Philip Holloway leads us through the legal reasoning behind Ryan Duke's latest trial postponement.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Hey, guys, Philip Holloway here next month on June, fit the second season of my criminal justice. Podcast sworn will be preparing a new podcasting app called luminary. We looked into some of the biggest problems and pitfalls in the crowd, of justice system and spoke with people who are fighting for a better system every day. If you go to luminary dot, link, Slash sworn you can sign up now and get three three months to listen. That's luminary ill! You am I in a are why dot l I Ann Kaye forward, Slash sworn for three months: free
I got Philip always here. In the last episode we talked about both dukes trial and Wilcox Kelly, where he was convicted and received twenty five years in prison
for charges related to lying about his role in what he knew about terrorist murder and her disappearance. So, even though Ryan Duke was the first one charged with anything related to terrorist disappearance and death, Bo Dukes is actually the first person who has been convicted of anything and sent to prison. Remember BO dukes still has additional charges pending in two other Georgia counties he's charged and been he'll county with directly assisting Ryan do with helping to destroy terrorist body by burning it in the peak and orchard now
those charges are bad enough, but in house than County Georgia he's charged with allegedly sexually assaulting two different women on New year's day, two thousand nineteen those charges involve rape, they involve kidnapping, they involve aggravated assault. Those are heavy charges in Georgia. If he's convicted, he will never see the light of day again as a free person. So now the question becomes just how did bows? Try effect Ryan's upcoming trial. Well, as many of you know, by now, Ryan Dukes trial has been postponed. Yet again you might be wondering just what's going on here, so I'm going to try to provide some clarity and give you my take on the situation. Ryan's Bernie have utilised a rare. A very rare legal mechanism is rooted in a Georgia case called the waldrip decision.
Brian defence team came up with a novel theory, they came up with something that legally, I think, was really interesting- all murder cases in Georgia if their appealed. That appeal goes straight to the Georgia Supreme Court. The Georgia
brain court is the highest court in the state and, as such, it has general supervisory power over all other lower courts. There are certain types of appeals that can occur prior to a trial is called an interlocutor appeal. It's also discretionary if the judge makes ruling that the defence doesn't like they can ask the judge to appeal that and the judge can sign up. If the judge says yes, then the Supreme Court would also have to say yes, so you'd have to get the trial court and this Supreme Court to both agree to the appeal being done: pre trial, but in this particular case they did try that they tried the intellect.
Tori appeal. The judge did not permit this pre trial interlocutors appeal, so they went straight to the Supreme Court. Onless just call it for lack of a better word and emergency basis, and they said. Look you guys have told us before through prior rulings, that in extraordinary cases you guys at the Supreme Court have this power. This inherent power to do the right thing, and so they they relied on this case from several years ago, where the Supreme Court said that it you know, and in the rare exceptional case, you can followed appeal directly with the Supreme Court and that's what they did so. The emergency motions that went to the Supreme Court
This case they came from the trial courts, denial of funds for investigators and defence experts there not seeking attorneys fees, their seeking money to pay for all the other things you can hire the best carpenter in the world. But if that carpenter doesn't have a hammer and nails and tools, they can Build a house and it's the same thing for a lawyer. You can hire the best lawyer in the world, but if that lawyer doesn't have the tools that he or she needs, they can't do their job, and so it's really hard to separate the attorney from the rest of the things that the attorneys use to defend somebody, they were wooing money to pay expert witnesses. We know we're going to have to have experts, in this case a big part of their defences. You know this is a false confession. That's the at the heart of at least a big part of the defence in order to convince a jury. That confession is a false confession: jurors are gonna have to be
educated that false confessions are a real thing in to do that. They're going to need expert, I think it's important for people to understand that these are really critical issues, this issue of whether or not an indigent defendant, who has pro bono counsel, whether or not that person is nevertheless still entitled to have access to state funds for the other things related to their defense. One thing that is commonly misunderstood about this appeal is just what's going on right now in the Supreme Court, so the merits of dukes motion in the trial court, that being his application for funds for witnesses and investigators, the merits of that, whether or not he showed or shouldn't get the money. In other words that issue
not directly on appeal right now. What is on appeal is whether or not this emergency avenue of appeal should still exist in the state of Georgia. Its purely illegal question, Waldrip V head basically says that if it's an exceptional case The issue is of such great concern and gravity in an importance to the public and there's no other timely opportunity for a pellet review, then parties can sometimes Take advantage of this very, very limited type of an appeal, and so the real question right, now is whether or not this is going to be a viable avenue of appeal, not only in this case but for the future in all cases to come. So if the defence can keep this road open, they can then ask the Supreme Court to turn to the matter.
Of their argument, which is we need money, we need money. He's got a right to money in his indigent. No He knows when Ryan's trout, he's gonna take place, because we don't know what the Supreme Court's going to do they may they may say to that. Fits well. We agree. These are important issues, but the the bigger point we're not gonna. Let you do this kind of an appeal. You're gonna have to wait and see if there's a conviction, and then you can make this part of your appeal. After a conviction, lawyers don't lie to put their eggs and the appeal basket if they think that they have got a bad ruling pre trial and they think they got a shot getting it reverse. They don't want away. Till after a conviction. They want the funds now, because if they want to have a trial, they want to do their best. They want to have investigators, they want to have expert witnesses. They want to give it their best shot at trial. If they rule that he does then that's a game it's a game changer, because now You're gonna have more witnesses in the
case, you're, going to have the defense hiring experts you're, going to have the defense employing investigators and you're going to give them some resources which will allow them to better prepare for trial. So we got at least one round of appeal to wait on the Supreme Court for, and we may have a second round and depending on how the Supreme Court rules it could delay at four four five six months or it could delay it for two or three years. We really just don't know, because we ve got a wait and see what happens at this point at this Court says to the defence know: we're not gonna. Allow you to use the special carbon appeal anymore. You're gonna have to go, try your case and come back to see us if there is real conviction. If that happens, the trial could be late summer, early fall of two thousand.
Nineteen. On the other hand, if they are allowed to address the merits of the appeal, that being the question of whether or not he gets state money, then that appeal could last several more months itself. It was really interesting to note that when the judge says alright, I'm going to go back and chambers to think about this during the time that he was in recess literally during that time, but This order from the Supreme Court came down that put the brakes on the case, trial judge. It already said: no, I'm not going to allow this pre trial appeal. We're going to go ahead with the trial, so everyone is getting ready. Are they really did not want to put the brakes on it, and it was almost surreal. It's almost like the Supreme Court was watching those same lives dream that we were all watching in some way met. We need issue this order before this judge goes for, but it looked like he was about to do something that would have been most unwise, which was to go forward and try to have hearings, because if you have a trial, while you dont have jurisdiction
You have a trial than the travelers analyses and has no legal effect. We really dont know when there's going The trial, because it depends on whether or not this appeal is going to be allowed to proceed. First, the Supreme what may rule in a few months time rule that well you're just going to have to wait- and let us address this issue on appeal. If there's a conviction and ass the case, then the trial court would be free to go ahead and schedule a new trial by, on the other hand, if the Supreme Court rules that this waldrip the head case is going to remain good law in the state of Georgia, then they will then turned to the merits of the appeal, decide whether or not Ryan should have access to state money? So we really don't know when there's going to be a trial. Yeah
yeah the new year is upon us, which resolutions do you plan to conquer and twenty twenty sticking to improve Libertine becoming more mindful and creating a healthier lifestyle through diet exercise and, of course, improved sleep. The sleep number three sixty smart bed helps everyone get the proven quality sleep that will change their life, their life sleep. I q apt to help create your routine. September's individual fit technology is simply amazing. Go check out. Asleep number storms If yourself, sleep, number beds, beds Eliza just on each side too. Your ideal firmness, comfort and support the sleep number three sixty smart bed, since your movements and automatically adjust keep you sleeping comfortably throughout the whole night with sleep, I q technology inside the bed it tracks high yours,
leaping and gives you personalized incised for your best, sleep discover proven quality sleep with asleep number three. Sixty smart bed, save one thousand dollars on a queen special edition. Smart bed now just said, eighteen, ninety nine during the January sale only at asleep. Restore or sleep number dot com, slash cadence again go. Are you a book, you don't love and an audio book library you keep forever. Even if you cancel- Kara, which is an awesome, audio books, the Keystone, motivated and positive about the new year start. so too,
rate. Ryan's pro bono lawyers there seeking money, the funds that they feel that Ryan is entitled to because he's indigent, because a financially disadvantage person. Now the defence has gotten to push back from the prosecution on this. The prosecution basically says that Ryan has waved his rights to public funding for things like experts, transcripts investigators, when he opted out of the services of the Georgia public defender system in favour of the murder.
And the pro bono legal team. However, the merchants, even though their private attorneys, they are not being paid, they are outside Georgia's public defender system Ryan, is still indigent. The fact that private, attorneys or representing him has not changed the fact that he's indigent. So this presents the real legal issue that the Georgia Supreme Court has been asked to tackle as an initial preliminary sort of appeal. Normally before a party can appeal a judge's pre trial ruling, they ve got to get permission from the judge to do it, and this case? The judge has said no. The trial judge says you're not going to be able to appeal. My ruling pretrial we're gonna go ahead
the trial, and if there is a conviction, then it can be part of the appeal later. However, the defence team says we're not gonna. Take no for an answer, we're going to use this waldrip decision and we're going to file an appeal directly with the Supreme Court, because, as Waldrip says, this is just the emergency type of an exception that allows us to go around the judge and go directly to the Supreme Court. So as an initial matter. The Supreme Court said. Yes, you do meet the criteria of the waldrip case, so we want you guys to come up to Atlanta. We want you to argue about not whether or not Ryan gets money, but whether or not the waldrip type of an appeal should still be allowed in Georgia. So all may seventh, two thousand nineteen, the Georgia Supreme Court held its first hearing other than the gag order involving the terror Grinstead case
This appeal was not about whether Ryan actually gets the money, but whether Ryan can ask the Supreme Court using this mechanism to give him money in this next recording you'll hear Justice, Keith Blackwell of the Georgia Supreme Court. it seems to me. I understand that the state prosecutor's office often doesn't get involved alive in the These funding issues that are often times between the defence and and the transport sort out, but it does seem to me The state has a powerful interest in not necessarily having inside in one way or the other, but in having incited right before trial understand from the briefing that this is a case, of of High profile in Israel.
We do a lot of folks down. I am in your part of state and I understand the desire to move on with the trial and so in since a delay is bad? It strikes me from the states perspective that, what's even worse, is if you were to get a conviction, the possibility you might have to trial this again. At some point, it seems to me that? The issue on funding is very murky. Want it's an issue first impression, it does seem to me a little odd that you would decide that because an accused is not exercising his right to have appointed Council under Gideon that he therefore must forfeit his right under eighty to hell. Assistance with respect to experts, particularly because One of those arises under the constitutional guarantee of effective assistance of council on the others. A distinct right of due process seems odd. To me you would forfeit one constitutional right just exercise another
it seems to me that if this court concludes that we cannot under Waldrip a revival case, the y'all, might all want to have another conversation when this goes back down about how this gets resolved. So I think the sound that you have just heard is perhaps the most important sound of the entire hearing. Here you have justice, Blackwell, saying look folks. We don't know if this waldrip type of an appeal is gonna be around much longer, but regardless we think it was Kanda silly for the judge
the trial court to deny these funds- and I think, he's also condescending a message. You know you folks need to get together: the parties, the defence and the prosecutor and and maybe agree that either the judge should sort of how this appeal, so that we can decide the funding issue directly or get together and agree on some way to provide these funds. Because it's much more important to have a proper trial than it is to have an unconstitutional trial that you have to do over again, so I think Justice Blackwell is clearly trying to send a message here and justice. Blackwell is right. He was a prosecutor in the same office where I was at one period in my legal career and prosecutors. Normally
get involved in these funding decisions between courts and defence counsel. When Defence Council make these requests, because that's a matter of defence strategy and its typically not a good idea for prosecutors to get involved in it. So Justice Blackwell seems to be kind of scratching his head a little bit and I think he might be speaking not only just for himself but maybe for several, if not all, of the justices on the Supreme Court. But that's just my opinion the court will rule and, of course, will be out with that information when it happens now that I've, given you run down of, what's happening in Ryan's case, I'd like to take some time to answer some of your questions. Let's get to it. I guess this is Lindsey calling from North Carolina loved the show. My questions can be fulfilled
just read this morning where bow was sentenced to twenty five years for his part in concealing terrorists, death and Brian has been asked for a delay in the trial. My question is: how there's going to heart lions, defence spending, they're coming back trying to say that bow was actually the actual killer that he now been convicted of just concealing? I'm. So what is this gonna do to defend? You suspect played out, or they still gonna be able to use that defence thanks, then, our forty years ago, great question Lindsey, it's important to remember that the case against Ryan, Duke is entirely independent. Of the charges Bode Dukes was convicted of in Wilcox counting. It is true that in bows, Wilcox County trial, the state alleged that right committed, murder and the jury convicted bow of lying to the g bia about the murder as alleged. Now that does not prevent Ryan's defence team
trying to pin the murder on both dukes when Ryan's case finally comes to trial. Whatever the Wilcox Kelly jury may have believed happen regarding the murder is not banned, on another jury. Yes, They may from Holly Springs Georgia, and my question is You believe that the Rhine, Dupe confession will stand up in court. It seems like it was late someone in the gb I but was taken down, but parts of it were still up. Where he was crying and talking about how tiny telegrams says body was so. I was just curious on their behalf. If it stands, I would imagine that would be pretty much the now in his coffin being connected thanks The hard work. Regarding Ryan's statement and for purposes of this question? Let's just call it a confession when the g
talk to Ryan on the day of his arrest, at least some that was recorded, but not all of it, and we really dont know why it wasn't all recorded what was leaked, how ever was leaked by boat. Dicks and it was a summary of what was alleged to have been said- prepared by the be a case agent. Written summaries and allow themselves aren't particularly useful. What is useful is the actual words someone uses when they speak to the police, in other words, a recording. If you listen to season? One of sworn you may remember coal, Case investigator John Dolls, when he was talking about the thing was that he looks at when taking on a cold case. He says he's not so much interested in in some ways of interviews he wore to see and hear the actual recorded words. Written summaries can be slanted, in other words they are written up and haired by the case agent, in this case, someone who
clearly has an interest in the outcome of the case. So that's not to accuse anybody of anything underhanded, but the mere written summary, doesn't carry a lot of weight, at least in this though, for ITALY part of the interview, a written summary, is all that we have because, as I said, the entire thing was not recorded the bottom line is there's no way to challenge the accuracy of a written summary, especially if there is not. Complete recording to match it up to now is Rachel calling from Albany New York area, but I have one question that was kind of dock in mobile. In for a little. While after hearing about the fact that the GB, I think you said it was mentioned- and look up public private friends or an interview that lion had never been on their radar, but that was actually not true. Question is and if I'm understanding the law correct way, which are very well may not be
would that be an example of possible. Brady violation in terms of like terrorist family, meeting to or having the right to have access to whatever the appeal Information is about the ongoing case and the investigation I feel like theirs just be a matter of its kind of hasty in real life, but there is no rule against it, but I feel like any information that came through to the investigators. Should have been accessible on, whether it was offered Readily available or whether it was something- and we had to specifically asked for, but I feel like that information, especially considering it was twelve years that. They had sort of been tipped off about this it's kind of choice in real life, but there is no rule against it, but I feel like in future the family or the family lawyer, but don't know is that
lay a violation, ambrady violation, thanks Rachel. Let me make one thing perfectly clear, whether it was something that the family had to specifically asked for, but I feel like that information, especially considering chances of terrorists, disappearance in her harder were in fact Gb Ass Radar, despite the GPS said at the press conference. This was all on their radar bow indicted and later convicted for lying to the GB in two thousand and sixteen about all of this so clearly that two thousand seventeen press conference was at best inaccurate. This was, all on their radar before that press conference. On top of that or one county sheriff's office has admitted that this general scenario anyway was on the right. Are all the way back to two thousand in five how much heartbreak Terrorist family have avoided if the left hand had actually known what the right hand was doing over the course of all these years. During this investigation is really sad.
Also came out at both trial. The original case agent testified and admitted that this general scenario was something that they had in their possession in this file all the way back to shortly after it happened, but due to all the moving parts, it just never was top of mind now. You asked about something called a Brady violation, the Brady rule Requires prosecutors to hand over evidence that is exculpatory that points to the innocence of some one rather than guilt, this issue of who was or was on anyone's radar, isn't necessarily a Brady violation, but many people have expressed that it makes the investigation look sloppy and it also triggers the running of the statute of limitations, which is something that we have discussed extensively, which is why don't expect both dukes to ever be convicted in been hill County for his direct role as alleged in terrorist death and disappearance, and this is also why I dont think Ryan
and legally be convicted of many of the charges he's facing murder, however, has no statute of limitations. Finally, just a touch Another point you raise believe it or not. Terrorist family doesn't have any legal rights to access. The investigative materials directly now in all likelihood. They are in communication with the prosecutors and law enforcement and I'm sure, they are being kept up to date with the proceedings and the investigation theyve likely bent old, a lot about the evidence but victims. And their families? Dont directly have unfair access to investigative case files high there. Thank you for all the hard work that you're doing on this case. I have a question about both immunity. I thought the KIA Rich, had an immunity deal and now that he's being brought up on charges on all of these the count them wondering what happened to that. Thank you. Both clearly has some belief that he had some degree of immunity we heard
asked him only from De Paul, bowed and of the tibetan Judicial circuit. Mr bowed, and is the lead prosecutor thought away in the state of Georgia versus Ryan? Do he was not the prosecutor in both trial, but anyway, district attorney, Paul, bowed and tested? at both trial. So it does seem clear, at least at some point. Both had some hope of benefit at the time he statements to law enforcement, about what he says, Ryan involvement was in the case that hope of benefit can be used to disk edit his information, if he ever becomes a witness clearly if he was a cooperate or early on. He did so, thing to screw it up for himself, because the state has publicly said that he has no deals not at this time
I may name is Amber. I'm calling from faltered and for my question would be if Brian is now saying that he had some paper relationship with terror of peace. For the night of the incident of the Buddha we be able to require form rather spur both of their cell phones or I'm guessing. I'm not sure brain has supported us, but wouldn't shall we be able to get those phone records and trace them back see if they ever had any type of communication before that night, because he's saying well Initially, he was saying it was random and the infidel what's random and thought it was random. Then they wouldn't have any type of communication before that bay. But if they do have communication then that would prove that they have some type of relationship and
I'm not really sure how that help, but at least we could get some type of true with some type of physical evidence showing a baby weren't communication, and if this really was on high amber and thanks for the call the short answer is: yes, phone records self an landline would be expected to be available, at least back in two thousand and five. They would have been available whether or not available now and perhaps were overlooked, is an open question, but I think they were been available to law enforcement back in two thousand and five in all, likelihood, I think they have all of terrorist phone records and they have a good idea who calling her and who she was calling during the relevant term period, this brand from Nashville. My question is: does reindeer child will have the potential to bankrupt account about Scylla? Where does that religious depend on where things go from here? Where they end up having to trial
Yes, Brian this case already has cost Erwin County a hell of a lot more than their accustomed to in criminal cases. This case has of were taken on a life of its own and his like nothing or when county or frankly, any other county in the country has ever seen, even if there is ultimately no change venue and I still think that there is a possibility that that could be the case. I still think venue could be changed. Cost is a practical consideration that I have no doubt has been discussed. Among local leaders, but in the end it doesn't matter they are going to have to spend the money if they're going to afford any accused due process, it costs whatever it costs so they're going to have to spend the money if they want to prosecute this case. If they don't have the money there, just gonna have to
come up with in one way or another. I do wonder, though, how much considerations of cost may have factored into Ryan now, having no access to public funds to pay for expert witnesses or investigators? The answer is not at all. I hope that cost considerations are not top of mine for anybody making decisions. I hope its fundamental fairness and due process, because everybody wants the trial to be done in a constitutional fashion. You recall the D. A originally did not oppose the motion for change your venue, yet the most and was in fact denied later on after it was denied the district attorney with drew his support for change a venue regardless the price tag for this trial is enormous, meaning, captain, I was wondering I'm in this past ever said. It was in that he died. Dna was made to it dna in her house,
when was that discovered and why? Why is this? Just now being mentioned, thanks by you, Catherine, according to testimony Heath, Dykes, DNA, his netteke material was on terrorist betting. It was collected by law enforcement, as was terrors blood, now in love it so that does not implicate him in any crime. It is interesting, though, from an investigative perspective, and it should have interested the investigators at the time we know Heath, dikes and others were persons of interest. Presumably, the dna connection was known to law enforcement early on that, combined with his business card being found at the scene and multiple phone calls that have been widely. Reported would have led investigators to at least take a look at him, none, the less At some point he was apparently cleared what we don't know, and it has just not been expressed at least not publicly. Is why or how he was cleared, but in any event, has apparently been cleared
it's that time of year, again time to set new goals and resolutions are easy to make, but their harder to stick to an we that listening can motivate inspire in form and he'll be successful and twenty twenty and the years to come, what your resolution are goal. Is this year, you'll find the perfect audio book audible to motivate and inspire you weathers, getting physically fit financially fit or being a better parent leader or person. It's all On audible and held motivate, you audible, is issuing a challenge to current and new members finnish three hours
books by March Third and get a twenty dollar Amazon credit. It's that simple and there's nothing to enter audible, keep track of your progress for you. Honourable members, can choose three titles. Every month, one audio book into exclusive audible, originals. You can't hear anywhere else. Honourable members also get access to exclusive, guided fitness programmes to help you start the new year off right, listen on any device any time. Any at home at the gym on your can you or just on the go. You also enjoy easy exchanges for any audio bug. You don't love and the naughty look library, you keep forever. Even if you cancel I've been listening, you are a bad ass by Jensen Shiro, which an awesome audio book. The keystone, motivated and positive about the new year start listening with a thirty day. Audible trial choose one audio book in two audible, originals, absolutely free visit, audible, dot com, slash up or text. You p, two five hundred five hundred again, that's audible, dot com, Slash Europe
or tax up to five hundred five hundred hey guys. This is Peter heard from Long Island, New York. I have a two part question. First, in hearing Mr Hallways explanation, in everything that went wrong at the on hearing and then his boy. I wish that the actual trial would proceed according to what he calls. Rules of evidence is a question whether any actual rules or laws broken at the bond hearing does defence, have any legal recourse regarding information that was brought out or their readiness to discuss it. Or is it all just objective,
The judge can decide hey. I want here all this, so I can make a decision now. The second part is, if that's it, and there is nothing to be done and is just up to the judges discretion. Why did he do it? Is it reasonable, that he would want to hear or need to hear all that information to make a decision regarding bond, or was he this judge? Was this judge just since patient lies in this case even more thanks. A lot really like to show thanks iter. As many will recall, I am of the opinion that the bond hearing for Ryan do ran completely off the rails and turned into a legal free for all where all sorts of information, perhaps unnecessary information, came out in open court things that would never have seen the light of day in a trial, because the rules of evidence wouldn't have permitted it. A bond hearing is supposed to be about whether the defendant is a flight risk or whether the defendant is a danger to the community or whether, if he's gone
and it bond is likely to commit a crime, and it is likely to come to court. Things like that, the burden of proof that a bond hearing is on the defence to satisfy a judge that the defendant makes those legal criteria for bail. But in this case the district attorney decided to call the case. Agent agents should deal as a witness to offer his subjective opinion. That Ryan should not be granted bail, which is really a relevant in this context, at least in my view, but the prosecutor did it for whatever reason, and so the defense was handed a golden opportunity to turn a bond hearing into a free wheeling deposition, keep in mind in Georgia. We don't get depositions in criminal cases. There's never really much of a pre trial opportunity to question a witness under oath about the facts of the case, at least not in criminal cases they effectively turn this into a deposition
They got into a lot of the details of the investigation that had nothing to do with the issues that are relevant to bond. They got into all the local rumours that happen to be documented in the GB I case file, they that have nothing to do with what actually happened. Now it was an unexpected. Opportunity for the defence and they took full advantage of it. I still think it was a mistake. For the prosecutor to put this witness on the stand to provide the defence with that opportunity. As to the last part of your question, while I think the judge could have rain things in just a bit at the judge was not trying to sensationalize anything. This cases, just sensational all on its own, the judge was simply letting the lawyers be lawyers and letting the chips fall where they may in the courtroom, based on the strategy of each side. So I don't think the judge was trying to sensationalize anything more than it already is. I think the district attorney's effort to use
lead case agent as a witness in a bond hearing simply backfired. I this is so be calling for more financial, as I have listened to this project at a pretty shocking rate. Since my friend mentioned it to meet your three weeks ago, so about cars, first of all, we heard John, the color say that both told him he went with Brian and his truck deterrent help ease the orchard. Where Brooks that line alone borrowed his car to go back to terrorize house. Were these differing account picked a part in this recent trial, and you expect them to be scrutinised in future. One along this vein. We had the state of carers car with darting the tired and deep pushed back as all Brooks statement to pain before
or where he let it fled that they drove her car. All of this still does not fit into any of the story, but I hear being told you think we may get any closure on this piece of evidence, namely terrorist far in the future the other only mean discrepancy. I have decided that these are the differing claims of punching versus strangulation, which I'll be curious to see how those are analyzing courts, but that's all for now, and thanks so much again for all your hard work can't wait for the next up then said I, you know Sophie they're, all sorts Discrepancies all over the place, not just discrepancies about bows truck and who was driving it and when they may have been driving it and not just about whether or when terrorist car may have been driven or by whom, but on countless things you really need. I think, a giant flow chart to keep up with all of this. Unfortunately
Those defence counsel in his recent trial did not really cross examined many witnesses on much of anything, let alone details of tears, disappearance and murder. To be fair from the defence perspective, both trial was not about whether law enforcement got those details right. So I can sort of understand why there was as little cross examination is. There was it wasn't bows lawyers job to effectively defend Ryan in the context of bows trial I do, however, expect any inconsistency that there may have been to be vigorously explored by Ryan's defence team. Whenever the time comes for Ryan's trial, they certainly have a lot to work with in terms of evidentiary discrepancies, whether it be physical evidence or inconsistencies, and various statements by various witnesses is name. Is I live in Atlanta? I was calling to see bomb Philip
if you have an opinion on how you feel BO trial when in it he believed him and if he thinking All of this information that we now know will hurt or help right do anyway on be curious to know what thought in how it will play out for or against Ryan. In the next phase of this, Hi MEG. The answer to your question is yes. I have an opinion about those trial. In fact, I have several opinions, most of which I prefer for now to keep to us I will say this, though both trial was surprisingly fast. You know they selected and pit. The jury, a local jury from Wilcox County, which is a neighbouring county to been he'll county in its very close to where all this is supposed to have occurred and really really close to where terror
body was apparently burned. There was no effort to change venue. I have no idea why there was no effort to change venue, but this trial was lightning fast under the circumstances. They managed- a miniature murder trial into a false statements trial as well, and they did it all within one week's time. Since bow was accused of lying about a murder, they basically had to prove too that this jury satisfaction at least that a murder took place. The defence didn't push back much on the details of the murder, as we ve talked about many witnesses, were asked only a few questions on cross examination. As for the poor keshan. They did not need to make tears family. In my opinion, sit there, and here from experts who collected bone fragments from a Burnside in here all sort of this very pay, for evidence, I think they may be over tried that aspect of the case and it was very painful to see terrorist family witnessing this evidence come out.
Trial. It's all. I want to come out later at Ryan's trial, and I think that they could have done with a lot less of it in this case, but that's just my opinion at risk. Trial. It's going to be a different situation. All of that stuff is going to be a necessary and again, I don't think it was absolutely necessary to be presented in so much detail in Bose Wilcox County trial presenting so much of their case against Ryan. In the context of bows trial, the district attorney Ryan's lawyers a snake preview and a detailed one at how Ryan's trial may unfold Ryan's lawyers were present in the courtroom for much of both trial and I'm quite sure they were taking good notes. They may even be able to get official transcripts of witness testimony so that, if during riots trial any of these witnesses, changed their testimony in any way any inconsistencies in their testimony can be used against them. It's called impeachment by prior inconsistent statement and its away
to attack the credibility of a witness who testifies in court. Own balance, I think it was perhaps a strategic mistake to try bow in Wilcox County before trying Ryan in Erwin County for murder. That has never made much sense to me because they just gave Ryan's defence a free preview of things to come. It sort of like one in a fell football team being able to spy on their opponents practice prior to the Superbowl, my name's or market, the evidence, and the stories are coming on about the case. Dont really seem to mix very well together, like something seemed to contradict everything's, so my question is: do you guys believe that the truth will come out and whatever it might be needed, for they took him up it has so far. All we have is a confession and though dukes story, which seems a little work, that's
Times and very real at times so yeah. This request because believe that you took him out and whatever it might be needed for the judge thanks so much. The answer to your question. In my opinion, is no, unfortunately, I don't think we will ever know the truth, at least not all of it. I think that all we will ever know for certain is that these two people one way or the other were involved in her disappearance and her murder and the destruction of her remains. I dont personally think much of anything beyond that will ever be conclusively proven. I could be wrong, I hope I am, but there will always be questions about who the actual killer was, and I think there will always be questions about exactly how Tara Dad their will. Always, I think, be questions about win terror dad why she died in all. So whether or not anybody else could have been involved, I certainly
hope I am wrong. Hope we get answers to all of these things and I hope that terrorists family can find peace in the end, I guys so I was wondering in the last episode it sounded like those statements said, he made the court pretty much admitted that everything the state said was racked, even though the defence kept saying, there's no evidence etc. I'm wondering if those statement help this in writing. Dukes upcoming case thanks so much it's true. Both did express regret or something he call regret. I won't dignify by calling it a true apology, but
what he said. It sentencing did not firmly corroborate the states theory of what they say happen to terror. It lacked a lot of detail about who exactly did what win and for what purpose. It certainly did nothing to reconcile any of the seemingly endless inconsistencies that exist, basically We were throughout this case. Besides, let's face it, bow has zero credibility, if both says the sky was blue eye, would not believe it. So I don't think there's any thing that both concede that will conclusively ever clear. Any of this up ever I have one another and of a high school student procedures with regard to both trial. If you tried to he's right tool or could impact. More time in addition to that. One values thanks so much for the programme in spite of the reason I'm going you criminals extra them as part of my facebook next year, I'm very sorry about it. Banks by
thanks for the call em. I am always glad to hear from young people who are just beginning their life's journey in the criminal justice field. If we ve played they part in your inspiration in this regard. On behalf of the entire up and vanish team, let me say that we are now to your question. Yes, without a doubt, both future is definitely not a bright one, as you point, he still has to face the rape and other charges from New year's day and house in County Georgia. Rape is just one. The charges that is facing and in Georgia, that is referred to as one of the seven deadly sends it is considered a capital felony, which means he's facing a lie: I've seen as if he's convicted, but there's more than one victim and there's more than just a rate charge celestial say then, if he's convicted the chance that Duke ever leave prison alive is, I think, zero good luck. You're studies Emma and please keep in touch with us
I made the name of my boy from Northern Virginia number eleven, the package that is a monster and I'm a little confused so How can they go to trial with both Duke on lying about a crime that brain Duke committed and still move forward. It seems to me, like Ryan, do is acquitted of the charges in his trial, and it might give the ability of Bo Duke to appeal his sentence here. I don't know it just seems like kind of a chicken before the egg type thing anyway. Thank you guys, a great day, keep up the good work, but by Michael you're, not alone. Definitely a challenge to keep all the straight. Those rights
The trial was about bows laws when both sat down and talk to the case agent in Wilcox Kantian, two thousand sixteen, and he did not tell the truth that constituted a separate and distinct criminal offence. The conversation between both dukes and agent should elitha GB. I was about terrorists, disappearance and murder, but the criminal charges that resulted from that conversation or about bow not being truthful. So in a subsequent trial the state had to put evidence related to terrorists, death to prove the falsity of both statements. Nothing in both Wilcox County trial, however, is binding on any other jury whatsoever. Right Trial will have to stand on its own legs, so to speak, and both sides start back at square one. That's a share all from now. Then Virginia? My question is about John, the color. Is he going to be held for any charges for not coming for
earlier so it appears that John Mccullough and most likely several other people knew some. If not most, of the details of what happened to terror, I'm not talking about recent knowledge, either the core Sure Cheryl is asking is whether any such person could face criminal charges for not coming for. The short answer to that is no merely keeping quiet about a crime that someone else committed is not a crime, some one would have to actively interfere with an investigation in order to be charged with a crime thanks guys for calling in great questions. We don't know. The exact date of the next hearing are, of course, the trial at this time, but we'll be watching carefully will be updating you along the way. Follow me,
Twitter, at Phil, Holloway Sq follow up and vanished or twitter followers on social media, and we will keep you up to date. See you next time. I've been vanished is an investigative podcast produced per tenderfoot TB by pain, Lindsey Migrating, Christina Data and me murder, sediment, executive producers, pain, Lindsey and Donald operate. Additional production by resonate recordings, as well as Mason Linsey Voice over by Rebecca, are in turn is highly the dull original score by makeup and vanity set our theme song is Ophelia performed by as a rose. Are cover. Art is by Trevor Eiler special thanks for the team at cadence13 visit us on social media via add up and vanished, or you can visit our website up and vanished com. You can join in on our discussion board.
If you're in drawing up and vanished, please how a friend family, member coworker about it and don't forget to subscribe rate and review an apple pie casts thanks for listening.
Transcript generated on 2020-01-12.