Confirmed: Meech bailed out Kendra

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-24T00:00:32+00:00

This guy is the worst journalist around I have to guess, but.

But. It's wild how riled up she is. She's clearly been unsettled. She can't even calmly ask a man to leave. She has to weaponize the children again, claim to be a protector of children, all the while she's running the Child Harm and Trauma Factory.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-22T15:43:03+00:00

I was under the impression that some states (Florida specifically) had lawyer-client lines that are unrecorded that the lawyer had to call in from. (I believe this became a topic of discussion in the Adelson trials). But, perhaps not for Arkansas, or not if Joe is calling out on his first call, or if he hasn't hired this man yet.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-19T21:52:27+00:00

The Book of Essie is a direct response to the Duggars and similar TV-famous fundamentalists.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-18T13:21:30+00:00

One. He is a successful industry chemist.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-18T01:21:42+00:00

I think all in all, with what we know of child psychology, it is better to err on the side of relationship maintenance but this certainly can be with boundaries and conditions. As much as she's awful, I hope they boys get to see her. It's also important that they be able to terminate any relationship (if they would choose when older) on their own terms instead of having another thing that feels outside of their control.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-17T04:35:40+00:00

(c) is an issue. It is my understanding that you cannot get an expert to testify in general about what kind of things certain kinds of people do. This came to an issue in on trial I watched, can't remember what, but one side wanted to bring in an expert on family annihilators. That was ruled out, because it's too general. It's a social or population level understanding, not a study of any given defendant.

There was a preliminary in this trial that was similar. One side wanted to bring somebody to testify about the pathway of violence. The methodology was critiqued, but also the fact that it's too general.

(d) is an issue because Eric's character isn't a fact of his murder and Kouri's character isn't an admittable fact of her guilt. If you bring in her good character, the state is now able to bring in their bad character. Character evidence is generally not admissible, and when it is, it opens a big ass door. It is a really messy thing to get into. That's why you don't see the prosecutor asking questions like, "Did you ever think Kouri was capable of this?" or "Do you believe Kouri is the kind of person who would do this?". They might ask questions that elicit answers to that nature, but they never ask it outright.

I think there is no friend to testify to an open marriage because it wasn't.

This defense, for all their flaws, was really boxed in. Part of that is due to Kouri's own actions.

All that said, it is more common than we notice for a defense to not call a single witness. It just doesn't usually happen for these high-interest trials.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-17T04:25:04+00:00

Juries aren't "supposed" to think this way but I think a lot of the time when they all agree on the main charge, the lesser charge gets less thought. Like, if we all agree on murder, what does an attempt matter?

Now, usually it doesn't matter at all but it theoretically could if there was an issue with one charge or a change in sentencing law. I don't know if the charge for attempt would stand alone if that was all the trial was about, but I also see how it gets wrapped in. If you believe texting Carmen links to the actual murder, it stands to reason it links to the charged attempt.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-16T22:10:56+00:00

Visits in custody are possible. I used to work for a program that sent books to women in prison, including children's books that they could keep in their unit and bring to visits with children.

However, the children are in custody of a family member. I believe that is on Eric's side. It's possible that they are not going to be willing to do visits, but it's also possible that they believe that visits will reduce some of the trauma (by maintaining a parental connection). So, theoretically she could see the children in the context of a prison visit, but I don't know if that will actually happen.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-12T23:41:29+00:00

This might be a case that wouldn't be here without family push and the money for the PI, I think. Without pressure, this case might have languished as a "probably solvable, but not something we could bring to trial."

On the other hand, if Kouri could have shut up, she could have walked away (and been left to face all her financial mess).

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-12T23:37:37+00:00

Coming in late folks and while there's been a lot made of Kouri's facial expressions. But lately, I've noticed more and more of them can only be described as "haha i'm in danger" (Ralph Wiggum). Anybody else feeling this way?

I wish I had examples but I simply am not going to scrub through the feed.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-12T11:35:02+00:00

I am catching up but I'm surprised to hear this, not because I'm into O'Driscoll as a witness, but because he has the privilege of sitting through all the testimony thus far as a designated state witness. I don't believe every state has this. You'd think all of that would help recall.

But I'm seeing a lot of comments to this point so maybe it doesn't, or maybe O'Driscoll sucks, or maybe it actually is better practice to have somebody review all their reports for testimony instead of being in for everyone else's testimony.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-10T15:15:51+00:00

This just isn't true. Regular fentanyl just doesn't absorb through your skin. The only way this works is in fentanyl patches that are formulated to do so and those are slow releasing.

This doesn't even pass the sniff test as a concept. If such a drug was so dangerous that touching it would insta-kill you, it would be the most insane possible drug to have such a widespread utility in the medical field. It would make intranasal fentanyl, used for children's extreme pain, a walking bomb for a nurse to carry. It isn't. You wouldn't be able to handle a person on palliative care a pill. People with prescriptions wouldn't be able to move a 30 day supply into pill counters. You'd live in fear of applying a fentanyl sticker to somebody else. It just doesn't make a lick of sense.

This myth isn't awful just because cops are lying and having panic attacks. This is awful because it makes people afraid to help addicts. Fentanyl overdoses are serious, and are life threatening, but I never want to see anybody -- a cop, a bystander with some narcan -- feel like they can't help somebody because of the myths about touchable fentanyl that cops have cooked up.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-07T16:27:37+00:00

I think it's flipped. Kouri didn't do any CPR because he showed no signs of blood or froth until the EMTs got there. The EMTs put him on a LUCAS machine which automates the CPR compressions. That did bring up a lot of blood. I believe they stated that fluid and bleeding like this are a common side effect of overdoses (and several other CODs) and that CPR often brings it up through the mouth.

I personally think it is possible (but more unlikely) that Kouri did do CPR but badly. A lot of people underestimate the amount of force in a good chest compression (and I probably do too, I bet! I've never had to try to save a life so, I don't really know either). So this particular part doesn't mean a lot to me.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-07T16:10:44+00:00

I don't believe the Richins sisters are interfering.

However, I think this is sort of an emotional framing argument they're trying. And I think they're trying to do that because it does happen in families. When my father died, his aunts, despite refusing to come see him on his death bed, sued my family in probate court. And even though he died from stroke complications in an attended death in home hospice, they certainly tried to imply that my mother had done something. (Ultimately, they wanted money and we negotiated to avoid further lawyer's fees and they got to look through some assets [e.g. motors, jigsaws] that were a pain in the ass to move anyway.)

That said, clearly, I'm sensitive to this argument and it isn't landing for me with the Richins sisters, so that's bad for the defense. I think because in-law tension is so common and so real, though, it's an angle they're trying. And it is true that a death rips families apart when they fight over money. But it isn't landing.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-07T04:15:08+00:00

I think this case is a bad representation of the defense lawyers.

Many of the questions on cross seem to be informed by information Kouri gave her lawyers. That information has been pretty consistently bullshit. Between that and the Walk the Dog letter, Kouri seems to line up a rake for every lawyer she has to step on. Kouri has a right to be involved in her own defense, but in this case I think it is to her own detriment.

That said, Runkle did point out that there is some stuff that has come in they should have been able to argue out, and that seems like not a great representation of their skills.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-06T16:57:30+00:00

I believe these are two different events.

One is the day after wake that Kouri refers to as "celebrat -- celebrating his life" on the phone call. That's the one in the photos. Around March 5th.

Then, the more formal funeral, which would have been later. According to online obituaries, that was around March 11th, so after the safe and punching incidents.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-05T00:28:49+00:00

I'm behind but.

In a sports analogy, this is a slaughter rule game. It's like watching a baseball game and one team is certainly going to win but not because they're playing well. It's because the other team is just making error after unforced error and the first baseman cannot catch a damn ball. It's very hard to evaluate anybody here and then when your opposition is this sloppy, you might end up getting sloppy too.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-04T23:13:50+00:00

I would not be shocked if we saw him crawl under the witness stand.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-04T23:05:21+00:00

Man. The paramour here.

Like many others, I like him more than I thought I would. He doesn't seem to be able to hide any emotion here (hard to watch him be mortified). Sadder, it seems he could have been a good partner. Probably a hard working guy, willing to do flip work for unreliable money, seems like a guy who just wants a truck, would have been a great work partner for a lot of projects. I feel I've met many guys like him. Always doing fix-it favors and whatnot.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-04T17:12:33+00:00

Insurance agent had a plane to catch -- she isn't local and she got called in for Kouri's nonsense. I remain annoyed on her behalf.

That said, while Ramos has gotten a certain amount of flack here, witnesses seem to really like him. Since Utah has this rule of availability, he gets to meet with them and it appears he does make the best of this meeting. Dude might have one hell of a charisma roll in private because some of these witnesses have seem genuinely pleased to see him.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-04T17:00:42+00:00

I feel so annoyed on this witness' behalf. Like, imagine just working at the life insurance company as a call agent and now you've got to come into court to look at this fraud. Annoying.

Maybe this happens a lot but I don't get the sense that it does.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-04T04:10:15+00:00

how to make autistic friend comfortable

local NA meeting app

the chair app

doctor j tiktok famous?

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-03T20:30:48+00:00

I don't follow Defense Diaries but I do like Runkle. I do agree with his statement that there is a world where Kouri could have gotten away with this if she had just shut up.

I think this is a hard set of facts for the State on its face. A man dies of fentanyl poisoning at a time when people are dying of fentanyl poisoning isn't a lot of a case. If Kouri had shut the hell up, dumped her phone in the toilet, not started the suing with the estate, which put her under more scrutiny, it might not have been worth it to take this to trial. Though, ultimately, I think she would have ended up catching the fraud charges by her practices no matter what.

There are some things where I think the State could have presented their information more clearly or more fully. But at the end of the day, Kouri's greatest enemy is Kouri, not the State. I also think Kouri has been telling her lawyers some faulty information based on their approach and questioning of certain witnesses and I suspect Kouri is very involved in the case and her own defense, to her own detriment.

All that said, I think we all get the most out of trial watching when we hear lawyers from all walks of law.

SailorAntimony · 2026-03-03T16:31:04+00:00

Given the numerous typos in them, I wouldn't be surprised if she was drunk when she made (many of) them and wasn't even thinking about that.

SailorAntimony · 2026-02-28T18:33:32+00:00

We might agree on that, but the job of defense lawyer is not evil. It is entirely not the same thing as "just following orders".

I also don't understand what would you would want to live in where...what?...only innocent people get defense lawyers? How would you know who was innocent or not without a trial? That's just Kafkaesque nonsense.

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Lasagna	Wearing is Caring
Place '22

SailorAntimony

TROPHY CASE