Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Foreign.
[00:00:05] Hey, everybody, it's Lacey. And again, no Lauren. Welcome to another episode of the Llamas podcast.
[00:00:13] I. I swear that we are a duo. And my heater's gotta go off. It's warm in here.
[00:00:20] We're gonna be together again. I was very sick last week. Then my kids got sick, so it was just terrible. And if you're from South Carolina, then you know that we had a big ice storm. If you're not, we had a big ice storm. It hit the upstate of South Carolina, which is where Lauren is, a lot worse than it did the Midlands, which is where I am at. And unfortunately, she had a pipe burst in her office, so she is currently in chaos right now, just trying to figure out next steps of what to do, because I think she has to be out of her office for about six weeks for them to fix it, and that would just. That'd be very difficult. So I think she's trying to find a place to rent until they are back in their office space that they have. So she has a lot going on this week. So, unfortunately, y' all are just gonna get me today, and hopefully we can resume next week. I just know that that's just going to be a lot for her to handle.
[00:01:20] I know that a lot of people were severely impacted by the ice storm. Thankfully, South Carolina, we. We fared pretty well overall. I know Lauren's still with some difficulties, but I was looking at some Instagram stories, and, you know, so many people lost power. I saw a couple people in Nashville, and they're just so cold and just can't get out because the streets are so frozen. And, you know, I think ice is definitely a lot more difficult than snow, for sure. But also, we're just not equipped in the south for this kind of stuff. You know, we don't have a bunch of snow plows and equipment like that because it's just a waste of money. We don't get that many storms.
[00:02:01] I was talking to my paralegal the other day, and we were talking about different snowstorms, and she's like, oh, yeah, the one about 10 to 12 years ago. Oh, yeah, I remember that big one. I was like, oh, remember a big one? I was. Before I was 8. I had to be like, 6 or 7. But that's how sporadic our big snowstorms are. You know, we're. We're talking about one from over a decade ago. So, anyways, our thoughts go out to all those affected by the storm this week, and especially with Lauren right now and dealing with everything she, she has on her plate with the new office space and stuff. So moving to our topic today.
[00:02:39] So today I'm going to talk about things that have gone wrong in criminal cases, things that, in some of the famous cases, and just things that we're warned about and what can you do when those mistakes are made?
[00:02:55] So that's kind of what I'm gonna touch on a little bit today.
[00:03:00] So when you think about big criminal trials, the biggest thing that can go wrong happen in the O.J. simpson case. That is probably the most infamous error in a trial that I can think of and that most people can think of. When you're asked, hey, has anything ever gone wrong?
[00:03:19] What's the biggest thing that's gone wrong in a criminal case? And it is the glove.
[00:03:25] So things do go wrong in criminal cases, sometimes for the state, sometimes for the defense is probably, even if I had to guess, but the biggest thing is the glove with O.J. simpson. So if you've ever watched any of the documentaries talking about O.J. simpson in the murder of his wife, wife Nicole, you know that there was a glove, a glove that was collected as evidence that they believe to have been OJ's. And, you know, we know at this point that DNA is reliable, and I don't think the jury did at that time, but it is reliable. And he was found responsible for her death civilly, but he was acquitted criminally. And the biggest thing is if it doesn't fit, you must acquit. And the defense argued that in closing, and the jury believed it, and he was acquitted. And a big part of our theory, you know, and looking back at this case, is because of the glove. The glove did not fit.
[00:04:22] So in trial, the prosecutors introduced a glove to try to say that this was O.J. simpson's glove. So therefore he committed the murders and he is guilty of these crimes.
[00:04:33] Well, the lead prosecutor, she told the, the other prosecutor, like, do not have him tried on. I guess that was like, one thing they kind of talked about, like an idea that they could do and have them tried on for the defense or have him try it on during the trial, the glove.
[00:04:49] But one of the biggest things I've always been told is never put something in trial that you don't already know what the outcome is going to be.
[00:04:58] So, for example, if I'm planning a demonstration with my client, we're going to demonstrate a scene, a part of the story, like what happened. I'm not going to do that for the first time in front of a jury. Right. I'm Going to have prepared my client. We are going to have demonstrated it several different times. Yes, this way, no, that way. We're just. We're not going to do it for the first time in front of a jury, because you don't know what that's going to look like, and it could backfire. So she told him, do not have him try this glove on. Well, he decided to do it anyway. So he gets the glove that they've introduced into evidence, and he asked O.J. simpson to put the glove on, and it doesn't fit.
[00:05:37] He's trying to get on his hand. Everybody's kind of cackling, the glove does not fit. And his defense attorney, like I said, ran with that, if it doesn't fit, you must acquit. So I think the biggest error that we've probably ever seen in any criminal trial is that I think that's the most infamous error that we all think back to.
[00:05:59] But errors can come not just in trial. There could be big errors, all in different criminal processes. And like I said, it's not always for the state.
[00:06:10] So when I was kind of thinking. And it's also not always on the attorney, sometimes it's on the client.
[00:06:18] For example, there have been times where defense attorneys have pled to a drug offense when their client wears a T shirt with a marijuana leaf on it.
[00:06:31] I've heard those stories of happenings, but when I think about, you know, big errors that definitely didn't help on behalf of, you know, more so the client. I think of Charles Mance, and when he was on trial, you know, the. The state was telling what happened. You know, Charles Manson was leading a cult, a very dangerous, violent cult that murdered someone in her unborn baby.
[00:06:58] A few others in the house as well. I think it was connected to a bunch of other crimes, too.
[00:07:03] But when the trial was going on and you got to think one thing you think about when going to try every. Like, the jurors are looking at everything you do. They're not just looking at you, they're looking at the people behind you.
[00:07:16] Same for the state. If there's an alleged victim, they're looking at the family.
[00:07:21] They're. They're observing everything. And in Charles Manson's case, I always go back to the women that were charged with him.
[00:07:33] Some that I believe, they all were convicted, too. And I don't know if they all went to trial together or not, but they did very bizarre things.
[00:07:43] They would come in singing, singing these, you know, weird songs, and they would dress weird, and then they would Come in at one point, they shaved their heads. And so, you know, if you're the defense attorney and you know, your job is to represent, you know, Charles Manson, and I imagine you're trying to say, you know, he's not the cult leader, he's not the one that did this murder, you know, other people did, but he wasn't there. And that was true. You know, Charles Manson was not at the crime scene, he did not commit those murders. And you know, he's on trial for conspiracy. So you're trying to argue against this and then you have them doing cult like behavior for the jury to see.
[00:08:26] So I think for a defense standpoint, that was a big trial error. But unfortunately, I don't think the attorney had any control over that. I am, I would be shocked if he didn't say something about it. I, you know, most likely the defense attorney probably did tell Charles Manson, hey, this isn't going to look good to a jury if you know these people, if you can get messages like, they need to stop, like, let's just chill out, let's try the case on the facts that you weren't there. And, you know, Charles Manson was a narcissist sociopath that knew more than anybody else, clearly. And so he was going to run the show and that was his show. So anyways, there are sometimes errors in trial and that none of the attorneys have control over, you know, and so when I was thinking of just different things that have gone wrong, that would have been one that definitely did go wrong. But what are you going to do? There's only so much you can do when you advise your client. They don't always listen to your advice and thinking about other errors. And this isn't a trial error. I mean, it definitely impacted the trial tremendously, but this was a big mistake in the prosecution and in investigation. And so that is the story of the Hamakas.
[00:09:46] I don't know if we've talked about them on the podcast, but they are one of the most infamous serial killers in Canada.
[00:09:55] And the, the error during the criminal prosecution is one of their most embarrassing moments, is what I've heard in Canadian history. So Paul Bernardo and Carla Halka were serial killers. Paul was a serial rapist and he married Carla Haala.
[00:10:16] Like I said, I do think we've covered this on the podcast, but I'll just kind of summarize a little bit. But they didn't know. They knew that they had a serial rapist. They didn't know who it was.
[00:10:27] Paul met Carla, they got Married. While they were engaged, they actually killed her sister, and he raped her.
[00:10:36] She got married. He continued to kidnap young women, rape them, kill them. It was very terrible.
[00:10:46] But when they caught Paul, they. They wanted to strengthen the case as much as possible.
[00:10:54] You know, is bad. Many victims, they did not believe that Carla was in on it at that time. They were not aware of that. So they approached her and like, hey, this is what you're like, we need your cooperation. And she says she knew some stuff, and her attorney, which is doing his or her job, asked for immunity. She'll cooperate with the state. She'll help you put Paul away, she'll help the prosecution, but you have to give her full immunity.
[00:11:23] So the prosecutor agreed, not realizing the depth of her involvement in it at the time.
[00:11:31] So she agreed. And, you know, I don't know what all statements she told the police. I'm sure she just put all on Paul and that she was scared, but she didn't know some things or whatever, but she was granted immunity. Well, they continued through their investigation, and later they found videotapes. He would tape these horrific crimes against these young women. And Carla was involved in it. She was a part of it. She helped in a lot of these steps in. In this happening.
[00:12:00] In addition, you know, they find out that she assisted in the rape and murder of her sister, and there was nothing they could do because they granted immunity.
[00:12:12] So unfortunately, you know, she was immune from prosecution for anything she committed and. And that they had to, you know, honor the agreement. So that's one big mistake that I can think of that didn't necessarily happen in the trial. Definitely impacted the trial, but definitely a huge mistake in the investigation of the case, for sure.
[00:12:36] Let's talk about when mistakes are made. Right. So we think about O.J. simpson. Definitely a big mistake by the state. What happens?
[00:12:45] Well, as you know, OJ Was never prosecuted again, and that's because we have double jeopardy. So if something goes wrong on the state side, if they have evidence, they can't get it in because they are missing a witness for chain of custody or whatever. If there's any issues like that, that come on, if they have a witness and they try to get them to the stand but they can't.
[00:13:06] You know, those are things that could go wrong. I have with murder cases. We have seen them go forward without a body. Sometimes, if the state chooses to go forward without the body and the person is found not guilty, if they later find the body and then the evidence matches that person, they cannot retry them.
[00:13:28] This is really Important to note for the the case in Horry county, the Moore's, Sydney Moore and Tammy Moore were charged with murder and kidnapping of Heather Elvis. I couldn't think of her name for a minute. And the state only went forward on one of the charges. They have not gone forward on the murder that was dismissed, but they can bring it back because they never went forward to trial on it. One of the reasons is they've never found the victim's body. They don't have enough evidence, they believe, to get a conviction on murder. So that's one thing the state can do is if they don't believe they have enough evidence on a charge, they can dismiss it without prejudice, which means that they can bring that charge back should additional evidence ever come to fruition. So, for example, if they ever did find the body, they would be able to at that point bring charges forward on that. They did go to trial for the kidnapping, I believe it was, don't quote me on that, but I think it was that.
[00:14:33] And both Tammy and Cindy were convicted at a jury trial for, for that charge. So. But the reason they do that is double jeopardy. You know, like I said, if there's an acquittal, if someone is found not guilty of a crime, if new evidence comes forward and they actually are guilty, the state cannot retry the case. That's just a constitutional right that we all have.
[00:14:57] So when a state, when the state makes a mistake, if it backfires and the person is found not guilty but they are guilty, there's nothing they can really do to remedy this situation. I mean, just because somebody's found not guilty in criminal court, like we've seen in the OJ Case, it doesn't mean that you can't be found financially responsible for their death, a wrongful death action in civil court. So that can still happen, but you know, there's just a big difference in that for sure. So, yeah. So if there's not enough evidence and later evidence comes forward, if they've already tried the case, there's really not much the state can do now if things go wrong on the defense side. So, for example, sometimes I've seen attorneys just think, oh God, the state doesn't have a case, even though they have this, you know, a lot of evidence to show their client's not guilty, if they think the state's case is weak, they can not put up a case. Meaning if they have eyewitnesses that would show their witness their client's not guilty, or physical evidence to show a cell phone data or whatever if they think the state's case is weak, they can say, well, we'll just go ahead and send it to the jury now and not put up all these witnesses and stuff.
[00:16:06] And then if the person is found guilty, you know, the defense attorney was wrong. The defense, the defendant does have rights to an appeal. They have a right to what's called post conviction relief. So if a defense attorney makes an error, if they make a mistake, there are remedies to try to correct it.
[00:16:22] I will tell you those remedies are extremely hard to overcome. Very difficult.
[00:16:29] I have a client, I was just an associate at the time, but I firmly believe he is not guilty. I think I've talked about him as well and his case a little bit on here, Thomas James, but I don't believe he is guilty. And there was evidence that was not introduced. That evidence was introduced at a post conviction relief hearing, but the judge still didn't grant any trial and he is actually still in prison.
[00:16:54] So it's really hard to overcome mistakes that the defense attorney makes.
[00:17:00] There are some that are very blatant, but overall it's a very difficult process. So if the defense makes an error, like by not calling an eyewitness, not introducing physical evidence and stuff like that, there are remedies, like I said, but it's just very difficult to do that. But those are mistakes that we see in the criminal trial.
[00:17:19] The biggest thing I see when I'm looking at, looking at a case for an appeal or post conviction relief, the biggest mistakes I see are the attorneys not preserving stuff for appeal. So if they don't object to certain things, it's not preserved for appeal, which means you can't bring it to the appellate court to find issue with essentially trying to simplify it. But yeah, so at least with the defense side, there are ways to try to remedy it. It's just, like I said, very difficult to do. So those are some of the things that have gone wrong in criminal trials and infamous ones. And like I said, sometimes we don't have control. I mean, I was just in court the other week and it smelled of marijuana.
[00:18:02] I don't know who's going to court with marijuana on them. But, you know, there's mistakes made by our clients and we don't always have control over that.
[00:18:09] I've had clients say stuff that they shouldn't. Usually I tell my clients, I was like, let me do the talking because that's what you paid me for.
[00:18:17] Know, just let me deal with it. But yeah, I, I've also seen mistakes during pleas that victims have made that have made them less credible. And I've seen, you know, defendants get less time and stuff because things that they've said just don't add up and are really out there and the judge doesn't believe it and gives less time. So errors can be made in all way, shapes and forms, not just trials. It can happen employees. It can happen. For judges, an appeal is for when a judge makes a mistake.
[00:18:47] Post conviction relief is when a defense attorney makes a mistake. But like I said, if the state makes a mistake, if there's an acquittal, there's not much they can do.
[00:18:55] If there's a mistrial, at that point, they can retry the case. And we saw that in the case in Boston. Oh, I don't know why her name is slipping me.
[00:19:06] But with the cop that was killed, they charged his girlfriend.
[00:19:10] I'm blinking. But, you know, the first case ended in a mistrial. So if it ends in a mistrial, the state can retry the case.
[00:19:17] So if there's anything they thought was an error, if that they didn't think was working with the jury, you know, you could correct it the second time with, with that. So anyways, so that's kind of just a summary on those things.
[00:19:32] And that was my topic for today. If y' all have any questions, definitely send me a message. And we are going to be diving into a new segment next month, so stay tuned for what that is.
[00:19:44] And I really hope that me and Lauren are back together again because I know I've really missed her and I really enjoy doing this with her. So hopefully we'll, we'll be back together next week. But until then, thanks for listening and following along and along and we will see you next week. Thanks.
