12:00

that they are reporting on something

12:02

that is public and

12:04

they are merely saying, why

12:06

are the myrdol's name all

12:09

over the investigative file? This

12:12

wasn't Sandy Smith saying,

12:15

Stephen told me about Buster

12:18

and Stephen. This is

12:20

other people. You know, when

12:22

you open a defamation case and I

12:24

talked about this on

12:26

my weekly recap, the defendants

12:28

are the ones that will control

12:30

the case, they get to take

12:32

discovery and it's broad based discovery

12:35

on everything having to do with Buster

12:37

that would be relevant to his reputation.

12:40

It's not only relevant evidence that you

12:42

get to discover, but you get to

12:44

discover any evidence that ultimately could be

12:46

admissible. So you would ask, well, what

12:48

do you mean? Well, I'm going to

12:50

take depositions of all Buster's friends. I'm

12:53

going to find out, has he ever

12:55

been along with Steve and has it

12:58

been parties together? What

13:01

did you hear about? Let's clarify this, Eric,

13:03

because I feel like you got sort of

13:06

maligned for saying this. You said the

13:08

same thing on Twitter and you went

13:10

on Vinnie

13:12

Politans show and you were sort of

13:14

attacked for having this opinion, which is

13:17

that just like you said, Buster's going

13:19

to be asked these questions. And I

13:21

think the simplistic view or the simplistic

13:23

retort that you got to that was

13:25

you're making like, could it possibly be

13:27

that Buster's innocent? Like, why are you

13:30

insinuating that he might have something to

13:32

hide in those questions would be damaging

13:34

for him to answer on the record?

13:37

So just clarify your opinion on that,

13:39

just to clarify your position, because you're

13:41

not saying, oh, Buster has stuff to

13:43

hide. Everybody has stuff to hide. But

13:45

you're saying that this is what's going

13:48

to happen. It's going to be very

13:50

invasive in his life. Is that right?

13:52

Yeah, he can't control the discovery process

13:54

limited to here's only the questions I

13:56

want to answer. You have very financially

13:59

well-heeled defendants. meaning

22:01

they said the Murdoch boys, so it

22:03

could have been Paul. We've

22:05

actually gone further and said we have

22:07

no evidence to date that

22:09

any Murdoch had anything to do

22:12

with Stephen's death. Right, but

22:14

when I started talking to these

22:16

documentary companies years ago, back in

22:18

2021, and

22:20

they were trying to get the lowdown of everything, and

22:23

a lot of them, not necessarily the

22:26

ones that were named, but some

22:28

of the ones that were named, wanted

22:30

the Buster thing to happen.

22:32

Like, they really wanted the

22:34

Buster thing to exist, and

22:36

asked questions in a way

22:39

that I got icky

22:41

about because I was like, I

22:43

don't really trust these people, and I

22:46

feel like that they are wanting something,

22:48

and this is not how journalism is

22:50

supposed to work. I don't know how

22:52

documentaries are supposed to work, but you

22:54

are not supposed to come up with

22:56

a conclusion and then have people fill

22:58

in the blanks. Right. And I

23:00

want to talk more about that after a quick break. It's

23:09

been 13 years since 11 bodies were

23:11

found on Long Island. Police

23:13

have arrested Rex Huerman for at least

23:15

six of those murders. On

23:18

Unraveled, the Long Island Serial

23:20

Killer, a podcast from I.D.

23:22

Learn about Huerman's ongoing trial,

23:24

the victims, other key players,

23:27

and the serial killers that may

23:29

be linked to this ongoing investigation.

23:32

Listen to Unraveled, the Long Island

23:34

Serial Killer, wherever you get your

23:36

podcast. Sometimes

23:40

the docs will bring all of the irritants

23:42

from the outside inside, and it feels like

23:44

there is no place to hide. So what

23:47

is the solution? Your doctor, the air purifier

23:49

that filters out 99.99% of dangerous contaminants so

23:51

your lungs

23:54

don't have to. This includes

23:57

allergens, pollen, pet dander, dust

23:59

mites, mold spores, and even

24:01

bacteria and viruses. We can

24:03

now all breathe easy thanks

24:05

to Air Doctor, and

24:07

it is so quiet. We even put

24:09

one in the studio. Air Doctor comes

24:11

with a 30-day money-back guarantee, so if

24:13

you don't love it, just send it

24:15

back for a refund, minus shipping. Head

24:18

to airdoctorpro.com and use promo code COJ,

24:20

and you'll receive up to $300 off

24:22

Air Purifiers. Exclusive

24:25

to podcast customers, you will

24:27

also receive a free three-year

24:29

warranty on any unit, which is an additional

24:32

$84 value. Lock

24:34

this special offer

24:36

by going to

24:38

airdoctorpo.com and use

24:41

promo code COJ.

24:48

I felt the same way, Mandy, when

24:50

I was last spring, when we were

24:52

doing the exhumation, and I

24:55

was doing the interviews, they

24:57

were trying to goad me

24:59

into naming Buster, or

25:02

naming a myrtle, because they wanted

25:04

that link. It's almost like

25:06

they wanted this story to keep continuing,

25:08

you know what I mean? The myrtle

25:11

story. Right, they did. I saw it for myself.

25:15

Sandy did a few interviews at our house,

25:17

and I just sat in and watched, and

25:19

I was grossed out. I will say by

25:21

some of the questions that she was being

25:24

asked over and over, and she did a

25:26

really good job of saying, look, I don't

25:28

know if it was Buster or not. We're

25:31

just happy that the investigation

25:33

is continuing, and

25:35

we are open to

25:38

wherever it leads, but we're not

25:40

saying that it's Buster. But what

25:44

I learned is a

25:46

lot of times, to

25:49

make the most interesting documentary, to

25:51

make the most salacious documentary, you

25:54

have to have some people who

25:56

are, how do I say this?

25:58

This is gonna be good. To

26:01

make it legit, you got to have somebody like

26:03

Mandy Matney who is in the belly

26:05

of the beast giving a comment. To

26:08

make it legit but not to make it

26:10

good and that's the thing that we knew

26:12

from the beginning. Yeah. Right.

26:14

I mean, I was getting calls from

26:16

sources that were saying, I sat for

26:18

nine hours for this document. I don't

26:20

even know what I said at the

26:22

end because they

26:25

sit you down, they convince you to do it. You

26:28

sit down and it's kind of like a

26:30

police interview where you just end up talking

26:32

and you don't even know what you're saying.

26:36

They're not feeding you while you're... They're

26:39

not feeding you and also this is

26:41

a first time situation for

26:43

everybody that's involved. No

26:46

one was seasoned in the documentary

26:49

media circus that was the

26:52

Murdoch's. So I still

26:55

to this day think one of the best

26:57

decisions that I ever made was to back

26:59

out from all of those documentaries. The

27:02

only interview that I did for years

27:04

was 2020 and even that at times

27:06

felt like they were

27:10

trying, they had questions that

27:12

were tricky. We did

27:14

a CNN with... Randy Kaye.

27:17

She was a nice... Yeah, she was... That was

27:19

a good one actually. I don't remember feeling... She

27:21

was good. I like the CNN one. But

27:24

speaking to what you're talking about, I

27:26

remember one of them that I was doing and it

27:28

might have been, I think I've only done two other

27:30

than the CNN one, but I think I

27:32

might have done this in both, but I remember turning to

27:34

the camera and being like, hi Jim, hi

27:37

Dick, because I was imminently aware

27:39

and they thought that the producers of the

27:41

show, whatever I remember them saying to me

27:43

like, why are you so worried that they're

27:45

going to subpoena this video? And I was

27:47

like, because they will. I'm

27:50

not going to say anything that... You

27:53

just go and I was ultra careful because I

27:55

knew anything I say that's

27:57

not used in the show can be subpoenaed, right?

28:00

So I'm not going to say anything

28:02

that could get me in trouble, but certainly not anything

28:04

that they're going to edit to make a certain way.

28:08

But even then, even going in and

28:10

knowing that this is, you know, got

28:12

to be careful, by hour nine you

28:15

truly are so exhausted and

28:17

a police interview is the

28:19

perfect comparison because you're

28:21

like, I did it. Like,

28:24

that was me. Let's just... Yeah,

28:27

and you don't. Right. Until you're

28:29

in that situation, you don't understand

28:31

it. Liz and I laughed. We

28:34

did the CBS one with the lady that

28:36

she was really nice. She was pregnant at

28:38

the time. Right. I mean, it

28:40

went on for six hours and they used one line and

28:42

I'm like, you know,

28:45

you forget what you're saying at a

28:47

certain point. Speaking of that, so that...

28:50

Okay, so yes, they did use one line, didn't care.

28:52

The less of me in it, the better. But

28:55

Mandy made a comment about how they wish...

28:57

She was just like, I wish they had

28:59

used more Liz, unless Michael DeWitt. And

29:02

that comment got picked up and

29:04

shared all over Twitter. And

29:07

Michael DeWitt, who is a reporter for The Hampton

29:09

Guardian, and just so people listening out there, The

29:11

Hampton Guardian is the paper that did this story

29:13

in 2015, in November 2015, about

29:18

the Stephen Smith case in which the

29:21

newspaper sort of allowed it

29:23

to go as far as saying that it was

29:25

a prominent family who was involved and no one

29:27

is saying who it was. So they didn't outright

29:30

say who it was, who kids

29:32

were saying it was at the time, but they got close.

29:35

And Michael did not write that story, but

29:37

he was the editor on it. And he

29:39

did not write that story. He admitted to

29:41

Mandy and me at Stephen's gravestone ceremony about

29:43

how he didn't have the guts to write

29:45

that story, that he wished he had the

29:47

guts to write that story. He

29:49

was afraid of the Murdochs, is basically right, Mandy?

29:51

Am I getting that right? What he was sort

29:53

of alluding to, right? So

29:56

he spoke about that moment in time

29:58

on Netflix. that's what sort of gotten

30:00

him in trouble. But he was in all

30:03

the documentaries, it seemed, he was just popping

30:05

up all over the place. And because he

30:07

was from Hampton, and that was his coverage

30:10

ground, he obviously comes to the table

30:12

with more authority on the matter, right?

30:14

So Eric, while you say that Michael

30:16

DeWitt was used as an anchor to

30:19

keep this in Hampton County, I do

30:21

think that the accusations Buster is making

30:24

are legitimate ones. But he could

30:26

have made him against others too, right? Not just against

30:28

Michael. No, no, because this is and this

30:30

is where we get into the area of what,

30:33

how journalists do it differently.

30:35

Okay, he admits he

30:37

admitted on Netflix that he found

30:39

some truth to the rumors. So

30:42

automatically, that's a little dodgy, right?

30:44

That gets a little further down the road gets

30:46

a little further. In addition, he admits

30:48

to the Murdoch's leaving a

30:51

bad taste in his mouth. So now

30:53

he's talking about having some sort of

30:55

isn't that opinion formed into that opinion? Yeah,

30:57

it could be we have a bad taste

30:59

in our mouth about some of the myrtles

31:01

don't we 100% but we don't present that

31:04

there's a difference. Yes, that's an opinion, right? But

31:06

what he's saying is in 2015, I had a

31:08

bad taste in my

31:11

mouth with the Murdoch's now we've been vocal

31:13

about that all the time, because we don't

31:15

claim to be unbiased about that. He claims

31:18

to be unbiased and unbiased reporter, correct? I

31:20

mean, that's, that was the

31:22

that's why I'm talking about the legitimacy

31:24

issue. He is was used

31:26

by these documentaries because he

31:28

comes off as more legitimate,

31:31

sorry, okay. Mandy

31:33

makes this comment saying I wish Liz was in

31:35

this more. So she starts

31:37

getting attacked online. But Michael

31:39

Dewitt takes this victim role in

31:43

like, Mandy's some, some sort of

31:45

like, bully out there in Hollywood

31:47

super villain. Yeah, yeah, the super

31:49

villain who's like, bullying him, he's

31:51

just a squirrel trying to get

31:53

a nut and that Mandy is

31:55

like somehow bullying him by expressing

31:57

this opinion semi privately and getting

31:59

shared But his name,

32:01

it turns out, is in all of these

32:03

major issues, like

32:06

with Becky Hill as well. Michael

32:08

Dewitt is named in her ethics complaint.

32:10

It's named, his

32:12

actions with Becky are named in her

32:14

ethics investigation, at least one of the

32:16

counts, I believe. So, because she

32:18

allowed him to use the courtroom, I guess, for

32:21

a book signing. But it's weird

32:23

to me that this entire time, you

32:26

know, we get all these defamatory things

32:28

said about us, frankly. And

32:31

here we are, it's going right back

32:33

to the original, the squirrel

32:35

just trying to get a nut. Yeah,

32:37

and I mean, I said, what

32:39

I said on Discord, and

32:42

which is our semi-private chat, I realized that

32:44

it's semi-private, I realized that people can

32:46

take pictures, and at that

32:49

time, we were having trolls getting

32:52

on our Discord and taking things out

32:54

of context. So I

32:57

realized that it was, I didn't

32:59

think I was in like an actual

33:01

private chat. And I stand by

33:03

everything that I said, because all

33:06

I said was, it's just really frustrating

33:08

to see this man who, all

33:11

of this happened under his watch for

33:13

all of these years in Hampton County.

33:16

And he had access to the same police

33:18

reports I did with the, he

33:21

could have had access to the same police reports I

33:23

did with the Stephen Smith case. He

33:26

could have had access to the Gloria

33:28

Satterfield settlement, and he could have written

33:30

about that all of those years. There

33:33

was all of these things that, I'm

33:35

sorry, but he failed as a journalist.

33:38

And it's really frustrating that

33:40

after it becomes popular in

33:43

Hampton County, and after all

33:45

of this happens, and

33:48

after basically the world knows who Alex Murdoch

33:50

is, and the rest of the world decided

33:52

that they hated Alex Murdoch, that

33:55

he decides to just ride

33:57

that wave and be a part of that.

34:00

And he scoots up to every

34:02

single camera and talks like he's

34:04

been on top of

34:07

this story for all along. But

34:09

without admitting, like, I failed.

34:11

I failed as a journalist for a

34:13

really long time, and I didn't do

34:15

what I should have done. And

34:18

I am now

34:21

taking advantage of the work that other people

34:24

did because to get to this point where

34:26

we can talk about it. But at the

34:28

same time, I read his

34:30

comments, and I can also see

34:32

that he could have said

34:35

things out of context, and they spliced

34:37

it together because those documentaries are very

34:39

tricky with stuff like that. And I

34:41

don't know. I mean, I

34:44

think the Michael DeWitt is a

34:47

very, very interesting ad. But mostly,

34:49

I think that Hampton,

34:52

it's shocking that they think that Hampton is

34:55

their home court still to this day that's

34:57

going to. Can you imagine that

34:59

Sean Kent, the work

35:01

ahead of him that is

35:03

going to be thrust on

35:05

him by nine different major

35:07

defense firms? Remember, each defendant

35:10

has an independent right to

35:12

do their own discovery. Every

35:16

witness is going to be questioned by

35:19

nine different lawyers. Nine

35:21

different lawyers are going to send

35:23

out their own subpoenas, their own

35:25

document requests, their own interrogatories, their

35:27

own requests to admit certain facts.

35:29

Remember, circumstantial evidence, the

35:31

burden of proof for

35:34

Buster is preponderance of evidence,

35:36

which is more likely than

35:38

not just crossing the 50-yard

35:40

line, and he proves defamation.

35:42

But then they have, as an affirmative

35:45

defense, truth. And

35:47

how do they prove the truth? I don't think

35:50

they have to have somebody say,

35:52

I saw Buster and Steven

35:54

in a compromising position. Or

35:56

I heard Buster say, I

35:59

was there. And

44:00

we're journalists, we knew that even though the

44:02

name is in there, we were still careful.

44:05

We're still attributing it to the

44:08

records. We didn't extrapolate by

44:10

having a picture of a redhead guy with

44:13

a bat in his hand. I don't know. Where

44:15

did the bat come from? That was just a

44:17

rumor. Yeah. Nobody's concluded what

44:19

Steve, I understand, but nobody that

44:24

did his autopsy or the second

44:26

autopsy said that there was a

44:28

Brandon Louisville slugger on his forehead. You know what

44:30

I'm saying? So where did the bat

44:32

come from? I think some of the people they

44:34

interviewed indicated that they had been coming, a truck

44:37

full of boys had been coming back from a

44:39

baseball game. So I think that might be where.

44:41

But the other thing is the highway

44:45

patrol, a lot

44:47

of the statements that

44:49

were shocking in there were made

44:51

by highway patrol agents. And

44:56

I hope that this lawsuit forces

45:00

them to actually explain

45:02

what went down with

45:04

that investigation, because in

45:08

a lot of those guys have

45:10

been interviewed in several of these

45:12

documentaries and they kind of allude

45:14

to pressure

45:17

in the investigation and they allude to

45:20

all these different things, but they don't

45:22

actually say like what went down, where

45:24

the pressure came from. And

45:28

I hope that, like

45:30

you said, Eric, this could lead to a

45:33

lot of answers, but I don't understand why

45:35

the highway patrol would not

45:37

be a defendant. And

45:39

also the other besides

45:43

Michael DeWitt as they outlier there, but

45:45

the rest of them seem like pretty

45:47

deep pocketed defendants as would the highway

45:50

patrol. Highway patrol has caps. There is

45:52

some of the caps that you would

45:54

have against a state agency, but it

45:57

would seem that at a minimum you

45:59

are, you hit a. spot on, Mandy,

46:01

that they will take the depositions of

46:03

those investigators and say, okay, you put

46:05

this as a conclusion or in

46:07

the report, where'd you get this from? Why

46:10

would you do that? Yeah. Why'd

46:12

you say that? Why'd you say that? Yeah. No,

46:15

I will say that I've seen depositions of law

46:17

enforcement officers and they're not always the most honest,

46:20

I would say, even though they're under

46:22

oath in the deposition. So I mean,

46:24

I hate to, I'm not trying to

46:26

say that all law enforcement officers aren't,

46:28

but that isn't to say that, I

46:30

mean, I still see some protecting in

46:32

South Carolina happening in those depositions in

46:35

general. So. I mean, do you guys

46:37

agree with me that these media companies are

46:39

going to fight this tooth and nail? Yeah.

46:42

If not for sport, you know? I think so. I'm

46:44

not just going to settle this quickly and

46:46

say, here's, let's go pre-suit mediation. You filed

46:49

a lawsuit. We're not even going to answer.

46:51

Let's just go to mediation and settle. No

46:53

way. This is their, this

46:55

is what they stand for. Yeah. Because

46:58

couldn't this set a precedent in some way? Because

47:01

like you look at the, what we find

47:03

entertaining and culture these days, I mean, Mandy

47:05

and I were just talking about the documentary

47:07

that we've both watched about Sherry

47:09

Papini, the perfect wife

47:11

where she went missing. These

47:14

documentaries are an industry now,

47:16

like a legitimate industry. So

47:19

I don't like, if

47:22

they don't fight back hard, doesn't that sort of

47:24

affect the future of that industry in some way?

47:27

Right. I mean, maybe

47:30

for the better. I mean, maybe that's the outcome

47:32

too. I don't know. Well, and

47:34

the woman is suing Netflix

47:36

also who was portrayed in Baby

47:39

Reindeer. That's right. Who

47:42

identified herself like nobody would have,

47:44

the public would have never have

47:46

known that that

47:49

was her until she went on some

47:51

show. And so

47:53

that's another one going on. But

47:55

Eric, I think you make a great point, which is of

47:57

course they're going to fight it because they can get content.

50:56

Hey, it's Kaylee Cuoco for Priceline. Ready to go to

50:58

your happy place for a happy price? Well, why didn't

51:00

you say so? Just download the Priceline app right now

51:03

and save up to 60% on hotels. So,

51:06

whether it's Cousin Kevin's Kazoo concert in

51:08

Kansas City, go Kevin! Or Becky's Bachelorette

51:10

Bash in Bermuda. You never have to

51:12

miss a trip ever again. So download

51:14

the Priceline app today. Your savings are

51:16

waiting. Go to your

51:18

happy place for a happy

51:21

price. Go to

51:23

your happy price, Priceline. think

1:00:00

they're doing a noble thing by saying we didn't want to put the

1:00:02

victim through that. So

1:00:04

ultimately that is important. But

1:00:08

another thing that, and I don't know

1:00:10

how this goes in most counties, but

1:00:12

if an officer, responding officer, shows up

1:00:15

to the scene and can't determine if

1:00:17

both parties have accusations of physical violence

1:00:19

against the other, they'll arrest both of

1:00:21

them. So a woman

1:00:23

might be defending herself by hitting the guard

1:00:25

back, but if he's telling the officer that

1:00:27

she gave me the scratch on my face,

1:00:31

she gave me this mark on my body, she's

1:00:33

going in too. And

1:00:36

just to make it easier for them, not for the

1:00:38

victim. And

1:00:40

I want to talk about this. So

1:00:42

it's a, it bars people who

1:00:45

are the subject of domestic violence

1:00:47

restraining orders from owning

1:00:49

weapons. But that

1:00:51

still means the court has, and

1:00:53

what is a domestic violence restraining

1:00:55

order technically like? Well,

1:00:57

what happens is if there is an

1:01:00

ongoing case, there's always a restraining order

1:01:02

that says you two can't be in

1:01:04

the same, you know, 50 yards apart.

1:01:06

You can't make direct or

1:01:08

indirect contact with the victim

1:01:10

or the complaining party. That's

1:01:14

what a restraining order is. And

1:01:17

it's good. I mean, you have to be approved

1:01:20

by the court. Right. Correct.

1:01:22

Right. And that's what makes people

1:01:25

apart. And what happens is the husband, if

1:01:27

he's the abuser, will try to get to the

1:01:29

wife and say, I'm sorry, you know, we have

1:01:31

kids, we have a history, you know,

1:01:34

we, I'll make it

1:01:36

up to you. And then the

1:01:38

woman, like you said, doesn't have a bank

1:01:40

account, doesn't have credit, doesn't have a means

1:01:42

to escape like you do or,

1:01:44

or my wife does. It's

1:01:46

sad. Yeah. It's

1:01:49

horrible. I mean,

1:01:51

I, we

1:01:53

have been talking about domestic violence for

1:01:55

a lot, covering the Mike

1:01:57

Miller case. our

1:02:00

country has kind of

1:02:03

an ancient way of defining domestic

1:02:05

violence, which is just... Condoning

1:02:08

it in a way, in a very slight

1:02:10

way, condoning it. It used to be

1:02:12

allowed. It used to be allowed, guys.

1:02:16

Right. It was allowed for a very long

1:02:18

time. It was just an expected part of

1:02:21

a relationship, right? Right.

1:02:24

And our laws have not caught

1:02:27

up at all

1:02:29

with reality. And I'm

1:02:33

saying this because it's a

1:02:36

step in the right direction that the

1:02:38

Supreme Court acknowledged that these abusers should

1:02:40

not have guns. However, I worry

1:02:43

about the women like Micah out

1:02:45

there who don't have... They

1:02:48

didn't have marks on their face,

1:02:50

and they went to police over

1:02:52

and over and said, I'm really

1:02:54

worried about my husband. I'm trying

1:02:56

to leave him, and police did

1:02:58

nothing. And just

1:03:01

because they don't fit within

1:03:03

that, just because you weren't smacked

1:03:05

in the face. But there

1:03:07

should be other forms of

1:03:09

domestic abuse that don't just include violence

1:03:12

within our laws. And

1:03:14

Canada is actually working on that. The UK

1:03:16

has coercive control laws. Massachusetts

1:03:19

just passed coercive control laws. But

1:03:22

that has been something extremely eye-opening. And

1:03:25

also, we know

1:03:27

through Laura Richards just how dangerous the situation

1:03:29

of coercive control is when a woman like

1:03:32

Micah is going to the police over and

1:03:34

over again and saying he's

1:03:36

stalking me, he's harassing me,

1:03:38

he won't leave me alone,

1:03:40

and the police do nothing.

1:03:43

According to Laura's research, it's 76%

1:03:46

of women in those relationships, in

1:03:48

coercive control relationships that are trying

1:03:50

to leave. 76% of them are

1:03:52

murdered during that time. It's

1:03:55

not good at all. Just

1:03:58

imagine a statistic like that with a

1:04:00

mic. involving a man. Like if there

1:04:02

was a... the entire system would change

1:04:05

to protect that. That

1:04:07

is a statistic that we are just

1:04:09

ignoring in society and we're ignoring all

1:04:12

of these signs. I

1:04:14

think that as in

1:04:16

society as a whole,

1:04:18

we have been subconsciously

1:04:20

programmed to dislike women

1:04:23

in a way that we

1:04:26

are not aware until you

1:04:29

strip everything back. And we're

1:04:31

doing... like I am doing

1:04:33

a lot of unlearning myself and saying, oh, is

1:04:35

that just the patriarchy telling me that I was

1:04:38

bad at that or was I actually bad at

1:04:40

that? I

1:04:42

think that... like if you look at

1:04:45

most movies, especially in the

1:04:47

era that I grew up in the early

1:04:49

2000s and the amount

1:04:51

that they sexualized and objectified

1:04:53

women and made these

1:04:55

female characters out to be vindictive.

1:04:58

And I always heard like

1:05:00

growing up, you can't

1:05:02

trust a woman. Like women are... girls

1:05:05

are mean, not like men and just

1:05:07

all... a lot of things. Make

1:05:09

them unlikable. In

1:05:12

Hollywood, if you're an

1:05:15

excellent female surgeon or

1:05:17

you're an excellent female lawyer or

1:05:19

you're an excellent female CEO or

1:05:21

an excellent female

1:05:23

entertainment mogul,

1:05:27

they make them fundamentally unlikable

1:05:30

with bad qualities. It's self-perpetuating. But I

1:05:32

think also, it just comes down to

1:05:34

the judge has feels that

1:05:36

a woman's voice is a nagging voice.

1:05:39

So it's like from the... yeah,

1:05:41

it's like you're just trying to like go, sir, I'm

1:05:43

just trying to tell you the weather. Calm down. Like

1:05:45

you're just trying to tell a fact and they act

1:05:48

like you're on the offensive. So

1:05:52

I think that going back to that, like

1:05:54

subconscious, those subconscious feelings, I think that that

1:05:56

can happen where a woman... I

1:06:00

don't know if I've ever mentioned it on the

1:06:02

show before, but when Britney Spears first had her

1:06:04

first appearance in court to explain to a judge

1:06:06

why she should no longer be in conservatorship, everyone

1:06:09

noted how speedy her voice was. She sounded like

1:06:11

she was, you know, some people said she sounded

1:06:13

like she was coped up or what have you,

1:06:15

because she's talking fast. CB, Right.

1:06:17

BT, She's just trying to get everything out. BT, She's trying

1:06:19

to get everything out. And I think when

1:06:21

you are put on the hot seat and

1:06:23

you're accusing your spouse, the person who maybe

1:06:25

earns the more of the money in the

1:06:27

family, or who has been making these sort

1:06:29

of horrible threats to you about what your life is going

1:06:32

to look like if you try to leave him, now

1:06:34

you are being asked

1:06:36

by this person with so much authority in

1:06:39

a robe, a question, you're going to most likely

1:06:41

be nervous in how you answer it, because the

1:06:43

person you're accusing is in the room, you've got

1:06:46

to get it right. You cannot slip, you cannot

1:06:48

say one thing wrong because it's going to be

1:06:50

used against you or twisted. And that energy annoys

1:06:53

perhaps a male

1:06:56

judge. I mean, I think even the ones that

1:06:59

are probably the most patient still get annoyed with

1:07:01

it. And that's where it's

1:07:04

just exposure therapy. That's the only thing

1:07:06

that's going to change that is exposure

1:07:08

therapy. Men having to expose themselves and

1:07:10

hopefully moms and dads out

1:07:12

there raising boys will, what's

1:07:15

that mean, Mandy? That's like millennial women

1:07:17

were taught that they could be

1:07:20

anything, do anything, what have you. But millennial

1:07:23

men, they forgot

1:07:25

to teach them to tolerate us, to

1:07:28

accept it, to operate in a

1:07:30

world where women have more power.

1:07:33

They just don't know how to do it.

1:07:35

And so I think this transition

1:07:37

period that hopefully we're in where we come

1:07:39

out on the other side with better laws

1:07:41

and more women with more power, right

1:07:44

now it's just laughable.

1:07:48

And it can be boiled down to the simple Joe

1:07:50

Coy making a joke about the Barbie

1:07:52

movie in comparison to

1:07:56

Oppenheimer. This movie was made based

1:07:58

on a Pulitzer prize. winning

1:08:00

book and a Nobel Prize winner, you know,

1:08:02

whatever. And this one was made about a

1:08:04

doll with boobies. And it's like, you missed

1:08:06

the whole point of the movie, dude, like

1:08:08

the book. It was so cyclical. So I

1:08:10

think until we have more, more

1:08:12

messages like that, and people are calling

1:08:14

out that kind of behavior over

1:08:17

and over again, it's, you know,

1:08:19

it's not gonna change. So that'll bring about the

1:08:21

change. We have to nag more is what I'm

1:08:23

saying, Eric, we're gonna have to nag at all

1:08:25

of you guys more. But on that

1:08:27

note, I think we need to wrap this one up.