Ashley Guillard, a tik tok content creator who claims to have psychic power and an inate spiritual ability that lets her solve crimes, has had all of her motions to dismiss the lawsuit against her denied by the Judge overseeing the case.


In this episode we begin our look at that ruling.


(commercial at 9:41)

to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

gov.uscourts.idd.51326.59.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this document, Sean Combs' legal team opposes the government’s motion in limine that seeks to avoid disclosing the identities of certain witnesses in the criminal case against him. The defense argues that the government has not demonstrated any credible or individualized threat posed by Combs to justify withholding this information. They note that the government relies on generic assertions about witness safety without offering specific allegations of intimidation, coercion, or retaliation tied directly to Combs. The motion, they claim, lacks the evidentiary foundation required under legal precedent to support such an extreme restriction on the defendant’s constitutional rights.

Combs’ attorneys also argue that shielding witness identities until just before trial would severely handicap the defense by preventing them from conducting thorough investigations, preparing cross-examinations, and assessing credibility—core components of a fair trial. They emphasize that protective measures, such as protective orders and redactions where necessary, already exist to mitigate genuine safety concerns without infringing on due process. Ultimately, the filing urges the court to deny the government’s motion, framing it as an overreach that would tilt the trial unfairly in favor of the prosecution.


to  contact me:

[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.266.0.pdf

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the early hours of November 13, 2022, four University of Idaho students—Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin—were brutally stabbed to death in a rental house near campus in Moscow, Idaho. The crime scene was particularly disturbing: there were no signs of forced entry, and two surviving roommates were left unharmed in the same house. The case immediately drew national attention due to the shocking nature of the murders and the lack of suspects in the early days. A months-long investigation led law enforcement to Bryan Christopher Kohberger, a 28-year-old Ph.D. criminology student at Washington State University, located about ten miles from the crime scene. Using cell phone data, surveillance footage, and a DNA match from a knife sheath found at the scene, police arrested Kohberger in Pennsylvania on December 30, 2022, and later extradited him to Idaho to face four counts of first-degree murder and one count of felony burglary.

As of April 2025, Kohberger’s case is still moving through the pretrial phase. His defense has pursued multiple motions challenging evidence collection, including arguments over cellphone pings, surveillance footage, and the genealogical tracing used to identify him as a suspect. The trial has faced delays due to defense requests for more time and the complexities of handling large volumes of digital and forensic evidence. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty, emphasizing the heinous nature of the crime and the calculated planning involved. Judge John Judge continues to rule on motions in limine, including what evidence will be allowed at trial. The case remains one of the most closely watched in the nation, with both legal teams preparing for what is expected to be a high-profile and emotionally charged trial, now tentatively slated to begin later in 2025.


to contact me:

[email protected]

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the early hours of November 13, 2022, four University of Idaho students—Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin—were brutally stabbed to death in a rental house near campus in Moscow, Idaho. The crime scene was particularly disturbing: there were no signs of forced entry, and two surviving roommates were left unharmed in the same house. The case immediately drew national attention due to the shocking nature of the murders and the lack of suspects in the early days. A months-long investigation led law enforcement to Bryan Christopher Kohberger, a 28-year-old Ph.D. criminology student at Washington State University, located about ten miles from the crime scene. Using cell phone data, surveillance footage, and a DNA match from a knife sheath found at the scene, police arrested Kohberger in Pennsylvania on December 30, 2022, and later extradited him to Idaho to face four counts of first-degree murder and one count of felony burglary.

As of April 2025, Kohberger’s case is still moving through the pretrial phase. His defense has pursued multiple motions challenging evidence collection, including arguments over cellphone pings, surveillance footage, and the genealogical tracing used to identify him as a suspect. The trial has faced delays due to defense requests for more time and the complexities of handling large volumes of digital and forensic evidence. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty, emphasizing the heinous nature of the crime and the calculated planning involved. Judge John Judge continues to rule on motions in limine, including what evidence will be allowed at trial. The case remains one of the most closely watched in the nation, with both legal teams preparing for what is expected to be a high-profile and emotionally charged trial, now tentatively slated to begin later in 2025.


to contact me:

[email protected]

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Leo "Tata" Sharp was an elderly World War II veteran and award-winning horticulturist who led a quiet life in Michigan—until it was revealed that he was one of the most prolific drug mules for Mexico’s Sinaloa Cartel. In his late 80s, Sharp transported hundreds of kilograms of cocaine across the country in his Lincoln Town Car, using his age and unassuming appearance to avoid suspicion. He was recruited around 2009 by cartel associates and quickly proved useful, making regular cross-country drug runs between Arizona and Michigan, sometimes delivering up to 200 kilograms of cocaine at a time.

His double life came crashing down in 2011 when he was pulled over in Michigan with over 100 kilograms of cocaine in his vehicle. During the stop, he tried to use his age as a shield, claiming he was lost and confused. Eventually, Sharp pleaded guilty in 2014 and was sentenced to three years in federal prison, a relatively light sentence given the scale of his crimes—largely due to his age, frail health, and status as a decorated veteran. The bizarre case captured national attention and inspired the 2018 Clint Eastwood film The Mule, loosely based on Sharp’s story. He died in 2016, leaving behind a legacy as one of the most unlikely figures ever caught up in the cartel drug trade.


to contact me:

[email protected]

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In the case of United States v. Sean Combs (Case No. 1:24-cr-00542-AS), the defense has filed a reply memorandum supporting their motion to suppress evidence obtained through search warrants executed at Combs' residences in Los Angeles and Miami, as well as his electronic accounts and devices. The defense argues that the government obtained these warrants by making false statements and omitting critical exculpatory evidence, thereby presenting a misleading portrayal of the facts to justify the searches. They contend that certain evidence, which suggested that participation in the alleged "Freak-Off" parties was voluntary and consensual, was intentionally excluded from the warrant applications. The defense asserts that this misconduct led to the issuance of overly broad warrants, allowing the seizure of extensive personal and digital records unrelated to the alleged offenses.


Alternatively, the defense requests a Franks hearing to challenge the validity of the search warrants. A Franks hearing is warranted when a defendant makes a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement was knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, included in a warrant affidavit, and that the allegedly false statement is necessary to the finding of probable cause. The defense maintains that the government's alleged omissions and misrepresentations meet this standard, necessitating such a hearing. They emphasize that without the purportedly misleading information, the warrants would lack probable cause, rendering the seized evidence inadmissible.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:  

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.187.0.pdf
show less

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​Kristina Khorram, who served as Sean "Diddy" Combs' chief of staff, has been implicated in multiple lawsuits alleging her involvement in Combs' purported criminal activities, including sex trafficking and abuse. In these lawsuits, Khorram is accused of facilitating the procurement of sex workers for Combs and managing operations related to alleged illicit activities. One lawsuit notably compared her role to that of Ghislaine Maxwell in Jeffrey Epstein's criminal network, suggesting she played a pivotal part in the alleged misconduct.

In response to these allegations, Khorram has categorically denied any involvement in or condonation of such activities. In a statement to Rolling Stone, she expressed profound distress over the accusations, stating: "I have never condoned or aided and abetted the sexual assault of anyone. Nor have I ever drugged anyone." She further emphasized that the notion of her being implicated in such acts is "beyond upsetting, disturbing, and unthinkable," and expressed confidence that the allegations against her would be proven untrue.

Plaintiff John Doe, represented by Eisenberg & Baum, LLP, files this complaint against Defendant Sean Combs. The allegations are based on personal knowledge and information. Plaintiff asserts claims against Combs, detailing specific grievances and legal grounds for action. The complaint outlines the nature of the alleged wrongdoing, including factual and legal bases for holding Combs accountable.

This lawsuit seeks relief for the harm allegedly caused by Combs, requesting appropriate legal remedies. The complaint establishes jurisdiction, presents supporting evidence, and sets forth claims that Plaintiff intends to prove in court. Through this action, Plaintiff seeks justice and compensation for the alleged misconduct by Defendant.



to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.637615.1.0.pdf

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) released a report examining the controversial 2007 non-prosecution agreement (NPA) granted to Jeffrey Epstein by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida. The report found serious missteps and poor judgment by federal prosecutors, particularly then-U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, who ultimately approved the deal. The OIG concluded that while there was no evidence of criminal misconduct or corruption, prosecutors displayed a stunning lack of urgency, failed to properly notify Epstein’s victims as required by the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, and sidelined a 53-page federal indictment in favor of a lenient plea deal that shielded Epstein and his unnamed co-conspirators from federal prosecution. The report criticized the secretive nature of the NPA and found that Acosta gave “too much deference” to Epstein’s high-powered legal team.

The report also exposed the government’s unusual willingness to cooperate with Epstein’s lawyers, including allowing them to essentially dictate the terms of the deal, such as minimizing public exposure and avoiding victim input. Despite mounting evidence of Epstein’s exploitation of dozens of underage girls, the U.S. Attorney’s Office prioritized avoiding litigation risks and potential political fallout over pursuing justice. Although the OIG did not recommend criminal charges against any of the involved officials, the findings fueled renewed calls for accountability and transparency in cases involving wealthy, well-connected defendants. The report paints a picture of a justice system that buckled under pressure from power and influence, enabling Epstein’s abuse to continue for years.

to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

dl (justice.gov)

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) released a report examining the controversial 2007 non-prosecution agreement (NPA) granted to Jeffrey Epstein by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida. The report found serious missteps and poor judgment by federal prosecutors, particularly then-U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, who ultimately approved the deal. The OIG concluded that while there was no evidence of criminal misconduct or corruption, prosecutors displayed a stunning lack of urgency, failed to properly notify Epstein’s victims as required by the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, and sidelined a 53-page federal indictment in favor of a lenient plea deal that shielded Epstein and his unnamed co-conspirators from federal prosecution. The report criticized the secretive nature of the NPA and found that Acosta gave “too much deference” to Epstein’s high-powered legal team.

The report also exposed the government’s unusual willingness to cooperate with Epstein’s lawyers, including allowing them to essentially dictate the terms of the deal, such as minimizing public exposure and avoiding victim input. Despite mounting evidence of Epstein’s exploitation of dozens of underage girls, the U.S. Attorney’s Office prioritized avoiding litigation risks and potential political fallout over pursuing justice. Although the OIG did not recommend criminal charges against any of the involved officials, the findings fueled renewed calls for accountability and transparency in cases involving wealthy, well-connected defendants. The report paints a picture of a justice system that buckled under pressure from power and influence, enabling Epstein’s abuse to continue for years.

to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

dl (justice.gov)

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On this edition of the morning update, we get right back into the headlines that we might have missed from overnight and see where things stand.




(commercial at 7:58)

to contact me:

[email protected]

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.