15. With Rachel Buffett's accessory to murder trial concluded, the spectators including family and friends are ushered out of court, with the media and their crews not far behind. The word is quickly spread that a formal press conference is taking place on a lower level in the Santa Ana courthouse as the crowd slowly moves toward the elevator banks. Others chose the stairs so as not to be late in attending what media folks call a “presser”—an event which I and my SLEUTH team attended as well. What promised to be a happy moment of closure for Steve and Raquel Herr and June and Masa Kibuishi…turned into an event that prosecutor Matt Murphy chose to instead, roast me and my podcast.
Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Please be advised this story contains adult content and graphic language.
I've watched. I've watched almost a thousand of those type
of press conferences over the years here in Orange County
and twenty three years of covering that courthouse and press
conferences like that. I've never seen that before. Welcome to Sleuth.
(00:30):
I'm Linda Sawyer. On this episode, we are fortunate enough
to have three guests on the program. Our first is
Scott Sanders, who's one of our recurring guests. Scott is
an attorney with the Orange County Public Defender's Office. For
nearly twenty six years, Scott was the public Defender and
(00:50):
the people versus Scott to Cry and in eleven, Scott
Decry killed eight people at a beauty salon located in
Seal Beach, California, making him the number one mass shooter
in all of Orange County history. In Mr Sanders discovered
an improper use of jailhouse informants in the Decry case
(01:12):
that he represented. He would later file a seven hundred
and fifty four page motion in the Wozniak case, which
is another case he represented, laying out a thirty plus
year history of informant misconduct. Revelations of deception and concealment
in the Scott Decry case led to the recusal of
the Orange County Day's office and later the dismissal of
(01:35):
the death penalty. Our second guest is Paul Wilson. Together
with his wife, Christie, they raised their family in southern
California for the last twenty six years. Christie went to
work one day at the Salon Meritage and on October twelve,
she and seven others were killed by Scott Decry. Paul
(01:57):
became a vocal advocate it for the death penalty, but
increasingly shifted his focus to the conduct of the District
Attorney and the Sheriff's Department. In sen Paul Wilson spoke
out about the actions of both agencies. Paul has raised
questions about the legitimacy of the Attorney General's investigation, which
(02:17):
was announced in March of with no public actions. Since
Paul Wilson is a victim of not only violent crime,
but also a victim of the o C justice system,
he has a relentless advocate for victims and the pursuit
to uncover the corruption that he believes exists in the
Orange County Day's Office and the Orange County Sheriff's Department.
(02:40):
And lastly we have Scott Moxley from the Scott Moxley
Confidential of the O C Weekly. Scott Moxley is an
investigative journalist known for his relentless writing about law enforcement
and government affairs. Two New York Times magazine writers cited
him for his herculean job exposing Southern California law enforcement corruption.
(03:04):
Mr Moxley one Journalist of the Year honors at the
Los Angeles Press Club for his writing focused on the
Orange County Jailhouse informant scandal. He has won numerous other awards,
including the Distinguished Journalist of the Year by the l
A Society of Professional Journalists. We welcome all of them
to Sleuth. Thank you all for being here today on Sleuth.
(03:27):
We really appreciate your time. So all of you might
not have known this. I know Scott Moxley is aware,
because he did write an article about it. But Rachel
Buffett's sentencing just took place, and there was a press
conference after, and of course all the victims families were there,
(03:49):
as was the prosecutor, and so what should have been
just an easy, pleasant closure turned out to be a
roast of of me and of the podcast. So I
wanted to take a look at the press conference and
as well the confrontation that happened subsequent to the press
(04:13):
conference with Steve hair Uh, sam Harre's father, one of
the victims fathers. So let's roll the tape and take
a look at it. Editor's note. Sleuth was unaware at
the time of the press conference that the press event
footage would no longer be included in the pool coverage
of the day's events at Rachel's trial. We therefore were
(04:35):
not welcome to the footage from datelines Soule camera crew,
even though they shared the same press footage with their
colleagues from four to eight Hours who also participated in
the press conference. When asked for a copy of the presser,
the answer we received from a Dateline representative was a
previous financial arrangement for that five minute press conference that
(04:58):
we at Sleuth were not made away are at the time,
nor were we given the same opportunity to participate, which
for the record, we would have gladly paid our fair
share for access to the footage. So please keep in
mind this event is coming to you from a camera
Mike that one of our engineers happened to be recording
(05:18):
as a backup camera for our coverage. Sleuth questions, is
it because of the content of the press conference that
we were denied access to the footage? The audio begins
with Steve Hair expressing his frustration that Rachel Buffett did
not receive the full forty four month maximum sentence. Then
(05:41):
his wife's twin speaks out as well, followed by Julie's mom,
June Kibuishi, and finally Matt Murphy takes us through the
case and the sentencing decision by Judge Hanson. But for
some odd reason, Mr Murphy decides to direct a line
of questioning towards me. Why don't you go to when
(06:03):
it takes out? Well, I X emotions personal, you can't
ski or anybody else. I wish you'd worked out with
forty four boats in christ and anything lower than that.
I'm the limed just scre in that quite a where
Pali from wrong, So get away she being in a
(06:29):
way spleen with emotions. Those ways you're basically saying you
knows a lot and you go n lear year at
each if you listens. But I'm just very frustrated, certainly
closing pace and everything, and that I gathered from the
(06:50):
judge her hand the time as far as follow the guy,
so very frustrating. Wait Rachel's um statement, you guys have
anything June or you're to um m. Well, and it's
(07:11):
just now that she said that, but it's then he
stay on that she said, I had to me be
honestly when you kin go like be thine to be
able to That's why I thought, you guys, you know,
I don't take that as any here how she acted
(07:33):
and you a wit or never spa. I just I
just don't take any you know from hers that she said.
It's hard that so you don't accept her apology or
feel it wasn't apology. I don't think it was an apology,
(07:56):
just like another another a fine ASPI are you a
where she's still never admitted lying. She never admitted lying
in her apoge. Yeah, she's the wis of course, especially
where she tried to tune of sad Day give the money,
(08:19):
say five days or older. She was there when Day
day and Chris she still was longer and she still
never Q. Is there some sense of satisfaction though that
the judge obviously paid attention and court and you know
(08:39):
she made her own statement. Is there is there any
satisfaction with today? I think you guys atually appreciates and
I don't feel it like she goes helpamly and thoughts
there helping fel Yeah, that this says that you didn't
(09:03):
feel as That's that's why I don't fuss her, is
that you see her it's not amotion at all like that.
She's the statement that okay, policy you should ever okay,
I'm sorry, but you feel from lock yourself from we
(09:24):
never see that entirest she's six years eight years no,
So yeah, Judge, I didn't feel that. Elma, she understood.
H I've gotten through the world years past. I appreciate
(09:50):
Judge her chamber for there is there a closure for
you guys. There's no cloture. I mean, nobody's in their
shows and nobody can put them says in their shows
on her twin sister, why I spokeingly different than hers
(10:11):
and I've been able somehow to put things aside, but
never to forget they are not able speaking hole Actually,
because I see all the postings, they cannot move on.
And then there's no gloves like a well move on,
you all say, yeah, true, I really as three hundred twins.
(10:47):
One of course she understood, So I have a new
stood up. The courts are undo at the end. Really
he'll keep going and I know my brother or not,
and he what he would like to see his justice
with every single one at eighty to do with this,
(11:09):
And it wasn't just the two lay or more. Unfortunately,
we are lost and we have to follow the goals
and we can't go by feels, which he always had
feelings about great about him and the best best thing
that we can come to terms with that those feels
translated in reality at least for her, not for the rest. However,
(11:33):
because it is another case, it's not to say that
if tomorrow or evidence comes for something greats that us
else count the fruition. That's the way I do that.
It is a verdict why you will attacted or our core. Yes,
we had a rarey that wore very hard. As as
(11:54):
the fail is imported out the positives. Uh, this is
always belitus prosecutions of the investigation and everything that we knew. Um,
this is something that we're we're going out looking forward
for the Ford did a great job, were did a
great job, and they taste while to get there. This
is for example, I think the uh, you know, the
(12:18):
system of work. Can you break it down for us
or the pounds and what you know? It's a little incasing, right,
So essentially U certain things that the court did today.
She had the option of branding forcation and she did
not do that. She also had the option of boring.
The two counts could grow up another, so she would
(12:39):
sure for the time at the same time with two
counts and the quarter sercises of discretion and site nozing events.
So she has as certain senses esecutively ter hers absolutely
right in the GOO system as well as the vast
before the stays that sess time um is linked to
the s private's help. So most says says, your after
(13:02):
time to her gives you a much wider sense in
range in California, accessor after crime or accessor after the
fat constitutes it's very holy prime and it has a
sixty two three month since this in So there's only
so much spore can do, which there's so much thing
we can do um as far as the time goes.
(13:24):
But um, you know, she's she's a convicted Feller and
she's going to give out in interestingly, you know when
you talk about justice in a case like this, for
the rest of her life. She she's playing a goat
her professional career. She's giving her masters in psychology right now,
and anybody that goes to Google it's ever gonna give
you just don't know that she's involved in this. She
(13:45):
think they're gonna know what her roles. They're gonna know
that she lied to the police. And from the part
of investigation she's delayed, you know, the the investigation she
heard these fable members and that's something that I thinks
can follow the most left. So part of this is
legal or it is uh social and I think the
lark or would immediately to the season that you got.
(14:09):
So yeah, So basically the maximus she can get is
four we four months. She had thirty two months and
you know, to me, the tick chargers jns UH and
snoymis looking the court and you better you know obviously
the failing you know, you want the MAXI for themerta
and you get it out. But good report did is
by why taking the under many days off the end
of that she most as serious of the mandatory supervision presascially,
(14:33):
even though it's done by the clation of parting. Now
by the new laws in California, gets essentially be a
role um. So she screws up, she can be violated
and sent back to prison. Whatever you max somebody else,
especially for the uh, you know, a relatively small amount
of time when you get it at PC thirty two
or it says you have back and out of it
to get it once you finished it. One the way
(14:54):
that judge did this, she's not done when she gets out.
She's gonna be when her mandatory supervision, she's gonna or
there's gonna be people checking her, you know, with her house.
You know it's she's not off the book in or
con for the week. So hey, thank you. You don't
fromation office structures that. And you know I'm gonna be
(15:15):
honest with you. I haven't done a PC vie too,
and so on. It's gonna changes in a lot. But
it's either I think it's three years and three out
and how much time will she actually served. Um, she's
gonna serve well, you'll defended on the good time to
arculations about the the jail. Um. Uh, she's she's gonna
(15:37):
serve it for a year at this whole four Uh.
But the she's she also she had a probably custody
so she's actually attacked by dr INDs. So she's gonna
be she's gonna be all in at a separate part
from jail now. So I think that may affect her
A good tongue of them, But again I'm not not
(16:00):
uncount for what can you just have a big picture
put the same perspective in terms of just everything from
start to end? I mean, where, what does you know?
Does this sort of cap everything? It's been such a
long journey for all of you guys, um it seems
like involved in here pot you know, a decade together.
(16:21):
So can you sort of like put into all in perspective?
You can only guitar about the case itself a little bit, Yeah, okay, sure.
So basically Dan Original, Dansa and lost you're got to
get married. Yeah yeah, yeah, defense that uh you just
lost planted this whole thing um in word to pay
for their wedding. He uh put together this diabolical, insane
(16:46):
plots of murder um Sam here and it's a kids
at m park every wedding. The proving um and then
use the cell phone to who were where it is
a junie keep ship to Sam's part, but to murder
her stage in to look like it was like he
was a brave and use SAMs the example or to
(17:07):
getting money out um in order to to attain his
financial posts. Uh. The case went on. In my view,
I think God lost a case too waiting long again
to try the mad people in his failings that were
suffering from cancer at the time. I mean that there
was that it was unnecessary in anti Della. But once
(17:30):
it finally got going around, we had a view. A
security court judge this case. It was so disgusting some
attacks is fus recused himself as as the first time
I wants to make history. We had a part out.
Uh they he was so disgusted with what he saw
the defensive viewer and he refused himself. And it's he
felt it you can help be fay so be. It
(17:52):
took to way too long, I make way too many
aperitis um, but we finally we we tried it in
front of a very good church by John Connolly followed
the law and everything right. He gave an offense and
me it wasn't like every opportunity to to to run
with virtually every theory all the way up to the
point of the defense. Wanted to dedicate the memory of
(18:15):
a ward Arro came back, he survived the Taliban, he
got murdered by the ships Ball community theater hack. I
think Gami the lass okay, so um, the power put
a stop to that idea you could offense that they
could not, and then the California laws says you cannot
assassinate the character to move. That's one of those things
that you shouldn't need a lot on that what we
(18:37):
have before held the defense of that, and offense has
been complaining about it ever since. When you got any
questions that I shouldn't you get any questions on that point?
N sure? Okay uh so uh. These families have gone
through a lot, they have They've been I can see
how a personal note, Um, they are the nicest people
(18:59):
you can have propope to meet. Um our brakes m
that's just our entire prosecution team. Um, you know, and
then tragically I'll say, you know we have um. The
media has been so professional the way I tell this,
I have enough but respect for the difficult job in
(19:19):
chos to do sensitivity that people are showing to these
family members, students process with one excel. There's good a
podcast comling right now that's been used as a platform
to detegrate that the member to see er um. I
think that creates unnecessary emotional part party but excamily numbers.
I think it's disgusting people like amounts to participate in
(19:42):
that podcast the postmas basic parment, it's likely not to
participate in that podcast. They provided in platforms or visualizing
as a past attorney to to essentially denigrate the victim
of assuming please without question to really this in this
in this word, did Sam Earth did nothing wrong leading
(20:04):
up to response. All the times we do with these
cases where the victims are in some way they're they're
using drudge and they're doing something wrong, the circumstances wind
up leading to their death. In this particular phase, who
was totally yes man served himself sure part Piper in
at is it you survived eighty two days? A hitter
row a baseball can heating that was over learning how
(20:25):
to teleman. We have tacts that absolute heroists. Great about
his apparent who came back in its word and now
his memories being dragon, but I liked the best him
and somebody who's actually giving a media platform, and I've
I've never seen anything like into a great threading. The
vast majority of professional journalism that Rage County rational would
(20:46):
touches that none of them are touched on except with
one person, and that is that that's very, very dissapoint
So is there anything you can say about you know,
these plasmia an if you guys lower, But as far
as you know an appeal being cloud or anything like
that moving forward or during the day, there's not at you.
(21:08):
It's not so every every death colter chase in uh
in california's an outfield. But I wouldn't give you a
chance for But that is your position that Daniel wass
Ac should not be on death row? Is that your position?
But thank you? All right? Any the thoughts of questions,
(21:30):
anything you guys wanted on? Yeah, anyway, doing any start soon,
any podcast and said in the first few years Sam
rs and kill kill anytime anywhere to bate him, but
he got to stop going after a dead man, a
(21:50):
quid dead man. That's all I've got to say. He
dead saying there's he puits there is such a thing,
because he had the decity to come up with examples
that were absolutely ridiculous, and we were very thankful to
the jewelers that didn't buy these games and standards, and
(22:13):
he had like a little child, and then he was
whining every time he were come into court, and we
had to sit through hours of his whining and offensive behavior,
especially towards Matt mc murphy. So if there is such
a thing or revittle finding claims against him, I wish
there would be a way. And we're still thinking about it.
(22:36):
And by then, I mean I I just don't know
what I faced with a person A h Okay, So
we just saw the unedited press conference, and I'd like
to first ask Mr Sanders how he feels about what
(22:59):
he just saw. Well, first of all, of course, you know,
these are family members going through an emotional experience. They
lost loved ones, and so I feel for them. Whether
they think that or not, I really I understand that
they probably don't, but I do. That's just and I
want to say that I've gotten to know you over
the last three years and I completely believe what you're
(23:21):
saying because I know that you have a lot of
heart and you feel for the victims families. It's difficult
if you're in a case like this to see what
we were doing and at some point to see it
anything other than you're just getting in the way of
our justice. So you know when the family member who
who's been involved and been present a lot is talking about, well,
(23:44):
I put up all these battles, you know, those are
things that I think we're all appropriate, and I think
historically they will prove out to be appropriate. We raised
a lot of important issues, and that's what happens in
a death penalty case. Um, there are more issues that
we were actually would have for to proceed on in pursue.
I've been a crime reporter for thirty years and I
(24:05):
know Mr Moxley is just about the same, and most
capital cases take about that length of time to get
into the courtroom. Would you agree with me, Mr Moxley,
Absolutely definitely, you know. So you know, in our case
took about the average period of time for a capital case,
and as we know, the case of Rachel Buffett took
locker than the capital case. But I know you're the
(24:27):
inclination of Mr Murphy is to kind of push it
back towards the Waia case, the Wasna case. In terms
of the other issues, there's there's just so much obviously
on the podcast. You I don't know the number of
hours that the podcast is taken. Almost seventeen hours of
content at this point and we're not finished. So I
think the issues with regard to Um, Sam her and
(24:51):
the prior incident took up about four minutes in total
of the entire podcast. So when Mr Murphy says the
podcast is about entic rating the memory Um, obviously that's
not the podcast. Right. Well, there was a question you
asked me. You asked me a question I answered it candidly.
It kind of mushroomed where Mr I asked you specifically
(25:14):
what you felt was one of the most egregious rulings
in the capital case that you defended and your with
your client Daniel Wazniac, and your response was about Sam's
past not getting in. Mr Murphy said essentially that we
are actually were almost out of bounds in asking for
the admissibility of that evidence. That's certainly not the case.
I mean that that will be a debated issue on appeal,
(25:36):
but that is once his personality, his character went in.
Absolutely it was appropriate for for us to ask and
I think for us to actually have it to be
admitted it wasn't. But that happens a lot. You know,
in all forms of criminal litigation, certainly in capital litigation,
the defendants are gonna lose. I don't think that has
anything to do with whether we should have appropriately pursued it.
(25:58):
We would have been incompetent candly if we didn't pursue
that issue. I think on the Appellate Council looking back
at our work would have said why in the world
did you not pursue that? And we disagree with the ruling.
But that's all that was. We asked for it, we
were and you felt the door was open to do
that when Mr Murphy discussed his time as a veteran right. So,
(26:20):
I mean, you know, we talked about this a little
bit in the episode. I don't want to labor the point,
but that was exactly what we were not seeking to
introduce it. In fact, as we've kind of said, we
weren't even really prepared to introduce it. We thought there
was going to be a limitation on what was going
to go before the jury, and then the next thing
we knew we were getting into issues like what was
going on in Afghanistan versus the other option for the prosecution,
(26:42):
which was just to rely simply upon the effect of
the loss in terms of loved ones and family and friends,
which also would have been extremely powerful, But they decided
to go to this next spot. We said that if
you're going to do that, then there should be a
whole picture. We lost. But certainly, again, the podcast hasn't
been about that or assassinating Sam Hairs. And I've said
(27:04):
from the beginning, no matter what somebody did or didn't
do before this moment in time, they shouldn't die. Nothing
like this should happen to anyone. So I've never moved
from that or suggested that his life at any less value.
Of course, me as a defense lawyer, we're seeing value
in lives that many people couldn't see. So we understand that.
(27:24):
And I feel that I would like to say on
the record, have I ever once, in all the times
that we've met, have I ever said to you, I
believe your client doesn't belong on death row? You haven't
said that, Thank you, Mr Moxley. That's your office, that
Santa and a court house, and nobody I've watched Alma
(27:48):
A thousand of those type of press conferences over the
years here in Orange County and twenty three years of
covering that courthouse and press conferences like that. I've never
seen that before. And that was other than the introduction
of you. That was pretty much what I've seen all
the time, the emotion from the victims and the prosecutor
making statements, but coming after you, that was rare. And wait,
(28:08):
you're shocked by that? To Paul, Oh, I'm totally shocked
by that. It's just, um, you know, it's a perfect
example of the unprofessionalism that lives in that office. And
to see that, I'm completely blown away by it. As
we all know here, this has happened before where a
prosecutor thought that Mr Wilson here was Moxley and went
(28:30):
after him. It's showing a little bit of unhingement there. Oh,
did that happen to you as well? Well? At a
which hearing? Was that Decry one of the Decry hearings. Paul,
you were you were in attendance and he thought the
prosecutor thought you, in fact were Mr Moxley. That's correct
what happened. Then he went, don't you were there? He came.
(28:50):
He came from behind the podium that he was standing at. Um.
I was behind Channel seven's camera and he came from
behind the podium and approached me, pointing his finger like
is is that? Mr Moxley? And I came from behind
the camera and approached him and let him know. No,
my name is Paul Wilson, and I'm from the Seal
(29:11):
Beach Salon shootings, which your office, and I'm a victims
family whether my wife died on the Yes, I think
it actually came. It came related to the Decry case.
It was the informant asker morial. It was. It was
the sentencing memorial a couple of days before Christmas, So
that was the informant. That was all about the informant
scandal and the Decry case, which is a separate case
(29:33):
from what this podcast has been focused on. But you
represented both clients, both Daniel Wesniak and Scott to cry okay.
I wanted to ask you Scott, Mr Moxley. UM, I
have two Scotts here, so I'm gonna go back to
the misters if that's okay. UM, I wanted to ask you,
Mr Moxley, how do you feel when you hear the
(29:54):
prosecutor not only roast me and my podcast, but he
made us suggect Sen that all the other journalists are
professional because they're not covering the podcast except for one,
and that's you. I take that as a badge of
honor because my position in covering any court hearing is
to my readers to tell the truth to my readers.
(30:16):
So I'm not editing out anything that's major. The motion
that Mr Sanders made in WASSN'TI Act pertaining to the victims,
his criminal history is part of the court record, and
there was a huge battling court and I'm not going
to sit there and go, well, I'm I'm not going
to share that with my readers. That's what happened in court.
It's a fact. That's not how I work. And on
(30:38):
some level, I think he was without mentioning your name,
he was referencing you because you have in fact been
covering the podcast. I mean, how do you take that statement.
I'm not worried about that. I think my position is more. Um, Look,
I've I've been covering trials here for many years and
the work that you've done has been outstanding. You've taught
(30:59):
I've said in the court room for hours and hours,
and in this case, you taught me many things that
I never knew. And um so I think focusing attention
on what on your work that was important to do,
the public needs to know what else you discovered. People
can disagree with your conclusions or whatever information you're putting
out there, but highlighting it for the public and digging
(31:20):
as deeply as you did, discovering so many important issues
that are still lingering there as they're trying to wrap
up the case, it's important. Well, it's nice to have
the appreciation and the respect of another fellow investigative journalist.
And I really do appreciate that I have been working
on this for three years. I know at one point
(31:41):
you said to me, I think you beat my ass
on this one, and you never have your ass beating
on anything. I mean, Scott Moxley, probably, I have to
tell you, of all the journalists I have read and
covered in my lifetime, I'm never been more impressed by
a person. And I just think what the work you're
doing singularly, I feel like you're an island onto yourself
(32:02):
in this town, and I am just so amazed at
the and you. You beat out everybody else. I got
you on one maybe, but you got it on every
other story that came out of this county for how
many years? Paul, I wanted to ask you how you
feel about watching this press conference. I know that you
were sitting in the courtroom in front of me and
(32:24):
we talked a little bit about the Thousand Oaks shooting
and how it brings back so much for you. Does
participating in the sentencing. I know you came for the verdict.
I saw you a couple of other times in the
courtroom for for Rachel Buffett successory trial. How does it
feel when you're watching the press conference? Well, as I
(32:44):
watched this right now, you know, it's sort of a
very emotional piece for me because I've stood in that
same position right there for almost seven years, and it's tough.
It's really tough for me, and I can understand the frustration.
But what I can also understand is from my experience
is we clearly see what's going on here, which is
(33:07):
the win at all costs mentality of that District Attorney's office.
I have a observation in a comment based on watching
Mr Morphy's performance during the press conference, one is that
the sister of the hers mentioned in her comments three
or four feet away from the prosecutor that she said,
(33:28):
wasn't it just wasn't the two. There's more as far
as the murders of Sam and Julie that it wasn't
just Daniel, was Nick alone. And that's the theme that
you've been exploring that seems to cause so much frustration
for the prosecutor. The other part is that when we
switched judges from Stottler, Stotler procused himself and John Connley,
(33:48):
a former Homer Side prosecutor and Matt's unit. When we're
covering the case, there's this incredible moment of bias. Matt
says he made perfect routlings, he never did anything wrong,
and he followed the law. There was one point where
Mr Sanders filed an important motion in the death penalty case,
(34:08):
and the and the judge sealed it, and he kept
it sealed, but he let Matt Murphy have it and
respond and write his own brief. We had for days
Murphy's response to what we couldn't read. He let that
be on the record. Remember that the dailies got to
write stories about Matt's response to something that was sealed.
(34:29):
That's that's not right, and he should be Both Matt
Murphy and Judge Connelly should be embarrassed about that. I
remember that quite well, and I'm sure you do as well.
Mr Sanders had to have been another frustrating moment in
a series, right, And that's part of you know, Look,
that's if you're candidly not like, oh, poor defense counsel,
(34:49):
but defense counsel. He's going to be up against a
lot of battles. So that's why we do have a
thick skin in the even these situations watching it, you know,
we're all gonna it hurts because you hate to see
family members convinced that you are this terrible figure. Yeah,
that's you know, nobody wants that. But the other hand,
(35:10):
as you've said before, they're in a terrible position. They're
in so much pain, and and the sister's right that
pain doesn't go away. So I understand, and I you know,
I go back and forth even with Mr. Her I
don't like a lot of the things he said, but
I also understand how much he hates what's happened to
(35:30):
he and his wife's lives. I mean, are a family man,
you understand that kind of pain. So you know, I
would rather they didn't hate me on an individual level.
I really would, but there's not much you can do
at some point. Well, I can only say that I
also joined you in that I wish Mr Hair didn't
feel the way he does about me. Now. I have
(35:53):
spent it quite a lot of time with him over
the years, because together we really did collaborate on this
and and share a lot of information. And I haven't
changed my opinion. I haven't moved off of my mission,
which is to uncover the truth about everything that happened
in the murder of his son and his friend Julie.
(36:16):
And I wish that he could see pass the four
minutes of a seventeen hour podcast that's still clocking, so
that he can appreciate that I'm still focused on the
end result, which is to make sure everybody pays. But
I do want to reiterate, just because this statement was said,
I don't believe Daniels next should have gotten a death penalty,
(36:36):
and and that's your opinion. And again I tried to
tell Mr Hair, I am not going to censor an
invited guest on my podcast. I will never do that.
I am a proponent, as I know Mr Moxley, as
we live our lives according to the First Amendment, and
you have a right to your opinion. I don't believe
you know, and it starts for me that I don't
believe these proceedings were completely fair from beginning to d
(37:00):
and so, and that's your opinion. I'd like to now
show you what, unfortunately happened after this press conference when
Mr Hare decided to walk over to me after its conclusion.
Editor's note, for the benefit of our listeners, I just
want to clarify that the gist of what you're about
(37:22):
to hear Mr Hair say to me is everything to
do with episode three where Scott Sanders mentioned Steve Hair's
son Sam Hair's history of being charged with murder, and
then in episode four I gave Mr Hair a chance
(37:46):
to respond to what Mr Sanders said about his son's background.
He had five minutes, and then Mr Sanders had the
opportunity to respond for five minutes. But it did take
Mr Sanders up until our air date to decide whether
or not he was going to engage in that conversation.
(38:08):
He finally did, and I didn't have any more time
left in my studio to give Mr Hair the immediate
chance to respond to Mr sanders comments. But I did
offer him the chance to go on the next episode.
Mr Hare declined because I believe at that point he
got upset after what he heard Mr Sanders say. So
(38:29):
here's the tape and you can hear the conversation that
happened after the press conference for yourselves up. I told
(38:51):
him he was he wanted to make it until the
very last day, and then he said, and I am
going to make just like season. And I said to you,
you want to come on the nick, I said, we
want responsible now all you musicable see if I spoke
you and I up until that point he wasn't. And
it respond he said he didn't want to get into
(39:12):
an engagement to you. I could want to feel that way.
You know what, I don't think I feel the first
you out here just a senser. I'm believe in the question.
She didn't give me a pen to immediately respond. Told
(39:34):
you you could any time you want if he hi,
you don't watch. So what you just saw was Mr
Hair coming over to me. And my understanding is he's
exasperated because he felt he didn't get the last word
what happened was after the episode, the episode three, where
(39:59):
I asked Mr Sanders about the ruling that he felt was,
of all of them, the one that upset him the most.
And obviously Mr Hair was very upset with the way
in which that conversation was framed. I spent about three
minutes talking about Sam's past. I don't think you spent
more than a minute talking about the ruling. And it
(40:21):
seems like he still has not been able to move
past that. And so he came over to me and
he said he wanted a chance to respond. I have
always given Mr Hair the opportunity to respond, and he
doesn't seem to remember that, I guess, but he's still
and I will state it for the record once more. You,
(40:43):
Mr Hair, always are invited to come on this podcast
and speak your mind and say whatever you want to
say about the way in which we discussed your son's
past in the context of this case. I'd love to
know how you feel about what you saw. Mr Moxley, Well,
I can't help but think about my first experience when
(41:06):
I met him after the murders, and and I was
at his house with his wife, and he was so emotional.
I spent maybe three and a half four hours there,
and he was full of anger and rage, and I
was worried about him when I left. And I've seen
him many times in the courthouse in recent years, and
(41:26):
what comes to me, not getting getting saving you for
the last it was just he's taken a deep breath.
He's able to smile more, even though it's never he's
never gonna get over what happened to his son. His
whole persona has taken a much lighter position. And you know,
I respect him for standing up and doing what he
(41:49):
thinks is right, but I also respect you, and I
know that's a difficult position. I've been in that position
as well, and it's unfortunate because I think Matt kind
of fueled that what he had said leading up to that,
those moments when it really wasn't necessary. I think that
Mr Murphy seems to be fueling the victim's pain in
(42:12):
his frustration with me and the podcast and the guests
that I bring on to speak their opinion. But I
do believe that it's Mr Murphy himself that's upset with
the things that we are discussing on this podcast, and
I think it would be hoove him to just be
straight about that, right, because I don't think it's fair
(42:33):
or it's right to be using the victims family's pain
that way. I mean, how do you feel about that, Paul, Well,
obviously I I don't agree with that. And um there
that office is very good at using the victims and
(42:53):
when they want to and when they need something. And
you know, I mean, this is tough for me to
com meant on this because those are tough shoes to
walk in. And I understand the frustration and the grief,
and you understand it firsthand firsthand, and it never goes away.
The healing never goes it never lets up, and the
emotion you can get carried away to that. And I
(43:16):
understand that, but you do if you're gonna, if you're
gonna be in this position I'm walking those shoes, you
have to you have to look at both sides, and
in this in this case, the big picture and the
big picture, and in this case, I mean, it's it's
it's much like mine, and there's there's a lot of
fault to be put on that d a's office. And
(43:37):
I did over and over. I met with Mr Hare
and his wife almost weekly for nearly three years, and
I always reminded him, I'm a journalist and I am
going to have to tell the story of your son's
past because it's part of the reason he was the
target for these murders, and I please accept that and
(43:59):
appreciate that. And he always acknowledged that. So it's it's unfortunate.
I know you're jumping in here to say, you know,
I still feel for him as I'm hearing that, because
I understand that he just there's still just a ton
of pain. And even with all of this, I look
at him and I go as much as he he
hates me, um at this moment and maybe forever, I
(44:23):
still feel badly for him, and I feel like, boy,
if he wants the last word, have it. I won't
say another word. You can say whatever you want about me.
And he said a lot of things about me in
a lot of context, and look, a lot of that
stuff I've just let roll, you know, off my back.
And that's it's just part of doing this work. People
are going to get very frustrated in experience like this.
(44:44):
So even listening to him now, I kind of wish
if I could do it all over again. I didn't
stop him from having the last word. Of course, I'm
just saying I kind of wish you would have because
I know that he feels like there's something that he
wants to say, and even though it's aimed at me,
I kind of wish he could have it. And if
he wants you, I certainly wouldn't make the assurance that
I wouldn't even ask you to come back on. So
if he comes back on, he he comes back on,
(45:06):
he can say whatever he wants. And I've and I
have presented that to him many times and I echo
that sentiment. Let me let me toss in here a
little bit that I I know, I've I've observed it firsthand.
There are many great people in d A's office who
do great victim service, incredible service over the years. I've
watched it, um. But I think what Paul's raising here's
(45:26):
an interesting point that sometimes it doesn't play out well.
He's clearly Mr Wilson's clearly a victim. And yet tell
me if I'm right, you were tossed out of the
District Attorneys building during a press conference when they found
out it was it was him, yes? Correct? What yes?
When they were announcing the Golden State Killer. I showed
(45:48):
up to attend the press conference, and initially they were
going to let me in and tell my name is
circulated around the office, and a gentleman by the name
of Paul Carbo came out and told me that I
was not welcome in there. And it was after the
cover story that I wrote featuring the two of them.
So let's let's get it in the context for our listeners.
You did write an article about the story about this
(46:11):
relationship which we're going to get into in a future episode,
the relationship between Mr Sanders and Mr Wilson, Paul Wilson,
And so it was after and it's basically a story
about what an unlikely pair, right um, Mr Mr Sanders
represented the person that killed his wife, and so yet
together they have formed this alliance to seek out and
(46:35):
try to shine a light on the on the corruption
that's going on in the justice system in Orange County.
And so after that article that you wrote, that's when
it happened. Yeah, it was probably a couple of weeks afterwards,
and an TONI was Rococcus was holding a big press
conference to announce the Golden States that they were they
were teaming up and making a progress and like I
(47:00):
show it up, just like the media. I stood in line,
I wrote my name on the piece of paper and
that was all they told me. At ten o'clock, open
the doors and you're ready to go in. And I
went outside the way. About five minutes later, Mr Carbo
came out and said, we've thought about this and we're
not going to allow you into this. You're not allowed
to come into doors today. I mean that's so I
(47:20):
waited until ten o'clock and everybody went in and I
attempted to walk through the doors and they escorted me
out again. They did, Yes, how did you feel about that?
It's a public place, a public place, I'm a citizen.
Why can't I attend? They're afraid of THEE I knew
(47:41):
about it, and it doesn't surprise me because Paul's been
up against a lot of this stuff, and I think
there's probably been more than one where you've been at
least they've wanted to kind of keep you away. And look,
he's not just a citizen, he's he's what the D's
Office usually treasures. I mean, he's a victim of a
very very serious case. So that's that's unusual treatment, but
(48:03):
it's less unusual when you considered for them the fact
that he has reached some mutual understanding with a person
they don't like very much. I guess that's me, and
who has taken an adverse position to them, explains that
it's he's His importance as a victim has become far
less um since he's spoken out about what he thinks.
(48:26):
So he's not he's not considered one of them. So
you're feeling the repercussions of choosing to once again look
at the big picture here and and make this a
journey that you've decided is important to you, absolutely, without
a doubt. How does that make you feel, Scott covering
this for so many years, such stuff happened. One of
(48:48):
the things I think is important for the listeners to
know is that in my article that the pivot point
for Mr Wilson was the realization that the distric att
Ernie's protest about how much he was for the victim
was really hollow. And there was a meeting you might
want to describe where it dawned on you, if my
memory is right, that you're looking at him and you
(49:11):
saw nothing in his eyes and basically said I'll make
the decisions I want, I don't, I don't need your
input something to that effect. Please please share. Yeah, sure,
this is when we had found out that there had
been a Scott You might want to chime in just
to refresh my memory, but there had been a deal
put on the table, and this would have been about
a year, year, year and a half, a little over
(49:33):
a year into the case. A little yep, it was.
It was in two thousand. There work several times actually
where it was suggested, um so I'm not sure which
time that was, but in two thousands have been one
of the first times it was introduced directly in in courts.
So us as the family members sitting in the courtroom
they wanted to share, were hearing this deal that they
(49:54):
were they weren't sharing it with us. We were hearing
Mr Sanders got saying that, you know, deals on the
table and they're deciding not to take it. And we
looked each other like, what deal? What are you talking about?
So as as as usual after court we would go
back into the Little d A's office and have a
discussion about what had happened, and of course it came
(50:16):
up and Mr Wagner, um Scott Simmons. Scott Simmons had
told us what was going on, and these are two
of the prosecutors. I just couldn't believe that was that
was out there and that we weren't. So I demanded
an immediate meeting with Tony himself. I got that meeting,
and it was very brief. It was the deal that
(50:37):
was being offered. We exactly what we got seven years later,
life life in prison without parole, special circumstances, pleading to everything,
everything that we ended up getting. Just it came seven
So you know, I remember sitting across from Tony and
Scott Simmons and Dad Wagner in there, and I emphasis
(51:00):
of Tony that I can't understand how you would have
this and not bring it to the families at least
to let us know, and why why would we just
hear this in court and not have any idea? And
he just looked at me with that callous and those
empty eyes and said to me, well, the reason is,
(51:22):
Mr Wilson, because it's not your decision, it's my decision,
and we are seeking nothing other than the death penalty,
plain and simple. That was the ends of the conversation.
So it was shocking, shocking. So getting back to the
press conference footage, Mr Moxley, you know Matt Murphy better
(51:42):
than anybody here today. What is your final observation? You
could see he was thinking about what he what he's
going to say. He's an incredibly articulate prosecutor, key controls
and dominates court rooms. There's no doubt has done that
for a long time. But going after you in that
way kind of cross the line. Why do you think
Matt behaved the way he did in the pressor? I
(52:05):
don't know. I don't know, Mr Sanders, why do you
think Mr Murphy acted as he did? Well, these aren't
things that he wants to talked about. You know, he
wants Woznia to just go out for twenty years and
and in his mind, hopefully be executed at that point.
He doesn't want to go through you week after week
(52:27):
analyzing whether the two cases are consistent, whether arguments are changing.
I mean, that's what he didn't talk about here, although
that's what I thought he was most upset about. Right,
He definitely right, he's upset because we've been talking about
the difference in the arguments and the different interpretations that
should be used for different pieces of evidence that's conspicuously
missing from what he said here and said he's he
(52:48):
used the thing that will rev people up right, Um,
you're not being fair to Steve her That's the kind
of stuff that he wants to get out there. He
doesn't want to talk about because he's free to You've
for to him many times. He can come to this
podcasts in writing. Yeah, and I know you've made it
so that you won't even have to worry about a
(53:08):
last word for me. He can be the last word.
He can speak as long as he wants. I imagine
you'd let him talk for a couple hours if you wanted,
and refute everything that's been sad. His press people said
that he would come on only if I retracted everything
that I've said, But that doesn't make any sense because
he is, as Mr Moxley just said, there's no question
he's articulate, he's smart, he's very good in the courtroom.
(53:28):
He doesn't need a retraction. If he owns this evidence
in the way he would suggest he does without saying
it here, he can do it. He'll powerfully refute everything
that I've said, all of my analysis. So, Mr Murphy,
if you're listening. You are welcome to come on the
podcast and speak your opinion, just like all my other guests.
(53:49):
The podcast has been out for nearly three months and
we have been able to develop by a listening base,
and some of those listeners send me comments, and the
overwhelming sense of the comments are that they're just it's
(54:09):
incredulous to so many. Why the d A didn't charge
it with murder. Well, you know we've talked about it
before on the podcast. I don't. I'm not going to
really take issue completely with whether he should or he shouldn't.
I think you can make those calls. He's made his call,
But the term came up when at all costs you
(54:31):
don't in the DA office has existed to date. You
try not to come back unsuccessfully, and that case, in
his mind may be one that there's a lesser chance
of success that that maybe he doesn't think at this
point is strong enough. Now you've developed a bunch of
evidence that I think would arguably help him quite a
bit that was actually given to him, A dossier of
(54:53):
ten pages of evidence that was in fact given to
him and in fact used in many instances. I sat
through that try all and I felt and I think
I've said this to you in a previous episode, that
he presented a case for murder right in the accessory
after the fact trial. And it's just ironic that our
(55:14):
listeners and jurors that I spoke to believed that she
was more involved in these murders, yet the prosecutor wouldn't
charge it with murder. And also, look, this is Steve
HER's number one mission, right, he wants accountability for all
people involved, and he has frustration because I said something
(55:37):
I won't even repeat at this moment, but ninety eight
percent has been your analysis of that and talking about
that evidence. And even here at the press campers at
the very end, what do you hear them saying. They're saying,
we still want accountability. And the one person who's been
pressing for accountability like none there has been, you, Thank
you I and I won't stop. And I think Ms
(56:00):
Or Moxley knows that passion right so much a part
of your life. Well, I just want to thank all
of you gentlemen for coming in today to to speak
to us on Sleuth and Mr Moxley, my colleague, thank
you for your time. And Mr Wilson, our condolences for
your loss and appreciate what you're doing on behalf of
(56:22):
Orange County and Mr Sanders, keep fighting the fight. Thank you.
Next time on Sleuth, we're going to surprise you with
a guest who I like to call my deep throat.
(56:46):
She's come forward since Sleuth has been published, with revelations
that will astonish you more than any other episode you've
heard to date. After three years of digging and sleuthing
on this case, we are fine only able to reveal
the definitive pieces of this murderous puzzle. You will not
want to miss a single minute. If you enjoyed this
(57:11):
episode of Sleuth, share it with a friend and be
sure to leave a rating or review. Follow Sleuth on
I Heart Radio, or subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts
so that you never miss an episode
Please be advised this story contains adult content and graphic language.
I've watched. I've watched almost a thousand of those type
of press conferences over the years here in Orange County
and twenty three years of covering that courthouse and press
conferences like that. I've never seen that before. Welcome to Sleuth.
(00:30):
I'm Linda Sawyer. On this episode, we are fortunate enough
to have three guests on the program. Our first is
Scott Sanders, who's one of our recurring guests. Scott is
an attorney with the Orange County Public Defender's Office. For
nearly twenty six years, Scott was the public Defender and
(00:50):
the people versus Scott to Cry and in eleven, Scott
Decry killed eight people at a beauty salon located in
Seal Beach, California, making him the number one mass shooter
in all of Orange County history. In Mr Sanders discovered
an improper use of jailhouse informants in the Decry case
(01:12):
that he represented. He would later file a seven hundred
and fifty four page motion in the Wozniak case, which
is another case he represented, laying out a thirty plus
year history of informant misconduct. Revelations of deception and concealment
in the Scott Decry case led to the recusal of
the Orange County Day's office and later the dismissal of
(01:35):
the death penalty. Our second guest is Paul Wilson. Together
with his wife, Christie, they raised their family in southern
California for the last twenty six years. Christie went to
work one day at the Salon Meritage and on October twelve,
she and seven others were killed by Scott Decry. Paul
(01:57):
became a vocal advocate it for the death penalty, but
increasingly shifted his focus to the conduct of the District
Attorney and the Sheriff's Department. In sen Paul Wilson spoke
out about the actions of both agencies. Paul has raised
questions about the legitimacy of the Attorney General's investigation, which
(02:17):
was announced in March of with no public actions. Since
Paul Wilson is a victim of not only violent crime,
but also a victim of the o C justice system,
he has a relentless advocate for victims and the pursuit
to uncover the corruption that he believes exists in the
Orange County Day's Office and the Orange County Sheriff's Department.
(02:40):
And lastly we have Scott Moxley from the Scott Moxley
Confidential of the O C Weekly. Scott Moxley is an
investigative journalist known for his relentless writing about law enforcement
and government affairs. Two New York Times magazine writers cited
him for his herculean job exposing Southern California law enforcement corruption.
(03:04):
Mr Moxley one Journalist of the Year honors at the
Los Angeles Press Club for his writing focused on the
Orange County Jailhouse informant scandal. He has won numerous other awards,
including the Distinguished Journalist of the Year by the l
A Society of Professional Journalists. We welcome all of them
to Sleuth. Thank you all for being here today on Sleuth.
(03:27):
We really appreciate your time. So all of you might
not have known this. I know Scott Moxley is aware,
because he did write an article about it. But Rachel
Buffett's sentencing just took place, and there was a press
conference after, and of course all the victims families were there,
(03:49):
as was the prosecutor, and so what should have been
just an easy, pleasant closure turned out to be a
roast of of me and of the podcast. So I
wanted to take a look at the press conference and
as well the confrontation that happened subsequent to the press
(04:13):
conference with Steve hair Uh, sam Harre's father, one of
the victims fathers. So let's roll the tape and take
a look at it. Editor's note. Sleuth was unaware at
the time of the press conference that the press event
footage would no longer be included in the pool coverage
of the day's events at Rachel's trial. We therefore were
(04:35):
not welcome to the footage from datelines Soule camera crew,
even though they shared the same press footage with their
colleagues from four to eight Hours who also participated in
the press conference. When asked for a copy of the presser,
the answer we received from a Dateline representative was a
previous financial arrangement for that five minute press conference that
(04:58):
we at Sleuth were not made away are at the time,
nor were we given the same opportunity to participate, which
for the record, we would have gladly paid our fair
share for access to the footage. So please keep in
mind this event is coming to you from a camera
Mike that one of our engineers happened to be recording
(05:18):
as a backup camera for our coverage. Sleuth questions, is
it because of the content of the press conference that
we were denied access to the footage? The audio begins
with Steve Hair expressing his frustration that Rachel Buffett did
not receive the full forty four month maximum sentence. Then
(05:41):
his wife's twin speaks out as well, followed by Julie's mom,
June Kibuishi, and finally Matt Murphy takes us through the
case and the sentencing decision by Judge Hanson. But for
some odd reason, Mr Murphy decides to direct a line
of questioning towards me. Why don't you go to when
(06:03):
it takes out? Well, I X emotions personal, you can't
ski or anybody else. I wish you'd worked out with
forty four boats in christ and anything lower than that.
I'm the limed just scre in that quite a where
Pali from wrong, So get away she being in a
(06:29):
way spleen with emotions. Those ways you're basically saying you
knows a lot and you go n lear year at
each if you listens. But I'm just very frustrated, certainly
closing pace and everything, and that I gathered from the
(06:50):
judge her hand the time as far as follow the guy,
so very frustrating. Wait Rachel's um statement, you guys have
anything June or you're to um m. Well, and it's
(07:11):
just now that she said that, but it's then he
stay on that she said, I had to me be
honestly when you kin go like be thine to be
able to That's why I thought, you guys, you know,
I don't take that as any here how she acted
(07:33):
and you a wit or never spa. I just I
just don't take any you know from hers that she said.
It's hard that so you don't accept her apology or
feel it wasn't apology. I don't think it was an apology,
(07:56):
just like another another a fine ASPI are you a
where she's still never admitted lying. She never admitted lying
in her apoge. Yeah, she's the wis of course, especially
where she tried to tune of sad Day give the money,
(08:19):
say five days or older. She was there when Day
day and Chris she still was longer and she still
never Q. Is there some sense of satisfaction though that
the judge obviously paid attention and court and you know
(08:39):
she made her own statement. Is there is there any
satisfaction with today? I think you guys atually appreciates and
I don't feel it like she goes helpamly and thoughts
there helping fel Yeah, that this says that you didn't
(09:03):
feel as That's that's why I don't fuss her, is
that you see her it's not amotion at all like that.
She's the statement that okay, policy you should ever okay,
I'm sorry, but you feel from lock yourself from we
(09:24):
never see that entirest she's six years eight years no,
So yeah, Judge, I didn't feel that. Elma, she understood.
H I've gotten through the world years past. I appreciate
(09:50):
Judge her chamber for there is there a closure for
you guys. There's no cloture. I mean, nobody's in their
shows and nobody can put them says in their shows
on her twin sister, why I spokeingly different than hers
(10:11):
and I've been able somehow to put things aside, but
never to forget they are not able speaking hole Actually,
because I see all the postings, they cannot move on.
And then there's no gloves like a well move on,
you all say, yeah, true, I really as three hundred twins.
(10:47):
One of course she understood, So I have a new
stood up. The courts are undo at the end. Really
he'll keep going and I know my brother or not,
and he what he would like to see his justice
with every single one at eighty to do with this,
(11:09):
And it wasn't just the two lay or more. Unfortunately,
we are lost and we have to follow the goals
and we can't go by feels, which he always had
feelings about great about him and the best best thing
that we can come to terms with that those feels
translated in reality at least for her, not for the rest. However,
(11:33):
because it is another case, it's not to say that
if tomorrow or evidence comes for something greats that us
else count the fruition. That's the way I do that.
It is a verdict why you will attacted or our core. Yes,
we had a rarey that wore very hard. As as
(11:54):
the fail is imported out the positives. Uh, this is
always belitus prosecutions of the investigation and everything that we knew. Um,
this is something that we're we're going out looking forward
for the Ford did a great job, were did a
great job, and they taste while to get there. This
is for example, I think the uh, you know, the
(12:18):
system of work. Can you break it down for us
or the pounds and what you know? It's a little incasing, right,
So essentially U certain things that the court did today.
She had the option of branding forcation and she did
not do that. She also had the option of boring.
The two counts could grow up another, so she would
(12:39):
sure for the time at the same time with two
counts and the quarter sercises of discretion and site nozing events.
So she has as certain senses esecutively ter hers absolutely
right in the GOO system as well as the vast
before the stays that sess time um is linked to
the s private's help. So most says says, your after
(13:02):
time to her gives you a much wider sense in
range in California, accessor after crime or accessor after the
fat constitutes it's very holy prime and it has a
sixty two three month since this in So there's only
so much spore can do, which there's so much thing
we can do um as far as the time goes.
(13:24):
But um, you know, she's she's a convicted Feller and
she's going to give out in interestingly, you know when
you talk about justice in a case like this, for
the rest of her life. She she's playing a goat
her professional career. She's giving her masters in psychology right now,
and anybody that goes to Google it's ever gonna give
you just don't know that she's involved in this. She
(13:45):
think they're gonna know what her roles. They're gonna know
that she lied to the police. And from the part
of investigation she's delayed, you know, the the investigation she
heard these fable members and that's something that I thinks
can follow the most left. So part of this is
legal or it is uh social and I think the
lark or would immediately to the season that you got.
(14:09):
So yeah, So basically the maximus she can get is
four we four months. She had thirty two months and
you know, to me, the tick chargers jns UH and
snoymis looking the court and you better you know obviously
the failing you know, you want the MAXI for themerta
and you get it out. But good report did is
by why taking the under many days off the end
of that she most as serious of the mandatory supervision presascially,
(14:33):
even though it's done by the clation of parting. Now
by the new laws in California, gets essentially be a
role um. So she screws up, she can be violated
and sent back to prison. Whatever you max somebody else,
especially for the uh, you know, a relatively small amount
of time when you get it at PC thirty two
or it says you have back and out of it
to get it once you finished it. One the way
(14:54):
that judge did this, she's not done when she gets out.
She's gonna be when her mandatory supervision, she's gonna or
there's gonna be people checking her, you know, with her house.
You know it's she's not off the book in or
con for the week. So hey, thank you. You don't
fromation office structures that. And you know I'm gonna be
(15:15):
honest with you. I haven't done a PC vie too,
and so on. It's gonna changes in a lot. But
it's either I think it's three years and three out
and how much time will she actually served. Um, she's
gonna serve well, you'll defended on the good time to
arculations about the the jail. Um. Uh, she's she's gonna
(15:37):
serve it for a year at this whole four Uh.
But the she's she also she had a probably custody
so she's actually attacked by dr INDs. So she's gonna
be she's gonna be all in at a separate part
from jail now. So I think that may affect her
A good tongue of them, But again I'm not not
(16:00):
uncount for what can you just have a big picture
put the same perspective in terms of just everything from
start to end? I mean, where, what does you know?
Does this sort of cap everything? It's been such a
long journey for all of you guys, um it seems
like involved in here pot you know, a decade together.
(16:21):
So can you sort of like put into all in perspective?
You can only guitar about the case itself a little bit, Yeah, okay, sure.
So basically Dan Original, Dansa and lost you're got to
get married. Yeah yeah, yeah, defense that uh you just
lost planted this whole thing um in word to pay
for their wedding. He uh put together this diabolical, insane
(16:46):
plots of murder um Sam here and it's a kids
at m park every wedding. The proving um and then
use the cell phone to who were where it is
a junie keep ship to Sam's part, but to murder
her stage in to look like it was like he
was a brave and use SAMs the example or to
(17:07):
getting money out um in order to to attain his
financial posts. Uh. The case went on. In my view,
I think God lost a case too waiting long again
to try the mad people in his failings that were
suffering from cancer at the time. I mean that there
was that it was unnecessary in anti Della. But once
(17:30):
it finally got going around, we had a view. A
security court judge this case. It was so disgusting some
attacks is fus recused himself as as the first time
I wants to make history. We had a part out.
Uh they he was so disgusted with what he saw
the defensive viewer and he refused himself. And it's he
felt it you can help be fay so be. It
(17:52):
took to way too long, I make way too many
aperitis um, but we finally we we tried it in
front of a very good church by John Connolly followed
the law and everything right. He gave an offense and
me it wasn't like every opportunity to to to run
with virtually every theory all the way up to the
point of the defense. Wanted to dedicate the memory of
(18:15):
a ward Arro came back, he survived the Taliban, he
got murdered by the ships Ball community theater hack. I
think Gami the lass okay, so um, the power put
a stop to that idea you could offense that they
could not, and then the California laws says you cannot
assassinate the character to move. That's one of those things
that you shouldn't need a lot on that what we
(18:37):
have before held the defense of that, and offense has
been complaining about it ever since. When you got any
questions that I shouldn't you get any questions on that point?
N sure? Okay uh so uh. These families have gone
through a lot, they have They've been I can see
how a personal note, Um, they are the nicest people
(18:59):
you can have propope to meet. Um our brakes m
that's just our entire prosecution team. Um, you know, and
then tragically I'll say, you know we have um. The
media has been so professional the way I tell this,
I have enough but respect for the difficult job in
(19:19):
chos to do sensitivity that people are showing to these
family members, students process with one excel. There's good a
podcast comling right now that's been used as a platform
to detegrate that the member to see er um. I
think that creates unnecessary emotional part party but excamily numbers.
I think it's disgusting people like amounts to participate in
(19:42):
that podcast the postmas basic parment, it's likely not to
participate in that podcast. They provided in platforms or visualizing
as a past attorney to to essentially denigrate the victim
of assuming please without question to really this in this
in this word, did Sam Earth did nothing wrong leading
(20:04):
up to response. All the times we do with these
cases where the victims are in some way they're they're
using drudge and they're doing something wrong, the circumstances wind
up leading to their death. In this particular phase, who
was totally yes man served himself sure part Piper in
at is it you survived eighty two days? A hitter
row a baseball can heating that was over learning how
(20:25):
to teleman. We have tacts that absolute heroists. Great about
his apparent who came back in its word and now
his memories being dragon, but I liked the best him
and somebody who's actually giving a media platform, and I've
I've never seen anything like into a great threading. The
vast majority of professional journalism that Rage County rational would
(20:46):
touches that none of them are touched on except with
one person, and that is that that's very, very dissapoint
So is there anything you can say about you know,
these plasmia an if you guys lower, But as far
as you know an appeal being cloud or anything like
that moving forward or during the day, there's not at you.
(21:08):
It's not so every every death colter chase in uh
in california's an outfield. But I wouldn't give you a
chance for But that is your position that Daniel wass
Ac should not be on death row? Is that your position?
But thank you? All right? Any the thoughts of questions,
(21:30):
anything you guys wanted on? Yeah, anyway, doing any start soon,
any podcast and said in the first few years Sam
rs and kill kill anytime anywhere to bate him, but
he got to stop going after a dead man, a
(21:50):
quid dead man. That's all I've got to say. He
dead saying there's he puits there is such a thing,
because he had the decity to come up with examples
that were absolutely ridiculous, and we were very thankful to
the jewelers that didn't buy these games and standards, and
(22:13):
he had like a little child, and then he was
whining every time he were come into court, and we
had to sit through hours of his whining and offensive behavior,
especially towards Matt mc murphy. So if there is such
a thing or revittle finding claims against him, I wish
there would be a way. And we're still thinking about it.
(22:36):
And by then, I mean I I just don't know
what I faced with a person A h Okay, So
we just saw the unedited press conference, and I'd like
to first ask Mr Sanders how he feels about what
(22:59):
he just saw. Well, first of all, of course, you know,
these are family members going through an emotional experience. They
lost loved ones, and so I feel for them. Whether
they think that or not, I really I understand that
they probably don't, but I do. That's just and I
want to say that I've gotten to know you over
the last three years and I completely believe what you're
(23:21):
saying because I know that you have a lot of
heart and you feel for the victims families. It's difficult
if you're in a case like this to see what
we were doing and at some point to see it
anything other than you're just getting in the way of
our justice. So you know when the family member who
who's been involved and been present a lot is talking about, well,
(23:44):
I put up all these battles, you know, those are
things that I think we're all appropriate, and I think
historically they will prove out to be appropriate. We raised
a lot of important issues, and that's what happens in
a death penalty case. Um, there are more issues that
we were actually would have for to proceed on in pursue.
I've been a crime reporter for thirty years and I
(24:05):
know Mr Moxley is just about the same, and most
capital cases take about that length of time to get
into the courtroom. Would you agree with me, Mr Moxley,
Absolutely definitely, you know. So you know, in our case
took about the average period of time for a capital case,
and as we know, the case of Rachel Buffett took
locker than the capital case. But I know you're the
(24:27):
inclination of Mr Murphy is to kind of push it
back towards the Waia case, the Wasna case. In terms
of the other issues, there's there's just so much obviously
on the podcast. You I don't know the number of
hours that the podcast is taken. Almost seventeen hours of
content at this point and we're not finished. So I
think the issues with regard to Um, Sam her and
(24:51):
the prior incident took up about four minutes in total
of the entire podcast. So when Mr Murphy says the
podcast is about entic rating the memory Um, obviously that's
not the podcast. Right. Well, there was a question you
asked me. You asked me a question I answered it candidly.
It kind of mushroomed where Mr I asked you specifically
(25:14):
what you felt was one of the most egregious rulings
in the capital case that you defended and your with
your client Daniel Wazniac, and your response was about Sam's
past not getting in. Mr Murphy said essentially that we
are actually were almost out of bounds in asking for
the admissibility of that evidence. That's certainly not the case.
I mean that that will be a debated issue on appeal,
(25:36):
but that is once his personality, his character went in.
Absolutely it was appropriate for for us to ask and
I think for us to actually have it to be
admitted it wasn't. But that happens a lot. You know,
in all forms of criminal litigation, certainly in capital litigation,
the defendants are gonna lose. I don't think that has
anything to do with whether we should have appropriately pursued it.
(25:58):
We would have been incompetent candly if we didn't pursue
that issue. I think on the Appellate Council looking back
at our work would have said why in the world
did you not pursue that? And we disagree with the ruling.
But that's all that was. We asked for it, we
were and you felt the door was open to do
that when Mr Murphy discussed his time as a veteran right. So,
(26:20):
I mean, you know, we talked about this a little
bit in the episode. I don't want to labor the point,
but that was exactly what we were not seeking to
introduce it. In fact, as we've kind of said, we
weren't even really prepared to introduce it. We thought there
was going to be a limitation on what was going
to go before the jury, and then the next thing
we knew we were getting into issues like what was
going on in Afghanistan versus the other option for the prosecution,
(26:42):
which was just to rely simply upon the effect of
the loss in terms of loved ones and family and friends,
which also would have been extremely powerful, But they decided
to go to this next spot. We said that if
you're going to do that, then there should be a
whole picture. We lost. But certainly, again, the podcast hasn't
been about that or assassinating Sam Hairs. And I've said
(27:04):
from the beginning, no matter what somebody did or didn't
do before this moment in time, they shouldn't die. Nothing
like this should happen to anyone. So I've never moved
from that or suggested that his life at any less value.
Of course, me as a defense lawyer, we're seeing value
in lives that many people couldn't see. So we understand that.
(27:24):
And I feel that I would like to say on
the record, have I ever once, in all the times
that we've met, have I ever said to you, I
believe your client doesn't belong on death row? You haven't
said that, Thank you, Mr Moxley. That's your office, that
Santa and a court house, and nobody I've watched Alma
(27:48):
A thousand of those type of press conferences over the
years here in Orange County and twenty three years of
covering that courthouse and press conferences like that. I've never
seen that before. And that was other than the introduction
of you. That was pretty much what I've seen all
the time, the emotion from the victims and the prosecutor
making statements, but coming after you, that was rare. And wait,
(28:08):
you're shocked by that? To Paul, Oh, I'm totally shocked
by that. It's just, um, you know, it's a perfect
example of the unprofessionalism that lives in that office. And
to see that, I'm completely blown away by it. As
we all know here, this has happened before where a
prosecutor thought that Mr Wilson here was Moxley and went
(28:30):
after him. It's showing a little bit of unhingement there. Oh,
did that happen to you as well? Well? At a
which hearing? Was that Decry one of the Decry hearings. Paul,
you were you were in attendance and he thought the
prosecutor thought you, in fact were Mr Moxley. That's correct
what happened. Then he went, don't you were there? He came.
(28:50):
He came from behind the podium that he was standing at. Um.
I was behind Channel seven's camera and he came from
behind the podium and approached me, pointing his finger like
is is that? Mr Moxley? And I came from behind
the camera and approached him and let him know. No,
my name is Paul Wilson, and I'm from the Seal
(29:11):
Beach Salon shootings, which your office, and I'm a victims
family whether my wife died on the Yes, I think
it actually came. It came related to the Decry case.
It was the informant asker morial. It was. It was
the sentencing memorial a couple of days before Christmas, So
that was the informant. That was all about the informant
scandal and the Decry case, which is a separate case
(29:33):
from what this podcast has been focused on. But you
represented both clients, both Daniel Wesniak and Scott to cry okay.
I wanted to ask you Scott, Mr Moxley. UM, I
have two Scotts here, so I'm gonna go back to
the misters if that's okay. UM, I wanted to ask you,
Mr Moxley, how do you feel when you hear the
(29:54):
prosecutor not only roast me and my podcast, but he
made us suggect Sen that all the other journalists are
professional because they're not covering the podcast except for one,
and that's you. I take that as a badge of
honor because my position in covering any court hearing is
to my readers to tell the truth to my readers.
(30:16):
So I'm not editing out anything that's major. The motion
that Mr Sanders made in WASSN'TI Act pertaining to the victims,
his criminal history is part of the court record, and
there was a huge battling court and I'm not going
to sit there and go, well, I'm I'm not going
to share that with my readers. That's what happened in court.
It's a fact. That's not how I work. And on
(30:38):
some level, I think he was without mentioning your name,
he was referencing you because you have in fact been
covering the podcast. I mean, how do you take that statement.
I'm not worried about that. I think my position is more. Um, Look,
I've I've been covering trials here for many years and
the work that you've done has been outstanding. You've taught
(30:59):
I've said in the court room for hours and hours,
and in this case, you taught me many things that
I never knew. And um so I think focusing attention
on what on your work that was important to do,
the public needs to know what else you discovered. People
can disagree with your conclusions or whatever information you're putting
out there, but highlighting it for the public and digging
(31:20):
as deeply as you did, discovering so many important issues
that are still lingering there as they're trying to wrap
up the case, it's important. Well, it's nice to have
the appreciation and the respect of another fellow investigative journalist.
And I really do appreciate that I have been working
on this for three years. I know at one point
(31:41):
you said to me, I think you beat my ass
on this one, and you never have your ass beating
on anything. I mean, Scott Moxley, probably, I have to
tell you, of all the journalists I have read and
covered in my lifetime, I'm never been more impressed by
a person. And I just think what the work you're
doing singularly, I feel like you're an island onto yourself
(32:02):
in this town, and I am just so amazed at
the and you. You beat out everybody else. I got
you on one maybe, but you got it on every
other story that came out of this county for how
many years? Paul, I wanted to ask you how you
feel about watching this press conference. I know that you
were sitting in the courtroom in front of me and
(32:24):
we talked a little bit about the Thousand Oaks shooting
and how it brings back so much for you. Does
participating in the sentencing. I know you came for the verdict.
I saw you a couple of other times in the
courtroom for for Rachel Buffett successory trial. How does it
feel when you're watching the press conference? Well, as I
(32:44):
watched this right now, you know, it's sort of a
very emotional piece for me because I've stood in that
same position right there for almost seven years, and it's tough.
It's really tough for me, and I can understand the frustration.
But what I can also understand is from my experience
is we clearly see what's going on here, which is
(33:07):
the win at all costs mentality of that District Attorney's office.
I have a observation in a comment based on watching
Mr Morphy's performance during the press conference, one is that
the sister of the hers mentioned in her comments three
or four feet away from the prosecutor that she said,
(33:28):
wasn't it just wasn't the two. There's more as far
as the murders of Sam and Julie that it wasn't
just Daniel, was Nick alone. And that's the theme that
you've been exploring that seems to cause so much frustration
for the prosecutor. The other part is that when we
switched judges from Stottler, Stotler procused himself and John Connley,
(33:48):
a former Homer Side prosecutor and Matt's unit. When we're
covering the case, there's this incredible moment of bias. Matt
says he made perfect routlings, he never did anything wrong,
and he followed the law. There was one point where
Mr Sanders filed an important motion in the death penalty case,
(34:08):
and the and the judge sealed it, and he kept
it sealed, but he let Matt Murphy have it and
respond and write his own brief. We had for days
Murphy's response to what we couldn't read. He let that
be on the record. Remember that the dailies got to
write stories about Matt's response to something that was sealed.
(34:29):
That's that's not right, and he should be Both Matt
Murphy and Judge Connelly should be embarrassed about that. I
remember that quite well, and I'm sure you do as well.
Mr Sanders had to have been another frustrating moment in
a series, right, And that's part of you know, Look,
that's if you're candidly not like, oh, poor defense counsel,
(34:49):
but defense counsel. He's going to be up against a
lot of battles. So that's why we do have a
thick skin in the even these situations watching it, you know,
we're all gonna it hurts because you hate to see
family members convinced that you are this terrible figure. Yeah,
that's you know, nobody wants that. But the other hand,
(35:10):
as you've said before, they're in a terrible position. They're
in so much pain, and and the sister's right that
pain doesn't go away. So I understand, and I you know,
I go back and forth even with Mr. Her I
don't like a lot of the things he said, but
I also understand how much he hates what's happened to
(35:30):
he and his wife's lives. I mean, are a family man,
you understand that kind of pain. So you know, I
would rather they didn't hate me on an individual level.
I really would, but there's not much you can do
at some point. Well, I can only say that I
also joined you in that I wish Mr Hair didn't
feel the way he does about me. Now. I have
(35:53):
spent it quite a lot of time with him over
the years, because together we really did collaborate on this
and and share a lot of information. And I haven't
changed my opinion. I haven't moved off of my mission,
which is to uncover the truth about everything that happened
in the murder of his son and his friend Julie.
(36:16):
And I wish that he could see pass the four
minutes of a seventeen hour podcast that's still clocking, so
that he can appreciate that I'm still focused on the
end result, which is to make sure everybody pays. But
I do want to reiterate, just because this statement was said,
I don't believe Daniels next should have gotten a death penalty,
(36:36):
and and that's your opinion. And again I tried to
tell Mr Hair, I am not going to censor an
invited guest on my podcast. I will never do that.
I am a proponent, as I know Mr Moxley, as
we live our lives according to the First Amendment, and
you have a right to your opinion. I don't believe
you know, and it starts for me that I don't
believe these proceedings were completely fair from beginning to d
(37:00):
and so, and that's your opinion. I'd like to now
show you what, unfortunately happened after this press conference when
Mr Hare decided to walk over to me after its conclusion.
Editor's note, for the benefit of our listeners, I just
want to clarify that the gist of what you're about
(37:22):
to hear Mr Hair say to me is everything to
do with episode three where Scott Sanders mentioned Steve Hair's
son Sam Hair's history of being charged with murder, and
then in episode four I gave Mr Hair a chance
(37:46):
to respond to what Mr Sanders said about his son's background.
He had five minutes, and then Mr Sanders had the
opportunity to respond for five minutes. But it did take
Mr Sanders up until our air date to decide whether
or not he was going to engage in that conversation.
(38:08):
He finally did, and I didn't have any more time
left in my studio to give Mr Hair the immediate
chance to respond to Mr sanders comments. But I did
offer him the chance to go on the next episode.
Mr Hare declined because I believe at that point he
got upset after what he heard Mr Sanders say. So
(38:29):
here's the tape and you can hear the conversation that
happened after the press conference for yourselves up. I told
(38:51):
him he was he wanted to make it until the
very last day, and then he said, and I am
going to make just like season. And I said to you,
you want to come on the nick, I said, we
want responsible now all you musicable see if I spoke
you and I up until that point he wasn't. And
it respond he said he didn't want to get into
(39:12):
an engagement to you. I could want to feel that way.
You know what, I don't think I feel the first
you out here just a senser. I'm believe in the question.
She didn't give me a pen to immediately respond. Told
(39:34):
you you could any time you want if he hi,
you don't watch. So what you just saw was Mr
Hair coming over to me. And my understanding is he's
exasperated because he felt he didn't get the last word
what happened was after the episode, the episode three, where
(39:59):
I asked Mr Sanders about the ruling that he felt was,
of all of them, the one that upset him the most.
And obviously Mr Hair was very upset with the way
in which that conversation was framed. I spent about three
minutes talking about Sam's past. I don't think you spent
more than a minute talking about the ruling. And it
(40:21):
seems like he still has not been able to move
past that. And so he came over to me and
he said he wanted a chance to respond. I have
always given Mr Hair the opportunity to respond, and he
doesn't seem to remember that, I guess, but he's still
and I will state it for the record once more. You,
(40:43):
Mr Hair, always are invited to come on this podcast
and speak your mind and say whatever you want to
say about the way in which we discussed your son's
past in the context of this case. I'd love to
know how you feel about what you saw. Mr Moxley, Well,
I can't help but think about my first experience when
(41:06):
I met him after the murders, and and I was
at his house with his wife, and he was so emotional.
I spent maybe three and a half four hours there,
and he was full of anger and rage, and I
was worried about him when I left. And I've seen
him many times in the courthouse in recent years, and
(41:26):
what comes to me, not getting getting saving you for
the last it was just he's taken a deep breath.
He's able to smile more, even though it's never he's
never gonna get over what happened to his son. His
whole persona has taken a much lighter position. And you know,
I respect him for standing up and doing what he
(41:49):
thinks is right, but I also respect you, and I
know that's a difficult position. I've been in that position
as well, and it's unfortunate because I think Matt kind
of fueled that what he had said leading up to that,
those moments when it really wasn't necessary. I think that
Mr Murphy seems to be fueling the victim's pain in
(42:12):
his frustration with me and the podcast and the guests
that I bring on to speak their opinion. But I
do believe that it's Mr Murphy himself that's upset with
the things that we are discussing on this podcast, and
I think it would be hoove him to just be
straight about that, right, because I don't think it's fair
(42:33):
or it's right to be using the victims family's pain
that way. I mean, how do you feel about that, Paul, Well,
obviously I I don't agree with that. And um there
that office is very good at using the victims and
(42:53):
when they want to and when they need something. And
you know, I mean, this is tough for me to
com meant on this because those are tough shoes to
walk in. And I understand the frustration and the grief,
and you understand it firsthand firsthand, and it never goes away.
The healing never goes it never lets up, and the
emotion you can get carried away to that. And I
(43:16):
understand that, but you do if you're gonna, if you're
gonna be in this position I'm walking those shoes, you
have to you have to look at both sides, and
in this in this case, the big picture and the
big picture, and in this case, I mean, it's it's
it's much like mine, and there's there's a lot of
fault to be put on that d a's office. And
(43:37):
I did over and over. I met with Mr Hare
and his wife almost weekly for nearly three years, and
I always reminded him, I'm a journalist and I am
going to have to tell the story of your son's
past because it's part of the reason he was the
target for these murders, and I please accept that and
(43:59):
appreciate that. And he always acknowledged that. So it's it's unfortunate.
I know you're jumping in here to say, you know,
I still feel for him as I'm hearing that, because
I understand that he just there's still just a ton
of pain. And even with all of this, I look
at him and I go as much as he he
hates me, um at this moment and maybe forever, I
(44:23):
still feel badly for him, and I feel like, boy,
if he wants the last word, have it. I won't
say another word. You can say whatever you want about me.
And he said a lot of things about me in
a lot of context, and look, a lot of that
stuff I've just let roll, you know, off my back.
And that's it's just part of doing this work. People
are going to get very frustrated in experience like this.
(44:44):
So even listening to him now, I kind of wish
if I could do it all over again. I didn't
stop him from having the last word. Of course, I'm
just saying I kind of wish you would have because
I know that he feels like there's something that he
wants to say, and even though it's aimed at me,
I kind of wish he could have it. And if
he wants you, I certainly wouldn't make the assurance that
I wouldn't even ask you to come back on. So
if he comes back on, he he comes back on,
(45:06):
he can say whatever he wants. And I've and I
have presented that to him many times and I echo
that sentiment. Let me let me toss in here a
little bit that I I know, I've I've observed it firsthand.
There are many great people in d A's office who
do great victim service, incredible service over the years. I've
watched it, um. But I think what Paul's raising here's
(45:26):
an interesting point that sometimes it doesn't play out well.
He's clearly Mr Wilson's clearly a victim. And yet tell
me if I'm right, you were tossed out of the
District Attorneys building during a press conference when they found
out it was it was him, yes? Correct? What yes?
When they were announcing the Golden State Killer. I showed
(45:48):
up to attend the press conference, and initially they were
going to let me in and tell my name is
circulated around the office, and a gentleman by the name
of Paul Carbo came out and told me that I
was not welcome in there. And it was after the
cover story that I wrote featuring the two of them.
So let's let's get it in the context for our listeners.
You did write an article about the story about this
(46:11):
relationship which we're going to get into in a future episode,
the relationship between Mr Sanders and Mr Wilson, Paul Wilson,
And so it was after and it's basically a story
about what an unlikely pair, right um, Mr Mr Sanders
represented the person that killed his wife, and so yet
together they have formed this alliance to seek out and
(46:35):
try to shine a light on the on the corruption
that's going on in the justice system in Orange County.
And so after that article that you wrote, that's when
it happened. Yeah, it was probably a couple of weeks afterwards,
and an TONI was Rococcus was holding a big press
conference to announce the Golden States that they were they
were teaming up and making a progress and like I
(47:00):
show it up, just like the media. I stood in line,
I wrote my name on the piece of paper and
that was all they told me. At ten o'clock, open
the doors and you're ready to go in. And I
went outside the way. About five minutes later, Mr Carbo
came out and said, we've thought about this and we're
not going to allow you into this. You're not allowed
to come into doors today. I mean that's so I
(47:20):
waited until ten o'clock and everybody went in and I
attempted to walk through the doors and they escorted me
out again. They did, Yes, how did you feel about that?
It's a public place, a public place, I'm a citizen.
Why can't I attend? They're afraid of THEE I knew
(47:41):
about it, and it doesn't surprise me because Paul's been
up against a lot of this stuff, and I think
there's probably been more than one where you've been at
least they've wanted to kind of keep you away. And look,
he's not just a citizen, he's he's what the D's
Office usually treasures. I mean, he's a victim of a
very very serious case. So that's that's unusual treatment, but
(48:03):
it's less unusual when you considered for them the fact
that he has reached some mutual understanding with a person
they don't like very much. I guess that's me, and
who has taken an adverse position to them, explains that
it's he's His importance as a victim has become far
less um since he's spoken out about what he thinks.
(48:26):
So he's not he's not considered one of them. So
you're feeling the repercussions of choosing to once again look
at the big picture here and and make this a
journey that you've decided is important to you, absolutely, without
a doubt. How does that make you feel, Scott covering
this for so many years, such stuff happened. One of
(48:48):
the things I think is important for the listeners to
know is that in my article that the pivot point
for Mr Wilson was the realization that the distric att
Ernie's protest about how much he was for the victim
was really hollow. And there was a meeting you might
want to describe where it dawned on you, if my
memory is right, that you're looking at him and you
(49:11):
saw nothing in his eyes and basically said I'll make
the decisions I want, I don't, I don't need your
input something to that effect. Please please share. Yeah, sure,
this is when we had found out that there had
been a Scott You might want to chime in just
to refresh my memory, but there had been a deal
put on the table, and this would have been about
a year, year, year and a half, a little over
(49:33):
a year into the case. A little yep, it was.
It was in two thousand. There work several times actually
where it was suggested, um so I'm not sure which
time that was, but in two thousands have been one
of the first times it was introduced directly in in courts.
So us as the family members sitting in the courtroom
they wanted to share, were hearing this deal that they
(49:54):
were they weren't sharing it with us. We were hearing
Mr Sanders got saying that, you know, deals on the
table and they're deciding not to take it. And we
looked each other like, what deal? What are you talking about?
So as as as usual after court we would go
back into the Little d A's office and have a
discussion about what had happened, and of course it came
(50:16):
up and Mr Wagner, um Scott Simmons. Scott Simmons had
told us what was going on, and these are two
of the prosecutors. I just couldn't believe that was that
was out there and that we weren't. So I demanded
an immediate meeting with Tony himself. I got that meeting,
and it was very brief. It was the deal that
(50:37):
was being offered. We exactly what we got seven years later,
life life in prison without parole, special circumstances, pleading to everything,
everything that we ended up getting. Just it came seven
So you know, I remember sitting across from Tony and
Scott Simmons and Dad Wagner in there, and I emphasis
(51:00):
of Tony that I can't understand how you would have
this and not bring it to the families at least
to let us know, and why why would we just
hear this in court and not have any idea? And
he just looked at me with that callous and those
empty eyes and said to me, well, the reason is,
(51:22):
Mr Wilson, because it's not your decision, it's my decision,
and we are seeking nothing other than the death penalty,
plain and simple. That was the ends of the conversation.
So it was shocking, shocking. So getting back to the
press conference footage, Mr Moxley, you know Matt Murphy better
(51:42):
than anybody here today. What is your final observation? You
could see he was thinking about what he what he's
going to say. He's an incredibly articulate prosecutor, key controls
and dominates court rooms. There's no doubt has done that
for a long time. But going after you in that
way kind of cross the line. Why do you think
Matt behaved the way he did in the pressor? I
(52:05):
don't know. I don't know, Mr Sanders, why do you
think Mr Murphy acted as he did? Well, these aren't
things that he wants to talked about. You know, he
wants Woznia to just go out for twenty years and
and in his mind, hopefully be executed at that point.
He doesn't want to go through you week after week
(52:27):
analyzing whether the two cases are consistent, whether arguments are changing.
I mean, that's what he didn't talk about here, although
that's what I thought he was most upset about. Right,
He definitely right, he's upset because we've been talking about
the difference in the arguments and the different interpretations that
should be used for different pieces of evidence that's conspicuously
missing from what he said here and said he's he
(52:48):
used the thing that will rev people up right, Um,
you're not being fair to Steve her That's the kind
of stuff that he wants to get out there. He
doesn't want to talk about because he's free to You've
for to him many times. He can come to this
podcasts in writing. Yeah, and I know you've made it
so that you won't even have to worry about a
(53:08):
last word for me. He can be the last word.
He can speak as long as he wants. I imagine
you'd let him talk for a couple hours if you wanted,
and refute everything that's been sad. His press people said
that he would come on only if I retracted everything
that I've said, But that doesn't make any sense because
he is, as Mr Moxley just said, there's no question
he's articulate, he's smart, he's very good in the courtroom.
(53:28):
He doesn't need a retraction. If he owns this evidence
in the way he would suggest he does without saying
it here, he can do it. He'll powerfully refute everything
that I've said, all of my analysis. So, Mr Murphy,
if you're listening. You are welcome to come on the
podcast and speak your opinion, just like all my other guests.
(53:49):
The podcast has been out for nearly three months and
we have been able to develop by a listening base,
and some of those listeners send me comments, and the
overwhelming sense of the comments are that they're just it's
(54:09):
incredulous to so many. Why the d A didn't charge
it with murder. Well, you know we've talked about it
before on the podcast. I don't. I'm not going to
really take issue completely with whether he should or he shouldn't.
I think you can make those calls. He's made his call,
But the term came up when at all costs you
(54:31):
don't in the DA office has existed to date. You
try not to come back unsuccessfully, and that case, in
his mind may be one that there's a lesser chance
of success that that maybe he doesn't think at this
point is strong enough. Now you've developed a bunch of
evidence that I think would arguably help him quite a
bit that was actually given to him, A dossier of
(54:53):
ten pages of evidence that was in fact given to
him and in fact used in many instances. I sat
through that try all and I felt and I think
I've said this to you in a previous episode, that
he presented a case for murder right in the accessory
after the fact trial. And it's just ironic that our
(55:14):
listeners and jurors that I spoke to believed that she
was more involved in these murders, yet the prosecutor wouldn't
charge it with murder. And also, look, this is Steve
HER's number one mission, right, he wants accountability for all
people involved, and he has frustration because I said something
(55:37):
I won't even repeat at this moment, but ninety eight
percent has been your analysis of that and talking about
that evidence. And even here at the press campers at
the very end, what do you hear them saying. They're saying,
we still want accountability. And the one person who's been
pressing for accountability like none there has been, you, Thank
you I and I won't stop. And I think Ms
(56:00):
Or Moxley knows that passion right so much a part
of your life. Well, I just want to thank all
of you gentlemen for coming in today to to speak
to us on Sleuth and Mr Moxley, my colleague, thank
you for your time. And Mr Wilson, our condolences for
your loss and appreciate what you're doing on behalf of
(56:22):
Orange County and Mr Sanders, keep fighting the fight. Thank you.
Next time on Sleuth, we're going to surprise you with
a guest who I like to call my deep throat.
(56:46):
She's come forward since Sleuth has been published, with revelations
that will astonish you more than any other episode you've
heard to date. After three years of digging and sleuthing
on this case, we are fine only able to reveal
the definitive pieces of this murderous puzzle. You will not
want to miss a single minute. If you enjoyed this
(57:11):
episode of Sleuth, share it with a friend and be
sure to leave a rating or review. Follow Sleuth on
I Heart Radio, or subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts
so that you never miss an episode
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season
Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks and Gregg Rosenthal of NFL Daily join forces to break down every team's needs this offseason.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.