The Cheat Sheet: Removals and Racketeering

[00:00:00] Content Warning. This episode contains discussion of murder and sexual assault.

[00:00:06] Today on the Murder Sheet we have three cases that we're going to review for the Cheat Sheet.

[00:00:13] The first is the shooting death of Manuel Tehran, a 26-year-old activist in Georgia.

[00:00:22] The second is the 1975 rape and murder of Indiana teenager Laurel Jean Mitchell.

[00:00:31] And the third is the murders of Ford University of Idaho students,

[00:00:38] Zana Kernodal, Ethan Shapin, Madison Mogan, and Kalingen Salves.

[00:00:43] And that of course is heading towards trial right now with the defendant being Brian Coburger.

[00:00:48] My name is Anya Kane. I'm a journalist.

[00:00:52] And I'm Kevin Greenlee. I'm an attorney.

[00:00:54] And this is the Murder Sheet.

[00:00:56] We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews, and deep dives into murder cases.

[00:01:03] We're the Murder Sheet.

[00:01:04] And this is The Cheat Sheet, Removals and Racketeering.

[00:01:54] Why don't we start with this story out of Georgia?

[00:01:56] Because that really caught my eye the other day.

[00:01:59] And it's also the only case on our list today that we have not covered previously.

[00:02:04] Yes.

[00:02:05] So let's dive into it and maybe explain what it is that caught our interest about it.

[00:02:09] So this is a really controversial story.

[00:02:12] And hearing it from one side, it's a story about domestic terrorism and activists run amok.

[00:02:22] And to hear the other side is it's policing overreach and maybe even murder against activists who are opposing them.

[00:02:30] So it's very, very polarized.

[00:02:33] And the person at the center of this was named Manuel Tehran.

[00:02:39] They went by Torto Guita, which is Spanish for a little turtle that was their nickname.

[00:02:45] And they were 26 years old.

[00:02:47] They were an activist.

[00:02:49] And before we really get into what happened to them, we need to talk about the wider context.

[00:02:56] In the wake of the murder of George Floyd in 2020, there was a lot of activism and movements across the country dealing with policing.

[00:03:07] And even people who wanted to abolish the police or stop police overreaches of wide multifaceted movement.

[00:03:15] In Atlanta, this came to a head because officials wanted to set up a new training compound for police and firefighters in Decav County, which is where Atlanta is.

[00:03:30] And they honed in on the grounds of the former Longsons closed old Atlanta prison farm, which is since it's a forested area.

[00:03:39] Local activists did not want that because they already felt that the police had too much resources, power, whatnot.

[00:03:48] They were concerned that this is near a black community, a black neighborhood where a lot of black people live.

[00:03:55] And they were also concerned that it was going to be an environmentally devastating thing to rip out some of this forest and whatnot.

[00:04:04] So there was a kind of a movement to occupy that space by what became known as Stop Cop City.

[00:04:11] That was what these activists were being called and that's what happened.

[00:04:17] On January 18, 2023, there was a raid on the Stop Cop City activists.

[00:04:25] Georgia State Patrol Troopers, including a SWAT team went in, divided into different teams.

[00:04:32] They're going through very wooded area underbrush.

[00:04:35] They're looking for tents where these activists are staying.

[00:04:38] And prior to this, there had been conflicts.

[00:04:41] The police alleged that these activists were throwing rocks, leaving trip wires, throwing firecrackers at people.

[00:04:50] And so they get a number of the activists to leave.

[00:04:55] Then they find a tent where Tehran is enclosed in.

[00:05:00] And there is about two minutes of back and forth.

[00:05:03] Tehran is not leaving the tent.

[00:05:06] The police, notably six troopers are kind of in this situation with them.

[00:05:14] And they fire a pepper ball at him, which is like a non-lethal weapon.

[00:05:21] And then the police say that Tehran returned fire with a 9mm Smith and Wesson,

[00:05:28] which hit a trooper named Jerry Parrish, injuring him and sending him to the hospital for surgery, although he did survive.

[00:05:38] In response to that shooting, Mark Lam, Jonathan Salchito, Brylan Myers, Reynald O'Cagle, Roy Saw and Jerry Parrish returned fire.

[00:05:49] And they shoot and kill Tehran.

[00:05:53] So, now again, once again, this is a polarized story.

[00:05:58] So the police are saying this person fired at us and we returned fire.

[00:06:04] They were refusing to comply with orders to leave the tent and get off the property.

[00:06:08] So it's sort of a self-defense thing?

[00:06:10] A self-defense thing. But it's complicated.

[00:06:13] Tehran's family and other protesters there that day say that they wouldn't have done that and it was friendly fire that hit the trooper.

[00:06:24] Here's where it gets really complicated.

[00:06:30] The 9mm Smith and Wesson was seemingly through an investigation linked to Tehran.

[00:06:37] It was registered to their name.

[00:06:39] So that seems pretty open and shut.

[00:06:43] But while preliminary testing from the police indicated that they had gunpowder residue on their hands, at the autopsy none was found.

[00:06:55] What?

[00:06:56] In addition, body cam footage exists of the immediate aftermath of the shooting.

[00:07:03] None exists of the actual shooting itself.

[00:07:06] In the aftermath, police are heard on camera talking to each other basically saying things to be effective.

[00:07:15] Was that just friendly fire? Did you just shoot your own officer?

[00:07:19] So I don't know. It's complicated.

[00:07:23] So it's murky.

[00:07:24] It's very murky.

[00:07:25] Whether or not Tehran actually was firing at all, let alone of the officers.

[00:07:30] To me, it's like their gun was used there.

[00:07:33] So when I read that, I was like, okay.

[00:07:36] Well, just because it doesn't seem like something they would do, maybe their friends and family are kind of mistaken or acting on emotion.

[00:07:45] But the fact that they didn't have the gunpowder residue.

[00:07:48] I mean, I'm not informed enough about the forensics, I suppose I would be very interested in hearing from someone who could speak to actually that does happen.

[00:07:56] Sometimes it's not always on their hands.

[00:07:58] That's not necessarily a huge deal.

[00:08:00] But just reading it, I can understand why this is controversial.

[00:08:03] And I can understand why their family and friends are sort of speaking out and saying this needs to have an independent investigation.

[00:08:11] We're concerned that this was friendly fire and somebody who was not posing a real threat to anyone was killed.

[00:08:21] But the Dekalb County prosecutor ended up bringing in a special prosecutor who did decline to charge the troopers.

[00:08:31] Looking through that document, I'm seeing a bit of an argument of kind of like they believe that Tehran did the shooting,

[00:08:41] but also that the failure to comply and just creating the situation that they were in essentially led to escalation.

[00:08:50] And so that's the police story.

[00:08:54] There seems to be certainly some disturbing questions here.

[00:09:00] But without really knowing more about I think the forensics of the gunshot residue,

[00:09:10] it's a bit hard for us as laypeople to say just more of kind of summarizing what's been reported so far to give you a sense of some of the recent developments which I haven't even gotten to yet.

[00:09:21] This is just background.

[00:09:22] This is all the background and it's already disturbing because it's a bad situation, a trooper's shot that's terrible.

[00:09:35] This person was killed, that's even worse.

[00:09:38] And it obviously ended very badly.

[00:09:43] That murkiness aside, that much is clear.

[00:09:47] But recently, stop cop city protesters have gotten into the news again because Attorney General of Georgia, Chris Carr filed an indictment against 61 stop cop city protesters under Georgia's racketeering law,

[00:10:12] aka its RICO law.

[00:10:15] Before we get more into this, what is a RICO law?

[00:10:19] It stands for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970.

[00:10:24] But what exactly does that mean, Kevin?

[00:10:27] Well speaking very broadly, RICO laws were designed to give prosecutors and law enforcement a tool to use against organized crime.

[00:10:40] They were originally designed to be used to prosecute, for instance, members of the mafia.

[00:10:46] But as time is going on, they've been used in other contexts as well.

[00:10:52] And here it's they're being applied or they're trying to apply them.

[00:10:58] In this case, which some would argue they're trying to penalize and go after activists.

[00:11:04] And others would say no, they're trying to go after people who are committing domestic terrorism.

[00:11:10] Yes.

[00:11:11] Obviously it's one thing I think to use these kinds of laws against organized crime.

[00:11:18] But I think this situation is more controversial because many do just view these people as activists who are trying to advocate for a position.

[00:11:27] Maybe taking some extreme measures but not necessarily doing anything that rises to a level of terrorism.

[00:11:35] While others do see them as terrorists who have done a lot of harm.

[00:11:39] So it's just getting to a point though where it's creating controversy, creating some concerns.

[00:11:47] And what gets really weird in this one is that the government is using Tehran's diary.

[00:11:58] They were at least attempting to use it as evidence in the case.

[00:12:04] What is it in the diary they're trying to use?

[00:12:06] What is this diary?

[00:12:07] So in a motion filed by the state, they're arguing that the diary can prove that these dozens of 61 defendants are involved in a criminal conspiracy.

[00:12:23] And let's be clear here. Certainly I think there are some instances where it would 100% absolutely no doubt about it makes sense to use someone's diary in a situation like this.

[00:12:38] Let's say I kept a diary and I said, today Ani and I are going to go rob a bank.

[00:12:44] And I read that in my diary.

[00:12:45] And then the next day I say, boy Ani and I have fun robbing that bank.

[00:12:49] And then the police lawfully obtain a copy of my diary and they see Kevin is admitting to specific criminal actions.

[00:12:59] Yes.

[00:13:02] And they even attached the diary.

[00:13:04] So I mean they attached the diary as an exhibit so that was released to the public and the press and whatnot.

[00:13:09] So they want this out there.

[00:13:10] That's an interesting move.

[00:13:11] Yes.

[00:13:13] Within the diary there is expression of wanting to kill cops, burn cop cars.

[00:13:19] There is very anti-police and aggressive and violent sentiment expressed here.

[00:13:24] Drongs of cop cars on fire.

[00:13:26] So it very much depicts that violence against police, violence against the authorities.

[00:13:34] Did they talk about specific acts with specific people or was it just general?

[00:13:38] But the activists are saying is that many of them who have been indicted don't even know Tehran.

[00:13:45] So they're, you know, it's like this guy doodling doesn't have anything to do with me.

[00:13:51] So I may be charged with a crime and some of the evidence against me may come from a diary written by someone I never even met.

[00:13:58] According to the Guardian, only a dozen of this 150 page document were even of the pages here were even penned while Tehran was at the stop cop city movement.

[00:14:13] So there you know, there's the argument there that like it's not like this is predominantly about his activity with them.

[00:14:21] It's more of getting into their worldview.

[00:14:26] So I mean, it's a controversial move for sure because it's.

[00:14:30] Yeah, I'm curious about your opinion. Certainly we cover the Delphi case a lot.

[00:14:36] And in that case, there's an instance where the defense filed a Frank's motion and they included a lot of information that some people felt wasn't needed.

[00:14:46] And some people argue they just do that because they wanted to get that information out there.

[00:14:50] How do you feel about in this case them including a copy of the diary in the filings?

[00:14:58] I think based on what I've read about what the diary contains, I'm very uncomfortable with it because a lot of it seems to have been written prior to Tehran's involvement with this movement.

[00:15:09] And the movement is at the center of these recent indictments to give you an example again.

[00:15:14] This is reporting from the Guardian and to be clear, the judge in this case hasn't ruled whether or not this can be admitted.

[00:15:20] So that's still a bit up in the air.

[00:15:23] But you know, Tehran's writing about like going to meetings of the industrial workers of the world, aka the Wobblies, right?

[00:15:31] I mean, the IWW they were a member of the IWW.

[00:15:36] You know, it seems like there's more about that than there is about stop cop city.

[00:15:42] So, you know, they're involved in leftist political activity.

[00:15:48] Whether or not whether or not anyone likes their politics or likes what they're doing, it just seems like when we're talking about these 61 other people, I don't really fully understand the relevance.

[00:16:00] It's possible that the judge can look through the diary and say, I imagine maybe like some of this is relevant and I would hope that they would then pare it down.

[00:16:08] But basically, applying a couple of crude doodles of cop cars on fires and kill cops.

[00:16:15] Again, we may find that disturbing.

[00:16:17] We may not like that, but I'm just more of talking about how it's then applied to this wider case about other people who are not necessarily making those same statements or drawings or whatnot.

[00:16:29] And I just want to repeat myself.

[00:16:31] I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea of prosecutors making available to the public something which may or may not even be evidence in the case because they can't really be considered evidence until we have a ruling from the judge.

[00:16:43] So that makes me uncomfortable.

[00:16:46] It makes me worry about the effect of this on a jury pool.

[00:16:50] And based on what we're reading, it makes me uncomfortable about the relevance of some of this.

[00:16:58] And I mean, like the judge, this is in Fulton County, so the judges, Kimberly Esmond Adams, she ruled on basically that it should be sealed.

[00:17:10] So she's sealed it, but it was already up for a while.

[00:17:12] So the media got it.

[00:17:14] So you know, the horses out of the barn, so to speak.

[00:17:19] Yeah, it's concerning.

[00:17:21] The case, I'm glad you flagged it with me because it definitely raises some questions.

[00:17:26] And there's some disturbing questions here about the law, how it's being applied here.

[00:17:31] Obviously, I think everyone, most people I think could probably say, well, we don't really like domestic terrorism.

[00:17:36] That's not a good thing.

[00:17:37] But what's the line?

[00:17:39] And I think we tend to prefer to see people being punished for their own actions and not like some sort of form of collective punishment.

[00:17:47] And you don't want to get into a situation like that where somebody is law abiding essentially and is being sucked into something because they happen to have an affiliation with a group that is doing bad things.

[00:18:04] Or maybe some of the members are doing bad things.

[00:18:08] So that's just our initial reaction to some of this.

[00:18:10] Obviously, we've not really gone in depth into it, but it's worth noting that this stuff is going on.

[00:18:18] I think next case is a little bit closer to home for us.

[00:18:22] Is this the Laurel case, I believe?

[00:18:24] Yes.

[00:18:25] So this is the murder of Laurel Jean Mitchell.

[00:18:27] We've covered that case pretty extensively on the murder sheet to recap Laurel was 17 years old.

[00:18:32] She was abducted and murdered in 1975.

[00:18:35] And only just recently, Indiana State police posts in the Fort Wayne district cracked the case seemingly they had DNA.

[00:18:43] And actually it was crack right after or shortly after we did our episode.

[00:18:48] We did our episode, our first episode on this.

[00:18:51] It was still an unsolved cold case.

[00:18:53] And so the fact that it was solved so soon afterwards led some people to jump to the conclusion that our episode somehow played a part in that.

[00:19:01] Or that we knew in advance that it was happening.

[00:19:03] We had some sort of advanced word that the case was about to be solved and neither one was true.

[00:19:08] Don't give true crime podcasters that much credit.

[00:19:10] Most of the time, we have very little impact on anything.

[00:19:13] We're just telling stories.

[00:19:15] We're just telling a story about a case.

[00:19:17] But we appreciate everyone who was congratulating us on that.

[00:19:20] It just, we don't deserve that.

[00:19:22] No.

[00:19:23] State police made the bust on that one.

[00:19:29] But we were very gratified to hear that arrests have been made because it gives hope to all cold cases that even if something is incredibly old, there can be progress.

[00:19:37] There's been some really intriguing, bizarre back and forth with the Indiana department of correctional in this one that I've been really like sucked into today in particular.

[00:19:48] And I guess for a little bit of context, as Anja mentioned, this crime happened back in the mid 70s, which was a long time ago.

[00:19:56] So naturally, the people who have been arrested for this crime are themselves older.

[00:20:04] Yes.

[00:20:05] And those men are Fred Bandy, John Wayne Lehman.

[00:20:08] Bandy is a convicted child molester.

[00:20:12] Not much interesting going on with his case right now.

[00:20:15] The pretrial conference that's next listed is on February 5th, 2024.

[00:20:20] So no current trial day to set up on my case.

[00:20:23] But again, he was unfortunately victimizing other children in the interim.

[00:20:29] He's innocent until proven guilty, but that's certainly a disturbing revelation.

[00:20:33] His alleged co-perpetrator John Wayne Lehman, who's also charged with Laurel's murder, does not have a criminal record.

[00:20:41] He does seemingly have some health issues though.

[00:20:44] Earlier on, this is all happening in Noble County.

[00:20:47] The Noble County Sheriff Max Weber filed a letter with the court essentially saying,

[00:20:52] we can't take care of him.

[00:20:54] He has all this medical equipment he has to be in a cell by himself.

[00:20:57] We are too small as a jail to deal with this.

[00:21:00] We need help from the Indiana Department of Correction.

[00:21:04] We've talked about this on a previous cheat sheet, but to recap, there was an email back and forth between Noble County officials and the Indiana Department of Correction and the Indiana Department of Correction.

[00:21:16] Very bluntly said, Lehman doesn't meet our criteria.

[00:21:21] We're not going to take him from you.

[00:21:23] Go away.

[00:21:24] They didn't say go away, but that was kind of the vibe.

[00:21:26] And how does that work out for the Indiana Department of Correction?

[00:21:29] Well, not so well.

[00:21:33] What happened was there was some kind of in-chambers meeting with the powers that be.

[00:21:46] So the judge is Michael Kramer.

[00:21:49] And that's sealed.

[00:21:50] It's been sealed for confidential information.

[00:21:52] We don't really know what happened there.

[00:21:54] But right after that, over the summer, Judge Kramer ordered Christina Regal, the commissioner of the Indiana Department of Correction to appear before the court on August 24th.

[00:22:10] And this is the exact quote, to show cause why she should not be punished for contempt of this court's orders in this case that were issued July 17th, 2023.

[00:22:19] Again, July 17th, 2023, that's sealed.

[00:22:24] I think we can guess what it is.

[00:22:26] It had something to do with where Lehman should be housed.

[00:22:30] Jail versus DOC.

[00:22:33] And so here we have the judge in Noble County, essentially threatening to issue contempt of court filings against a commissioner of IDOC.

[00:22:45] So just some drama.

[00:22:48] What was the outcome?

[00:22:50] Well, IDOC folded seemingly.

[00:22:52] Well, that's my interpretation.

[00:22:54] I think that so a lawyer filed into the case representing Regal.

[00:23:00] This is David J. De Bruyne.

[00:23:02] He's the senior counsel for the Indiana Department of Correction.

[00:23:06] And he filed in on August 18 saying that IDOC would take Lehman.

[00:23:18] There was a communication error.

[00:23:20] That's why it didn't process earlier.

[00:23:22] It wasn't that they were just saying no.

[00:23:24] There was some misunderstanding and that as of August, Lehman was being held at the reception and diagnostic center.

[00:23:32] And now we actually have more information about where Lehman is.

[00:23:35] He is currently at Miami Correctional Facility, which is a pretty tough prison to be honest from what we've heard.

[00:23:44] That's I remember one of the keg incline hearings we were sitting there and then a person was brought up.

[00:23:50] He looked kind of scary.

[00:23:52] Kind of had an intense vibe about him and they were talking about how he murdered his cellmate there with a shiv.

[00:24:00] So it's I'm sure more dangerous than the Noble County Jail, but it also has more resources.

[00:24:09] And so the problem again with Lehman is this like the physical issues he has because he is older.

[00:24:15] He has all this medical equipment.

[00:24:17] He has to be in his own space.

[00:24:20] The medical equipment could be dangerous to other inmates.

[00:24:23] So that's effectively what happened here.

[00:24:27] Yeah, you had a little standoff local authorities via the statewide authority of the Department of Correction.

[00:24:33] And just to be clear my own mind, were there any indications that Lehman's attorney opposed him being transferred into the Department of Correction?

[00:24:42] There were no notes that I saw that indicated that Lehman's team was opposed to this.

[00:24:49] I imagine if there was any objection, we would have seen it by now.

[00:24:54] Interesting.

[00:24:56] And as for Lehman, what's next?

[00:24:58] Well, there is a pretrial conference on January 22nd, 2024.

[00:25:04] Move on to Idaho.

[00:25:05] Let's move on to Idaho.

[00:25:07] One thing that's been really intriguing to me about the Idaho cases, you have one area where the prosecution and Brian Coburger's defense team is walking in lockstep.

[00:25:17] And that is on the issue of the media being super annoying and terrible.

[00:25:24] I'm being a little facetious, obviously, but they are both sides have raised a lot of concerns about the amount of attention this case has gotten, the rights of the defendant in all of this.

[00:25:36] And conduct of media within the courtroom.

[00:25:40] We have to note our bias as people who are journalists and who are doing journalism, we're going to usually be on the side of the media saying there should be cameras in the courtroom, there should be more transparency.

[00:25:54] Yes.

[00:25:55] Obviously legitimate concerns about cameras in the courtroom and what they might pick up.

[00:26:01] But I don't feel that those concerns generally warrant removing cameras from the courtroom.

[00:26:07] They just warrant being careful and giving clear instructions about what the cameras can and cannot pick up.

[00:26:14] An obvious example, I believe you might even be mentioning this in a few minutes is a camera in the courtroom could in theory zoom in on papers on the attorney's desk.

[00:26:27] And that would clearly be inappropriate.

[00:26:30] But there's a way to deal with that just tell them don't do that.

[00:26:34] Right.

[00:26:35] And the defense and the prosecution are up against the media interveners.

[00:26:41] So there's a number of different news outlets that are filing into the casing.

[00:26:46] We need to continue to have, you know, cameras in the courtroom because it's, you know, First Amendment rights and Kelly Gonzalez's family is also very much on that side of things saying we want the transparency.

[00:26:59] Now it's kind of come to a bit of a draw on November 17th 2023.

[00:27:07] Judge John Judge ruled a partial victory for the defense and the prosecution.

[00:27:14] They're going to remove cameras from the courtroom.

[00:27:18] All cameras still in video, at least those that are operated by media, the reporters, the journalists, the camera operators.

[00:27:27] But they're going to still videotape it.

[00:27:31] It's just going to be a court operated video system.

[00:27:35] So that allows for the video feed to still be accessible to the public and for people to watch along and for the media to still get those footage.

[00:27:46] But it's saying that the media messed up too many times to continue to be doing it themselves.

[00:27:57] The judge hat tips the defense's motion to remove cameras from the courtroom, which I think I was a bit critical of.

[00:28:03] He does, based on what they said, feel that in some instances the media was zooming in on Colburger too much.

[00:28:11] The judge was saying they're making him look guilty.

[00:28:14] They're making him look crazy.

[00:28:16] They're zooming in on him to make him look sinister and doing all this stuff.

[00:28:19] And the judge is saying, yeah, they were.

[00:28:22] And the only way to really prevent that is to kick him out and just do it myself basically.

[00:28:31] Not himself.

[00:28:32] He's not going to be going around with a little camera like a wedding videographer.

[00:28:35] They're just going to do it in-house.

[00:28:39] People have a right to the information.

[00:28:42] They have a right to see the pictures in my view.

[00:28:44] They don't necessarily have the right to have very super dramatic footage with like lots of close-ups of Colburger or his attorneys.

[00:28:52] Yeah, as much as I want to side with the media, I kind of have to acknowledge that that is fair.

[00:29:00] And I just hope that this doesn't preclude anyone's access to this.

[00:29:05] It doesn't sound like it will.

[00:29:08] And I can understand why it would be frustrating for the media outlets.

[00:29:11] The judge notes to be clear, he's saying, I'm not accusing all the journalists and media outlets of violating what I said.

[00:29:20] I'm not.

[00:29:21] Most of you guys are great, but doing this court-operated video system will just allow me more confidence to know that my orders are being followed correctly and nobody's goofing around.

[00:29:33] And there's just seemingly some people are not listening to me when I'm saying, don't just zoom in on him.

[00:29:43] He also cited as issues like the fact that witnesses are going to be filmed, possibly inappropriately victims might be filmed or there's going to be photos and stuff.

[00:29:56] And he deserves a fair trial by an impartial jury and ultimately that has an important weight to it as does the First Amendment rights.

[00:30:06] So he also kind of indicated that the media interveners didn't really quite, I mean this is more of a procedural issue but they didn't quite really have a right to intervene in this situation.

[00:30:18] But he was going to view what they filed as a friend of the court brief.

[00:30:24] So, you know, I think this is probably a pretty even-handed way.

[00:30:30] I suppose we'll have to see the product if there's really a lot less going on or things are kind of seem less transparent going forward than maybe it is more concerning.

[00:30:41] But the way it's been outlined here at least, I'm glad that at least there's going to be continued filming.

[00:30:47] And I hope that that's something that's done at most high-profile trials because I think in most cases transparency is a good thing.

[00:30:58] What do you think?

[00:31:00] I support transparency.

[00:31:02] What happens in court as much of what happens in life, it's a series of compromises.

[00:31:08] It's a series of balancing competing interests.

[00:31:12] And it sounds like the judge is really making an effort to do that in a reasonable way.

[00:31:18] We hope you guys have a fun the rest of the day.

[00:31:43] If you're interested in joining our Patreon, that's available at www.patreon.com.

[00:31:52] If you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests, you can do so at www.buymeacoffee.com.

[00:32:03] We very much appreciate any support.

[00:32:06] Special thanks to Kevin Tyler Greenlee who composed the music for the murder sheet and who you can find on the web at www.kevintg.com

[00:32:36] Thanks again for listening.