drag myself into that when I've got all these other things going on in my life?
I'd rather not even go anywhere near that, but I can tell you this.
When I say I had a good faith basis, I am absolutely convinced I had a good faith basis.
I stand by that today as I did 11 years ago.
And believe me, when I tell you, there were numerous facts that came out in that case in evidence that no one ever talks about and no one ever wants to discuss.
And I'll just leave it at that.
What do you mean?
Finish your sentence.
That what?
That bolster the drowning theory?
Again, you have to read the transcripts or look at the actual trial.
There's tons of stuff in there.
And I'd rather not rehab.
I'm just asking you, what point are you making, though?
Like, I'm not going to go back and look at every, what are you trying to say if I were to go there?
what point would it prove that that she drowned?
Or like, what are you saying is bolstered by a review of the transcripts?
Well, there was evidence testified to by our forensic experts as to the potential drowning theory.
There was, in addition to that, there was cross-examination that the jury can make their interpretations based on.
They're free to believe a witness or not believe a witness based on those questions.
Prosecution Stacks the System 00:15:54
And I can tell you this.
A lot of the feedback that we got from the jury is they believe certain parts of the evidence.
There were statements made at numerous points throughout the trial that raised serious concern about the drowning in the pool.
And when I say concern, I mean raise the issue that that was certainly a potential aspect.
And it's the prosecutor's job to exclude that reasonable hypothesis of innocence.
That's true.
So, you know, they knew about the drowning theory since day one.
But she had been telling cops it wasn't true.
I get that.
But Casey had told the police that didn't happen.
She said that at the time.
And to the documentary Filmmaker's Credit, she actually does include that in this piece.
There's an interview with a law enforcement officer saying Casey was adamant that the child did not drown in the pool.
And sure enough, Casey today is adamant that the baby did not drown in the pool.
She's, you know, you maybe may have heard me play for Vinny, but she's like, there's lots of possible theories.
That's not one of them.
Just to reiterate, I don't want to play it again, but she says, lots of scenarios of what could happen.
Her drowning in the pool is not one.
It is not possible.
In most scenarios, it'd be plausible.
Not this one.
The latter was not on the pool.
It's the only way in or out for her or for me.
Well, you're not going to pin me against my former client's statement.
So I have nothing to say about that.
That's not a case that I'm currently handling.
So I'm not going to comment on that.
But I can tell you this.
If I had a nickel for every lie that was spoken in that case, I'd have been able to retire right after.
For sure.
I'm not referring to the lies that have to do with Miss Anthony.
There were lies throughout that case from multiple witnesses and multiple people on the side who had knowledge and information, but chose to say other things.
So having said that, that's really not foreign when it comes to criminal cases because people have their specific agendas and interests.
So you have to look at a case in its entirety and the entire complexity of the case.
So look, your best argument on that front is the fact that the jury found for you.
No one's going to dispute that.
Your best argument is that the jury did that and found in your favor.
Now, some of them have expressed regrets after the fact and said they regretted.
I imagine why.
I wonder why with all of the media backlash that they faced and the personal attacks and threats.
I don't buy into that.
I mean, they made the decision.
They didn't know Casey.
They're not friends of Casey.
They had every reason in the world, given what they were exposed to prior to the trial to convict her.
So to come back and say that later on after the fact, it's ridiculous.
And I'm not referring to the jury.
I understand their reasoning behind it, especially after the public backlash, but to post that up as if it means something, it really doesn't in my book.
And if someone wants to play stock in that, you're free to do so.
So let me ask you, I had Marcia Clark on this show recently.
And I know you're aware that she's made allegations about what was on the computer.
And you made allegations about what was on the computer in your book.
And then she took up those allegations and did a deeper dive.
And the long and the short of it, correct me if I'm misstating what happened here, but you wrote in your book that one of the search engines that was on the family computer showed a search the day that Kaylee went missing or died for full proof suffocation.
And that you posited in the book that that time of day was 1.50 and that George was the only one home at the house at that time.
George was the only one who could have done that search, fullproof suffocation.
I think your position was he may have been looking to kill himself out of guilt over having hurt Kaylee.
Then she did a piece on a special she did on A ⁇ E saying there was a glitch in the software and your timing was off.
It wasn't 1.50.
It was 2.50.
And George was at work by 3 p.m. that day.
And then there is a reporter included in this documentary who says, we went and we subpoenaed because Florida is really open with all of its evidence in these criminal trials.
We subpoenaed her cell phone records and we could show that Casey Anthony was at home pretty much all day.
She did not leave early in the day.
She was 100% there at 3 p.m. and beyond.
And we can prove it because her cell phone was there.
So she was at home when that search was done.
George was at work within nine minutes of that search being done.
And the evidence suggests that it was Casey Anthony who searched fullproof suffocation, not George Anthony.
How do you respond to that?
I don't.
I don't need to.
Again, you're asking me about something that occurred 11 years ago, specific pieces of evidence that occurred 11 years ago.
Well, I saw you issued a response to Marsha Clark.
Just my answer, if I can.
Yeah, I'm just saying you recently commented on this.
Well, no, I didn't.
Let me clarify what I'm willing to comment as far as I'm willing to go.
I'm aware of what reporters had in their possession.
I had the only mirror screened copy of the hard drive along with law enforcement.
Law enforcement never made that claim.
Neither did I.
I was certain based on the evidence that I had from my experts, not a blogger, which the media used.
Both Tony Pippetone, who was the reporter, and Marsha Clark utilized the same person who looked, who dabbled in computers, wasn't a real forensic expert, but yet it's being tainted.
It's being painted out in the world as if it had some real credibility.
I was, I lit this case 11 years ago, and I can tell you we did an incredibly thorough job.
We did, in fact, just as thorough a job as law enforcement did, if not better.
And I had that evidence ready to go and ready because I believed it favored Casey.
And let me finish.
That is just one of many things that we had in our possession that we were willing and able to use should we have decided to use it.
But you got to understand, and when you defend a criminal case, you don't have to prove anything.
It's the other way around.
It's not really an adversarial system the way it's painted out.
So given that, I didn't feel I needed to.
So, and it's, and that's the same thing with all of my cases.
If I have evidence.
Jose, nobody's asking you why you didn't raise this at trial.
That's not what I asked you.
I said, how do you respond?
Your question, which was essentially.
Well, no, first you said, no, I don't remember what happened all this time later.
And then I pointed out that you actually did, you raised it in your book.
Marsha Clark called you out.
And then you felt the need to respond to her.
And I'm just asking you if you'd like to respond here since I had her on the show saying the similar things.
And your response is, it's not an adversarial system.
It wasn't my obligation to submit this evidence.
That's a dodge.
That's a duck.
I'm asking you to respond to.
I'll be as clear as possible.
Marcia Clark doesn't know what she's talking about.
She wasn't involved in the case.
She didn't have the hard drive.
She didn't utilize a real expert.
She utilized a blogger.
And I questioned the credibility of what was actually laid out there based on what I had.
And given all of the evidence, this is my opinion of what this evidence shows.
And I believe theirs was incorrect.
And I had the only copy.
And it's that simple.
I mean, I had the legitimate copy that followed the chain of custody.
What occurs after something loses its chain of custody can be highly manipulated when it comes to evidence.
And I don't ever believe any of it if it falls outside of the chain of custody.
So having said all of that, I just, my plain answer to that is that one, it was 11 years ago.
So the specifics of which I don't choose to get into.
But two, and most importantly, I had the only piece of evidence along with law enforcement that followed the chain of custody that I could say this evidence was potentially not tainted at the time.
And I put more credibility in that than I do what a blogger did with some of the other potential version that I have no idea about.
So I get it.
I got it.
Love on.
We spent enough time on this.
All right.
Well, let me just tack on.
Jose, it's dragging.
I get it.
Let's move on.
I want to get to your other cases.
I know you'd like to discuss them in some way.
You're criticizing me.
I said dragging.
Dragging.
Dragging.
Not bragging.
And just trust me, as the anchor, I know when the discussion has run out of energy and we're there.
Look, I can't help it if you don't like the answers I'm giving you.
I mean, I'm really sorry for that.
I know you.
Listen, you're dodging and I'm pinning you down and you're repeating your points, which does not help you.
It undermines you.
I'm ready to move on.
What else would you like to add that's going to bolster your point?
You go ahead.
You go ahead.
Yes, trust me.
This is a dead cat.
Let's move on.
I want to ask you if you believe her claim now that all the lying she told, all the lying she did was as a result of trauma, that she declined to say to the police, George did it.
My father hurt my baby.
He killed my baby because she'd been sexually abused.
And that the entire time she was partying for those 31 days, she had no idea the baby was dead.
And that she was being told, as she's now claiming, by her father, just to keep quiet, keep quiet.
Kaylee's alive.
Trust me, trust me, trust me.
Do you believe that?
This doesn't require you to reveal attorney client privilege information.
It's just a question about whether you believe that claim.
Well, I think it's an improper question to ask me, number one.
It's not my job to judge clients.
It's something I never do because that's not what I would want from my lawyer should I hire one.
So why would I be the type of lawyer that would go out and make judgment calls after a case is over?
Look, I love the practice of law.
I think it's incredibly important.
It's one of the most honorable professions available to anyone to undertake.
But one of the main things that you do not do, and I even try to practice this as a person, is not be so judgmental of people.
And, you know, we're all better than our worst mistakes.
And I think that there's a certain human dignity that each and every person has.
And I really try to live my life in a way that I try my best day in and day out not to pass judgment on others.
It's something I wish a lot more people employed, but for some reason they don't.
That's that's on them.
So I don't disagree with that when it comes to a moral failing, a genuine mistake.
When it comes to murdering your three-year-old, I feel differently.
I'm going to judge.
Well, I think we're all going to judge.
Again, you're assuming that she murdered someone.
There were 12 very important people that you didn't that fell.
No, I did.
I actually heard, I watched the case and I followed it very closely at the time.
There's a lot that happens in a courtroom that you don't see on TV.
In fact, that's a big aspect.
That's true, but I also practiced law for 10 years and I understand how lawyers manipulate juries.
And I'm not saying you did anything wrong, but you were a very skilled jury when you were a lawyer.
I'm saying I know it when I see it.
No, I was a very talented trial lawyer and appellate lawyer and I won most of my cases.
And I saw how you won this case.
And I'm not saying there was anything untoward about hold on, Jose.
Hold on.
I'm not saying there was anything untoward about the way you handled the case.
I'm saying I didn't believe you for one second and I don't believe your client.
And my legal practice has led me and most other attorneys and citizens in this country to think that she got off because of your skill, not because she's innocent, which is the word she uses to describe herself now, that I was proven innocent, which is bullshit.
That's not exactly, that's not what happened at all.
Well, I disagree with you.
I think you are certainly a very judgmental person and you're free to be that.
Yes, when it comes to murdering three-year-olds, I am.
You know, you know, well, you're eliminating into that, but I'm sure you judge every day and a lot of the things you say as it relates to your profession.
And that's your job to do what you do.
So I'm not going to sit there and attack you on that, but I'm not familiar with your work in the courtroom.
So I really can't comment on that or place any real stock into it.
But having said that, I can tell you this.
Every single thing that we did in that trial and everything that we do in every subsequent trial is held up to the highest ethical standards that I ensure that my entire team follows.
No one is suggesting otherwise.
I don't know what else to say.
You're defending a claim that hasn't been made about you, which says something.
I'll have to think about what.
I don't think it says anything.
I think you're just reading into it as much as you can.
But hey.
Well, I'll let my audience decide.
I'll let my audience decide.
It's up to them.
Let's move on.
Let's talk about Aaron Hernandez.
So that's another case that made national headlines that you got pulled into.
And I confess I didn't remember the number of people that Aaron Hernandez was accused of murdering.
The story was sensational because he was a huge NFL football player.
He was on the Patriots.
I think at the same time a young Tom Brady was on the Patriots.
He was a tight end, I think, and was a star, was making several million dollars a year, and then got accused of killing somebody.
And you came in to represent him on that, but then got accused of killing like a bunch of other people.
And then there were intimations that maybe the list was even longer than what had been brought in court.
And just bring us back to what you got brought in to defend him on, because as I recall, you won your case, but he was convicted in another case of murder.
Yes, it's a bit confusing because he was initially tried for the Odin-Lloyd case, which was a case that I didn't represent him on.
He had other lawyers that his agent connected him with, and he was convicted of that case.
Subsequent, actually, while that was going on, the investigator on an unsolved crime had remembered that he, in looking at the videotapes of a case that he was in, that he had investigated previously, remembered that Aaron Hernandez was in the nightclub where these two gentlemen were shot.
Blaming CTE on Murder 00:08:16
And then they kind of put together a case against Aaron based on that video.
And the gentleman that he was with ran into some trouble and they flipped him to be a witness for the prosecution in exchange for a deal.
And that was pretty much the case that I represented Aaron on, which was an alleged double homicide that occurred that was really, I think, quite embarrassing for the prosecutors to have brought forward in the first place based on the evidence that they had.
So that's.
Had he already been convicted when you got brought in for that case, had he already been convicted of the earlier alleged events?
Yes.
And every juror who sat on this case knew that he had already been convicted of murder.
So it was an especially difficult job given that they had a negative view of Aaron before he even stepped into the courtroom.
And it made it extremely difficult.
That was our biggest challenge at that time.
Oh, my goodness.
To me, it's just so amazing because from the outside, you see this person who achieved so much success in his professional career.
And then the implosion in such violent ways.
And then he died in prison.
They said he took his life, his own life.
I seem to remember you cast some doubt on that.
I don't know whether you accept that or you don't accept that, but I mean, he died in prison.
And it's just the end of such a promising career, such a promising life.
I don't, what do you think of him now?
Like, when you look back on the story of Aaron Hernandez, what do you think?
I think it's a sad case.
It's, well, they're all sad and they're all terrible.
And Aaron's is especially difficult for me because of the whole roller coaster ride of emotions that we had to go through in that case.
It's so many things you don't learn in law school.
And you also don't learn an experience until you experience it.
And I just feel so terrible for everyone involved in that case.
He was a unique young man that I grew quite fond of as I was representing him.
And the things that a lot of the things that were said about him were completely untrue.
And a lot of the stuff that was said about him, he brought upon himself.
So I just, you know, the whole, the whole case is terrible.
And one of the things I hope we learn from that case is that football is an incredibly violent sport.
And CTE is a real brain disease that can affect people in many ways.
And I want to be clear, I've never said that I believe CTE was a mitigating factor or the reason for any of the murders.
I know for a fact that the evidence showed and every speck of evidence that I read and looked at in that Boston case that I represented him in showed he was innocent.
I did not represent him in the Odin-Lloyd case, although even that one has some questions.
But all in all, I wish Aaron, you know, I hope that we can learn something from Aaron's case.
And I am very close to his ex-fiancé and his child.
I want nothing but them to be able to move on and live a happy life, as well as the families of the two young men who passed in that case.
They were an incredible family.
It's good that the family had the testing on the CTE because you can only confirm CTE by dissecting a brain.
And obviously, that means the person will have had to have passed.
And so more and more we're seeing athletes or their athletes' families say you can do that, you know, that they're donating their brains.
I interviewed Abby Wambach, the famous soccer player, and she said she agreed to have, to donate her brain.
I mean, it's such a thing for these athletes to think about.
But we need to understand more about CTE, as you point out, not blaming the murders on that, but just yet another case of it by somebody who played at the top level.
Let me ask about Harvey Weinstein.
Not him in particular.
He's whatever.
But I think it's fascinating.
You were, were you partners with Ron Sullivan?
The Harvard, the guy who was a dean at Harvard.
You guys were partners in representing Harvey.
What kind of bullshit was it that Ronald Sullivan took at Harvard for representing Harvey Weinstein?
It was so wrong what was done to him.
Ronald Sullivan is not just an amazing lawyer.
He's my friend.
So, and he's my friend for multiple reasons.
And one of them, which is because he's an incredibly good human being.
And he cares about his students.
He's an incredible teacher.
And he's an example.
And he's an example for all people of color to look up to because this is an incredibly brilliant man with a brilliant legal mind and who has a kind heart.
And for them to have done what they did to him at Harvard was truly sad, truly sad.
And I remember the whole situation and when it was happening.
And I felt terrible for Ron because I could go through something like that.
As you see, even today, I get people want to tie me into some of my cases or my clients.
But the fact that he's a professor at Harvard law makes it incredibly difficult because he's beholden to the university and to its students.
And the fact that the students couldn't see it in their mind that this is what a lawyer does and this is what makes our system of justice work.
It's a truly sad situation, especially for Harvard.
It's a black guy on Harvard's history.
And it's something that we should not be right off the hook on.
He lost his, he was a dean of like a student housing or students and I think he lost that position.
Was he fired entirely or did you just lose the dean?
No, no.
He was removed as he was basically the faculty dean for a house as they as they call it in at Harvard, which is the dorm that if you think Harry Potter, you think, you know, how they had Slytherin houses, these schools.
That's pretty much what he was the house dean for.
And they removed him from that because I guess some of the students alleged that they didn't feel safe or comfortable taking issues related to Potential sexual violence to a man who would defend someone such as Harvey Weinstein.
And it just created a very terrible situation for him and his family.
He's a family man with two beautiful children and such a big part of that community at Harvard and really an inspiration to all of its students.
And apparently not all, but to a good number of students.
And I'm still terribly unsettled by that whole thing.
It's me too.
It's just so like, what do they think criminal defense attorneys do?
Like, you just wait until the next perfect angel comes along.
Like the nature of the business is you're going to represent some, you know, some good guys.
They stop teaching criminal law, constitutional law, and criminal procedure over at Harvard law because it's not allowed.
Fear of End-of-Life Care 00:04:03
Wait, say that again?
I said they need to stop teaching criminal law, constitutional law, and criminal procedure because apparently over there, it's not allowed.
Yeah.
It's absurd.
Not only the perfect angels find themselves in criminal trouble.
So it's just either you defend the system, you believe in the system, you believe in a strong criminal defense, or you don't.
And the system's so stacked in favor of the prosecution, you must believe in a strong criminal defense, even if you don't like the guy or the gal being tried.
All right.
And that leads me to the last thing I wanted to ask you about, which is this Dr. William Hussal.
Now, was I Hussell?
Hussal.
Hussall.
Okay, Hussel.
I only ever read about it and I never heard it pronounced.
So this is a victory that you obtained this year when he was acquitted, found not guilty on 14 counts of murder.
Murder, not, this wasn't like a civil case for malpractice.
Young guy, like 47, something like that, accused of murdering people because they said he was giving them unusually high doses of fentanyl, something allegedly they said, 10 times as much fentanyl as would be the normal standard dose in end-of-life care, people who are in the ICU.
Is that the basic allegation?
Like, were they saying you're a Kvorkian and we know your heart's in the right place, but that's murder?
Or were they saying you're like some sick serial killer who takes joy in killing people and you're targeting sick people in the ICU?
It's closer to the second example you gave, which was their theory.
The reality is, this is the most important case of my career.
And having that really does say a lot given the broad range of cases that I've been involved in.
But I could tell you this much.
This case gave me so much anxiety and so much fear of losing it that I really had to check myself multiple times.
The allegations were that he gave, he intentionally tried to hasten their death by giving them too much pain medication.
And essentially what we were discussing throughout the trial is end of life care.
When you die, it's not always pretty.
And in the ICU, there is this thing called a bad death.
And that is when patients who are actively in the dying process, and this is when you have minutes to hours left in life and you're suffering because your body is breaking down, the anxiety of your impending death, the fact that you can't breathe and that you are suffocating to death.
Everyone knows the fear of drowning or suffocating is by far the scariest way of dying.
And Oftentimes, doctors are given the discretion to decide how much pain meds should a patient give.
His dose amounts were higher than normal, but he was a brilliant doctor trained at the Cleveland clinic.
And none of the cases that he actually was involved in hastened the death of these individuals.
All of these people were actively dying, and many of which he had previously saved and brought back to life.
They had died and he gave them CPR and brought them back to life and did numerous life-saving measures only to kill them maybe 30 minutes later, according to the prosecutor.
It was a scary case in the fact that I think it would have had a chilling effect on all doctors at end-of-life care, where we could have had suffering throughout the United States because of fear that they might be charged with a potential murder case.
Gabriel Brown's Sentencing 00:07:28
And it truly was a unique experience.
Now, all of my other cases brought me eventually to this case.
And it's one of those examples where it's clear to most people that a defense lawyer is often in the times where you can actually make a difference in life, and not only in one person's life, but in multiple people who may suddenly find themselves in a similar situation.
So it truly is.
When I look back at my career, there are two cases that really stand out.
This is the one that stands out the most.
And it's the one that I'm most proud of my team for being incredibly tough and working these late, long hours to get the acquittal.
And it was 25 counts of murder.
We were able to get 11 of them dropped before the trial.
And then the remaining 14, we got a full acquittal on.
Is the other case case, Anthony?
Actually, no.
The other case had to do with a veteran named Gabriel Brown.
It was, I don't know if you want me to explain it.
Yeah.
Sure.
Gabriel Brown was a veteran five times, five tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, and then after which went to work for Blackwater.
He was a career soldier from 18 years old until his 40s.
He had severe post-traumatic stress disorder and an addiction to adrenaline.
So when he came back and he was released into society, he never got any counseling or anything like that and went on a gambling binge to try and fulfill that addiction to adrenaline that he had.
He tried everything, drugs, gambling, and then eventually found it and started satisfying it with armed robberies and went on an armed robbery spree of committing like 10 in two weeks.
And the reality was it wasn't the money, it was the addiction to the adrenaline that he needed.
His body needed, he needed psychologically.
And it was the very first time when I got the case, he had already confessed and he pled guilty and I handled his sentencing, but it was the first time we had the opportunity to use adrenaline addiction as a mitigation for potential sentencing.
And what was unique about it was, you know, the prosecutor wanted life and we argued for some type of counseling and treatment.
And the judge, after seeing all of the lives he saved in Afghanistan and Iraq and the people and how committed he was to his country and serving his country, gave him three years and additional counseling.
I can honestly say, I can say this, I'm still in touch with Gabriel Brown's family and I'm glad to hear he's flourishing out in the outside and he's doing incredibly well.
His son, who was just a little boy at the time, is now entering the army.
It was a moment in the courtroom.
I don't really cry often, but when he stood up to address the court at his sentencing in full attention with his chest popped out like a soldier and apologized to the court and everyone and how ashamed he was of his behavior and how much he loved his country.
And when he said that, he broke, his voice cracked.
And it was truly a moment.
It was truly a moment to see how someone had given their entire life, themselves to their country where we just don't identify with that at all.
And where bombs are going off on a regular basis, bullets are flying by your head.
And when you survive that rush, that chemical reaction that you get, it can get addicting.
And for now, since that case, soldiers have the opportunity to utilize that as a mitigation factor for sentencing.
Again, it's those cases that get to help other people, not just the ones you're representing, that truly make this profession a unique calling.
And I am touched forever by Gabriel Brown and the service that he gave to our country and to the freedoms that myself and my family enjoys every day.
And I never take it for granted.
So that's the thing about criminal law.
You know, you can, if you're a prosecutor, you sleep at night knowing you've put lots of bad guys away and made society safer.
That's the hope.
If you're a criminal defense attorney, you get moments like that, you know, where you keep an innocent person out of jail and you think, you know, yes, this is, or you've just tested the system and made sure that it doesn't railroad people unfairly.
You know, one of the reasons I left the law is because unlike you, I did a little criminal law, but for the most part, I was in corporate litigation, which I have to tell you, Jose, does not provide a lot of those moments.
You know, like it's big business.
It pays the bills.
You don't get particularly rich necessarily going into criminal law.
It pays the bills in corporate litigation.
But it all felt like such paper pushing and defending big faceless corporations.
And it's no wonder so many people leave like I did, as opposed to somebody like you who stays in it lifelong because it doesn't have, it doesn't press the same moral buttons.
Oh, I know exactly what you're talking about.
I'm general counsel for a couple of major corporations and where I manage their litigation.
But the reality is it's harder to touch the individuals that way when you're dealing in business.
But like I said, I've got into this business for two reasons.
One, because not everyone who gets arrested is guilty.
And two, those who did make mistakes sometimes should not pay for it for the rest of their life.
And Gabriel Brown is a perfect example of that.
Here's a man who accepted responsibility for what he did, but there were reasons behind it that one can understand.
He didn't harm anyone during those robberies.
He put people in danger and he was incredibly sorry for that, but he sacrificed so much for our country.
And for our system of justice to turn their back on him and other veterans is shameful.
And I have to tell you, based on the work I've done over the years, veterans have really paid dearly in our system of justice because we put them in a position of kill, kill, kill, violence, violence, violence.
And then when we're done with them, we say thank you for your service.
Accepting Responsibility 00:03:53
And that's the end of it.
They don't get integrated back into society after we've already brainwashed them through boot camp and through the system of the chain of command and the violence that we ask them to utilize.
And nobody goes and checks up on them.
Nobody cares anymore.
We had on Dakota Meyer, Medal of Honor recipient, Dakota Meyer, and he talked about a similar journey he had when he got back to the States, culminating in a moment where he tried to take his own life.
He actually fired the gun.
But thank God, some angel had taken the bullets out because they had seen him deteriorating.
But I mean, this is what we do to our vets.
You're right.
There's no on-ramp back into civilized society for these guys.
They're just expected to be able to turn it off.
And that endangers them.
It endangers the community.
And it's just, it's unfair.
It's wrong.
So anyway, I thank you for calling attention to it here and for helping these guys who wind up taking it too far.
I appreciate the broad ranging discussion and tense at times, but interesting and always spicy, Jose.
It's great to talk to you.
Well, I've been nicer a lot of things, but I'll take spicy any day.
All the best.
I hope I can see you again.
Thank you.
Take care.
See you.
Want to get in a couple of questions from our mailbag?
You can email me at megan, M-E-G-Y-N, at megankelly.com.
I love this one.
Okay, this is from Joe about Shaddy Hamid, who came on the other day.
We talked about Trump.
We talked about democracy.
And he talked about how the night Trump won in 16, he cried.
But his dad, an immigrant, set him straight on how democracy works and how people had been heard and that was a good thing.
And about how you'd have another chance four years later, you know, to change the outcome.
Joe writes into the show, I loved this interview, especially when he spoke about his father's wisdom on the night Trump got elected.
When Shaddy talked about getting another bite at the apple in four years, I thought that was a perspective that could only be brought to the U.S. by immigrants coming from oppressive environments, and it should be amplified.
Thank you for that, Joe.
Adam writes in, I am a true conservative, and I greatly appreciate it when you have guests like Shaddy and Ryan Grimm on to give me the opportunity to question my opinions and expand my horizons.
Thank you for that.
This is, I hope you notice, one of the only shows out there, certainly one of the only podcasts that has people from the left and the right come on regularly because we want to make sure nobody manipulates your brain, right?
And makes you think just like a conservative, just like a liberal.
We're not trying to do that here.
We're trying to expose you to different points of view and opinions.
Here's another one.
Oh, here's a nice, this is a sweet one from Laura.
Same thing.
Loved your conversation with Shaddy listening to him speak.
I couldn't help but think of Jesus' words in Matthew 5, 9, blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
We need a million more voices like his.
And can I tell you something?
You know who else loved the Shaddy interview?
Doug Brunt, my husband.
He was one of the first ones.
He came home and he was like, I love that guy.
That was a great interview and really enjoyed it.
So, if you haven't seen it, what episode was that, Steve?
It was last week, but I don't remember the episode number for the people.
He's going to go check it out.
He's going to find it.
Another comment here from Amy.
We talked about how with Clay Travis, they're going to crack down on sports teams even more now.
It's like not enough to get rid of the Cleveland Indians or the Washington Redskins.
It's going to, I joked soon they're going to be coming after the Syracuse Orange.
They're going to decide orange is somehow offensive.
And Amy writes in, heard that discussion.
She says about coming for the orange.
Right before I started at Syracuse, the Chancellor actually did come for it.
It used to be the Orange Men.
She thought the men was offensive and removed it.
You know what?
That really did happen.
Coming After Syracuse Orange 00:01:25
I remember that.
Orange men was deemed offensive.
How long can the Cleveland Browns last?
I don't know.
What is it?
Episode what?
It was just Monday.
My God.
What's today?
Is today's Wednesday?
No, today's Thursday.
Today's Thursday.
Episode 442.
Okay, so you can hear shaddy for yourself what Doug and Joe and Adam and Laura love so much at episode 442.
Listen, love today's exchange.
Would love to know what you guys think.
You can email me and get in the mailbag at Megan at megankelly.com.
And we'll try to get your calls in tomorrow.
Wanted to make sure we got some of our written submissions in because if people take the time, they write in, we appreciate it.
And you can subscribe again at megankelly.com for the American News Minute if you want to see all the hot hits of the week and also just get all the news of the week in 60 seconds or less.
I mean, we've had the audience time us over and over and we nail it.
So you don't have to go perusing the internet to find out what you're going to talk about at your weekend cocktail parties or football games.
You can just subscribe.
It doesn't cost you anything.
We don't spam you.
You only get one little email from us a week.
Check it out.
MeganKelly.com.
Thanks for joining us tomorrow.
Dan Wooten will be here.
Don't forget to check that out.
Thanks for listening to The Megan Kelly Show.
No BS, no agenda, and no
Export Selection