Blake Lively's Legal Fees Ploy, and Mackenzie Shirilla's Shocking ＂Crash,＂ with MK True Crime's Phil Holloway, Ashleigh Merchant, and Dave Aronberg ｜ Ep. 1330
00:00:57.540Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show, live on Sirius XM Channel 111 every weekday at New East.
00:01:09.260Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly. Welcome to The Megyn Kelly Show. We've got a mega Kelly's court
00:01:13.880today where we are going to bring you the latest on multiple major cases of serious interest.
00:01:19.360Jury selection is underway right now in the Carmelo Anthony murder trial. The teen accused
00:01:24.020of stabbing 17-year-old Austin Metcalf at a track and field meet in Texas in April of last year.
00:01:30.200You remember this case? It has potentially a racial element. The defendant is black,
00:01:34.880the victim was white, and the black teen was in a tent that was populated by a different school.
00:01:45.120Austin Metcalf allegedly went to him to say, you know, move out of our tent. He said,
00:01:50.080make me. And the next thing you know, Carmelo Anthony stabbed him in the heart with a knife.
00:01:57.620That's what this case is about. Now he's going to mount a defense of some sort. I have no idea
00:02:03.080how or what it will be. He seems to be suggesting it's going to be self-defense. We'll get into it.
00:02:08.920And we now have the shocking footage of 18-year-old British student Henry Novak
00:02:16.580dying while handcuffed. The police tried to withhold this. They would not release this
00:02:21.800during the course of the trial. Well, now that's over and it's finally been released.
00:02:25.980This poor kid lays dying, trying to tell cops that he has been stabbed five times and that he
00:02:34.160cannot breathe. And the police officer looks at him and says, I don't think you have mate.
00:02:39.120and he dies. He drowns in his own blood. And for that, absolutely nothing has happened to these
00:02:47.460police so far. One has been allowed to retire early. That's it. They say an investigation
00:02:55.140is underway. What's taking so long? This case has been out there for quite some time. How long does
00:03:01.260it take to figure out he was stabbed? They didn't get him emergency help. And if the shoe were on
00:03:07.140the other foot because the person who stabbed Henry Novak is a brown skin Sikh in England.
00:03:15.360And you're not allowed to say that they're the perpetrators of anything. You see here,
00:03:21.080the victim too was a white man, which is the most evil thing you can be in England and still in our
00:03:28.180country, which is why they let him fucking die. I'm sorry. It's just so infuriating. They let him
00:03:34.000die as he begged for help. And they did that because they took the word of his murderer
00:03:41.520that he, Henry, was the assailant, that he had harassed the actual perpetrator based
00:03:49.640on his Sikh religion or his brown skin, and that really the roles were reversed with no
00:03:56.660evidence. They had an eyewitness call in that suggested it was the opposite, that Henry
00:04:00.580was in fact the victim henry was the one who was down henry had five stab wounds and still
00:04:07.520they they took the other kid's word other man his word they didn't even handcuff that other man
00:04:14.320at any point it's just it's so egregious what has happened over there
00:04:19.160they knelt in the street over the george floyd death in the uk for henry novak nothing these
00:04:30.460police officers let him die, and then the community has let them get away with zero
00:04:36.780accountability, the cops, who should and do owe a higher duty of care to its citizens,
00:04:44.700to their citizens, those like Henry and those around Henry, who expect more of the people
00:04:50.200they pay for, for safety and security services.
00:04:53.640This case is just, it's so disturbing.
00:04:55.460So we'll have the latest because now Henry's family speaking out, as is the family of the perpetrator.
00:05:02.640Digwa is the last name. So we've got a lot to get to with Phil Holloway, Ashley Merchant and Dave Ehrenberg, the hosts of the MK True Crime Show.
00:05:11.240They're all going to be here together later, fresh off their trip to Las Vegas for CrimeCon.
00:05:16.880That's fun. But we have got to start today with the latest in the Blake Lively versus Justin Baldoni legal saga.
00:06:03.740However, the settlement, she argues, did allow her to continue pursuing attorney's fees and damages,
00:06:12.440which she said, says should be trebled, meaning tripled under California law. And in addition to
00:06:20.460that, she wants a separate award of punitive damages, which are meant to punish a party when
00:06:26.680they do something truly egregiously wrong. Now, she makes this argument under a California law
00:06:32.380signed by Gavin Newsom back in 2023 that was inspired in the wake of the Me Too movement.
00:06:38.540It's called the Speak Your Truth Act. And it makes certain communications about sexual harassment privileged. The thinking was that a lot of alleged sexual harassment victims won't come forward because they expect the man or could be the woman could be reversed, who they are accusing to then slap them with a defamation lawsuit to try to up the ante.
00:07:04.640And that this is silencing too many women and that we have to change the stakes on these retaliatory defamation claims brought by sexual harassment defendants or were effectively discouraging the sexual harassment victims from doing anything about it.
00:07:22.700OK, so Justin Baldoni did respond to Blake Lively's claims with a defamation claim, and it was dismissed a year ago.
00:07:34.140But and so there was a question right from that moment about whether he was going to have to pay all of her, not just costs.
00:07:39.480When you win a lawsuit, you generally get your costs, you know, the price of filing the lawsuit and so on, but not legal fees.
00:07:45.260We don't do that here. That's a UK thing where where loser pays your attorney's fees.
00:07:49.500And it's a massive deterrent to bringing a frivolous lawsuit, but that's not how we do it here in the United States.
00:07:57.740It allows individuals who filed a sexual harassment lawsuit and then got faced with a counterclaim for defamation and then get the defamation claim dismissed to get their attorney's fees, which will be substantial in this case, and other damages.
00:08:15.960And then, as I point out, those can be trebled, meaning tripled, and you get punitives potentially, too.
00:08:21.220To quote California Civil Code Section 47.1B, 47.1 is the short form for this law, quote, a prevailing defendant in any defamation action.
00:08:32.120It's kind of confusing because here, Blake Lively is the defendant.
00:08:36.300as in all of these cases, you've got the sexual harassment plaintiff who then becomes the defendant
00:08:43.200in the cross claim brought by the man she sues for defamation. All right. So as you hear me read
00:08:50.880this picture, Blake Lively as the defendant, a prevailing defendant in any defamation action
00:08:57.700brought against that defendant for making a communication that is privileged under this
00:09:03.940section shall be entitled to their reasonable attorney's fees and costs for successfully
00:09:08.460defending themselves in the litigation, plus treble damages for any harm caused to them
00:09:12.800by the defamation action, in addition to punitive damages available under Section 3294 or any
00:10:22.100Is there any like live proceeding in front of me?
00:10:25.000This is one of the things the judge was asking
00:10:26.500now that the parties have already settled this.
00:10:29.160And if we have a factual determination to make about her legal fees and or whether there was behavior in this case that amounted to malice, which is one of the requirements.
00:10:41.860I'll explain. Who makes that finding? Do I make that finding as a judge or is it contemplated by this statute that a jury makes this finding?
00:10:50.740And how am I this judge in New York federal court supposed to determine any of this?
00:10:55.100This is California's weird law, not mine.
00:10:58.020And I never even passed the California bar exam
00:11:00.220is basically what this judge is saying.
00:11:30.520But my point is simply, I didn't know him and I had nothing for or against either one of them.
00:11:36.140However, all you had to do is pay attention to this case to see her claims fell apart almost instantly.
00:11:44.720I mean, direct allegations fell apart by independent witnesses.
00:11:48.760For example, she claimed they brought some guy in to play the doctor when she was delivering a baby who had zero acting experience and was just one of Justin's best friends just so he could get a look at her lady parts.
00:11:59.400Well, it turned out she had on biker shorts for the scene.
00:12:03.540There was no getting a look at her lady parts by anybody.
00:12:06.240And the guy who played the part of the doctor was a repeated and respected stage actor whose usual gig is really respected Shakespeare plays and so on.
00:12:17.100So it wasn't odd that he was brought in. He wasn't just some like loser friend of Justin's who wanted to get a peek at Blake who was wearing biker shorts. That's just one. We could be here all day if we did it.
00:12:27.240My point is simply, her claims were specious at best.
00:12:32.640And now there is a real question about whether she should be entitled to her legal fees when her sexual harassment claim against him was also thrown out.
00:12:44.540His defamation claim, counterclaim against her was thrown out, but her sexual harassment claim was also thrown out.
00:12:51.320The only thing that was left standing that they almost went to trial on was her claim that after she raised sexual harassment with Baldoni and his team, that they then retaliated against her by unleashing this alleged campaign in the press to hurt her reputation.
00:13:09.700And she could have gone to trial on that.
00:13:13.060I mean, that's for you to decide why she didn't think she could make that case in front of a jury.
00:13:17.080So now she's back, having proven nothing, having willingly walked away from this entire case, having seen her sexual harassment case thrown out, as was his cross claim for defamation, and seeking, we have no idea how much money, I mean, it could be over $100 million for all I know, if you take her exorbitant legal fees and then triple them and then add in punitive damages.
00:13:40.040I have no idea what she's claiming they are going to be, but this is going to be a substantial number she wants, after the case is over, settled, and none of her claims on the merits have ever been heard.
00:13:51.880So something extraordinary happened yesterday after they had this argument, and it was the woman who was the architect and driving force behind this California law, who happens to be an attorney herself and a professor of law, posted on social media that this was never her vision.
00:14:14.520that somebody like Blake Lively would be allowed to use this law potentially against someone like
00:14:21.980Justin Baldoni, which we found very interesting. So we reached out to her and asked her if she'd
00:14:26.560come on and she agreed. So she's here. She's a lawyer. She's an adjunct professor of law at
00:14:31.580Southwestern Law School. Her name is Victoria Burke, and she is indeed the architect of and
00:14:36.540the woman behind this law. Think about this. In 2006, 20,000 bucks equaled roughly 33 ounces of
00:14:45.200gold at spot price. At today's prices, those 33 ounces would be worth about $165,000. Smart
00:14:53.980Americans should consider diversifying a portion of their savings into precious metals. So let me
00:14:59.040tell you about Birch Gold Group. For thousands of years, gold has been a store of wealth,
00:15:03.820And today, it can be a crucial part of any balanced strategy.
00:15:08.500Birch Gold can help you convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax-sheltered retirement account in gold.
00:15:15.180Just text MK to the number 989898 to receive your free info kit on gold.
00:15:20.000There's no obligation, just useful information.
00:15:22.860With an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau and tens of thousands of happy customers,
00:15:27.800let Birch Gold help you diversify with gold for peace of mind.
00:15:40.340So a very extraordinary effort on your part.
00:15:43.080Let me just start with just a little bit of your backstory.
00:15:45.100I don't want to put you on the spot, but this one was near and dear to you for personal reasons.
00:15:49.280Yes, this bill was intended, it was made by me, who's a survivor, intended to protect survivors when speaking out
00:15:57.460because i myself had been drugged and sexually assaulted by acquaintance in 2019 and i had gone
00:16:05.380to the police and i pursued all the legal channels that i could at the time some of the evidence was
00:16:12.340lost of the blood and the video evidence had been like not recovered in time it was lost and it was
00:16:18.660going to be very hard to move forward as a case and i was talking to a friend of mine from law
00:16:23.780school and she said you know be very careful speaking out or telling one don't use his name
00:16:30.020don't use any identifiers because you could be sued for defamation and i was confused because i
00:16:35.780thought current defamation laws you as long as you're speaking your truth or opinion you should
00:16:41.060be protected and she said please look at see what happened in the wake of me too that there's been a
00:16:47.300tremendous surge in retaliatory defamation lawsuits and you know you could be hit with one
00:16:53.380So I was curious and I started researching.
00:16:57.420I'm like, oh, this is really interesting because this was not covered in the press.
00:17:01.600And I was noticing many cases were saying it was having a chilling effect on survivors coming forward.
00:17:08.100And I had previously been on American Bar Association committees where I drafted legislation.
00:17:13.460And I thought, I wonder if I could just adjust the defamation laws to protect survivors when they come forward.
00:17:20.060So I spent a year and a half researching cases and statutes, and I worked on drafting it, and I vetted the bill by various advocacy groups.
00:17:32.620And then in the summer of 2022, I proposed it to members of the California legislature, and within a year, it was passed into law.
00:17:41.980but we did work with the aclu to fine-tune my original drafting to make sure there's still
00:17:49.580access to courts that was very important to us for anyone falsely accused to still be able to
00:17:55.300have access to courts and prevail like let's say depp v heard which you know a lot of times people
00:18:01.980would bring up to me like what about that case and i would say as you know johnny depp prevailed
00:18:06.460by showing malice, he would prevailed under this law as well. Just to point out, because what you
00:18:12.680did is you said, OK, you can bring a responsive defamation case if you're let's just go with it's
00:18:21.640a man who's a defendant because that's the case here. You can bring a defamation lawsuit if you're
00:18:26.860a man who gets sued for sexual harassment and you feel this is defamatory and it's untrue.
00:18:30.540You were not saying you can never bring a claim, but we are going to raise the evidence that is required of you to prove a defamation claim to to proving that that just sorry, you were going to raise.
00:18:44.840Yeah, the defamation standard is going to require you to prove that her claims were brought with malice.
00:20:48.700Or does Justin have to prove that she did file the lawsuit maliciously, which is why he's suing her for defamation?
00:20:57.980Now, let me just table all that because it's a complex legal debate that people aren't going to really fully understand.
00:21:04.200They are going to understand that you as the architect of the law who believes in this law came forward and made this post yesterday, which I found interesting, too.
00:21:11.200And you wrote, first you write, I thought my bill, I never thought my bill would be in the eyes of a storm with all eyes watching.
00:21:20.360As the architect of the bill, I strongly believe in the constitutionality of my bill, because that was one of the things Baldoni's team argued, like, not even sure this is constitutional.
00:21:28.960And then you wrote, unhappy with it being weaponized as a PR redemption tool by Blake Lively and her team.
00:21:35.960Honestly, I don't think the judge should grant attorney's fees in this matter.
00:21:40.340So why do you think it's being weaponized as a PR redemption tool by Lively and team?
00:21:45.520I received a communication from her attorney that mentioned that Blake was going to be moving 47.1 nationally.
00:21:56.760That she wanted your law to become a national law.
00:21:59.100She is aware, they would be aware that I've already moved it to four states.
00:22:03.520It's been now enacted in four states, and I have introduced it in 15 states, this legislative session.
00:22:09.360So I have, for years, been working on moving it nationwide.
00:22:13.820I acquired three extra states last year, and I'm moving forward to different states.
00:22:18.600It takes multiple years for different states, but I received a communication from her attorney
00:22:23.980that Blake was intending to now move 47.1 nationwide, including she would be moving
00:22:31.920And I responded, I'm already doing that.
00:22:36.520can you please check with me before going forward because my whole strategy was to fly this under
00:22:42.260the radar because we basically usually don't have much opposition and I said there's oftentimes
00:22:48.040your client is compared to Amber Heard and so I would prefer you check with me and just stick with
00:22:54.720like mentioning the California part without mentioning it's being moved nationwide because
00:22:59.640I was worried that this is going to become just a PR campaign for her and it wasn't going to be
00:23:07.200about survivors anymore. It was going to be about like, I didn't want her to turn my bill into the
00:23:12.080Met Gala. Yeah, right. So well said. And so what was their response? I, from what I understand is
00:23:19.900her attorney wrote me back and said, thank you for your perspective and that she still moved
00:23:24.820forward without me being included in additional communications and meetings about moving the
00:23:30.460bill in New York. It came to light that this spring, her attorney was having meetings that
00:23:37.180I was unaware of with one of the advocacy groups once a week where she was assisting in redrafting
00:23:46.160the bill. And I understood that she added or contributed to an additional paragraph. And I
00:23:53.080kept asking to see the additional paragraph it was never sent to me but i understood it was
00:23:58.100something to protect the attorneys who would be um you know like the equivalent of like blake's
00:24:04.380attorney and so i asked for that portion to be removed from the bill language because i felt
00:24:10.360the you know focus should be on survivors purely because attorneys have insurance
00:24:16.380and i wasn't under right like why why drag them into i wasn't understanding why she was part of
00:24:22.000the conversation and I wasn't. And so what is it about this particular case that makes you think
00:24:30.300Blake should not get attorney's fees under 47.1? Well, for two points, I was like last year when
00:24:37.240it was dismissed, it was dismissed procedurally. So I wasn't understanding if, if the case is
00:24:42.680dismissed, how are you awarding damages when a jury hasn't heard or a judge hasn't heard the
00:24:49.640facts, whether or not malice is there. So I was confused, like, how can you award it without,
00:24:54.860you know, fact finding? And I was also confused because initially when I heard
00:25:00.280the settlement had been reached, I was like, okay, that's off the table. They're done with this now.
00:25:06.680And I thought for sure they would have resolved that as well during that settlement.
00:25:10.820And then to hear what's continuing on, I was puzzled by that.
00:25:15.420so in other words Justin's got to prove that she behaved maliciously in bringing this lawsuit in
00:25:22.520order to recover for defamation and you were wondering like when did that happen because
00:25:28.020as I said in the intro both of their claims got dismissed on the papers her her sexual harassment
00:25:33.220claim and his defamation claim and there's been no proof of malice one way or the other as I
00:25:38.360understand her sexual harassment claims have been dismissed so I was a little bit confused
00:25:42.960why this is still pending and ongoing so i was concerned about the use of the bill and how did
00:25:49.120you how did you envision it because this seemed to be something the judge was really wrestling
00:25:53.520with yesterday he's like he was kind of like you're back didn't you like didn't you settle
00:25:59.120this case and like we we decided not to do this and we didn't impanel a jury which i would normally
00:26:05.620use to determine something like malice and like damages awards and we actually didn't even go
00:26:10.760forward with certifying experts, which is what you'd also do before a trial. You'd have an expert
00:26:14.480witness certified. And he said, we didn't do any of that because you said you were settling the
00:26:20.460case. So I don't even have expert witnesses that I can call or whose testimony I can look to.
00:26:26.740And there's no jury here to evaluate it. So tell me how you envisioned. And he says the case is
00:26:32.680over. So like, shouldn't this have been handled before I dismissed the case? So how did you
00:26:37.180envision this would have gone down? How should this have gone down? In my opinion, if the case
00:26:42.280is dismissed on a different basis, it stops at that point where it is dismissed and the procedural
00:26:49.320point and it went away and it should not continue after the case has been dismissed, the damages
00:26:56.400part. So if she wanted to file this motion, she should have done it in your view prior to the
00:27:01.680dismissal of the case? Well, she had used as a defense. She had used multiple defenses to my
00:27:07.960understanding. The first was a procedural one about where she spoke. The communication happened
00:27:12.860to be in a privileged place. And that's what she filing a human rights campaign or complaint with
00:27:20.820the California HR. Right. And that defense does not include attorney fees. And her second defense
00:27:27.800was 47.1, which does include attorney fees, trouble, actual damages, and potential punitive.
00:27:35.840Punitive is not guaranteed, it's potential. So that would be, but my understanding, if he
00:27:41.600dismissed it under one completely and chose not to discuss it because Judge Lyman chose not to
00:27:46.740discuss it, number two, he did not say I'm dismissing it for three reasons. He said I'm
00:27:53.080dismiss it for one. So I thought we're one and done then. But then here we are.
00:27:59.700Do you think this is about her trying to look like the victor when, you know, clearly they
00:28:07.080settled for no money and people pointed that out and she took a bit of a PR black eye?
00:28:11.780Well, I have a bit of a concern that this bill is really meant to protect survivors who are
00:28:18.140having meritless cases brought against them when they don't have money to defend themselves.
00:28:21.980And it was supposed to make someone discouraged from bringing forward a meritless suit.
00:28:27.040And I do worry about my bill being misused and for, you know, just for PR and what it could be gained from that when it really matters so much to survivors to be able to have these protections that so many of her claims are dismissed.
00:30:09.520So the concern was if you have to go forward and defend it and you prevail,
00:30:15.100then only if you prevail to show that you did not have malice you would recover your attorney fee
00:30:22.520so at least you'd be made whole in any damages that you might have like missing work or something
00:30:28.100to that effect and also the purpose that I believed in was to incentivize attorneys to
00:30:33.840take these very difficult cases and you know so that's been my main concern with the bill
00:30:39.820and when you say you prevail I imagine her lawyers will say well she did prevail because
00:30:44.060she got the defamation case against her dismissed. Is that not good enough?
00:30:48.140For 47.1, it would not be. You would have to show malice in order to receive any attorney fees.
00:30:54.860That would have to be established. And right now we have not seen that. It would have to be argued
00:31:01.380or a whole new case. And I don't know how you make a lie of a case that was dead.
00:31:07.900Who would have to show malice by whom?
00:31:09.860In this circumstance, the plaintiff, Baldoni, would have to show that Blake was motivated by malice, did this with malice behind her sexual harassment lawsuit.
00:31:21.940So if he's able to show that she had a motivation other than her concerns for sexual harassment, if, you know, if he can't show, you know, she did this maliciously and she honestly believed this was happening to her, then she would potentially prevail.
00:31:36.140But if he is able to show that she had ulterior motives or some other definition of malice behind her wanting to go forward with this, you know, sexual harassment case, then he would prevail.
00:31:52.620Got it. And then this is back to the problem of they never had testimony.
00:31:58.420They haven't had a hearing. They haven't had a trial.
00:32:00.400So it's like she just wants this reimbursement, my own belief is, to make it look like she won something from him, even though she walked away for not even $1.
00:32:10.080And she took a PR hit because everybody said it's basically an admission that she has no claim.
00:32:16.220She knows she's going to lose if she goes forward to trial.
00:32:18.140So last question, if the judge, in this case Judge Lyman, is listening to this, what do you want him to know?
00:32:24.540I would say I used hesitation on awarding something that has not had fact proven of
00:32:30.380malice. You would still have to go forward and listen to that because that was the intention
00:32:34.740of the bill. And to do it in this case, I would suggest can undermine survivors as opposed to
00:32:41.140advance their cause. It is interesting. The whole purpose was to protect survivors that were in a
00:32:47.640place of being silenced because they had no power. Yeah. And that's not Blake Lively.
00:32:53.960Well, I thank you for coming on and explaining your post.
00:36:10.060this law that had a very good purpose, you know, a good basis was actually there to try to level
00:36:15.720the playing field. And that's really what attorney's fees do. You know, attorney's fees
00:36:18.940clauses in these statutes, they're really for one of two purposes. It's either to curb really,
00:36:24.300really bad conduct, which is why we see that malice language in this law, or it's to really
00:36:28.620make the level playing field. And that's what your last guest was talking about. You know,
00:36:32.460it's really hard for survivors to find lawyers to take these cases. And so they want to sort of
00:36:37.960level this playing field, give a little bit more incentive to lawyers to take these cases.
00:36:42.460That's not what we have here. We have Blake Lively, who is definitely misusing this law,
00:36:47.180trying to remain relevant, trying to remain in the headlines as desperately as she can.
00:36:51.540She just needs to walk away at this point.
00:36:55.120You know, Phil, it becomes really clear if you think about something like the Duke LaCrosse case,
00:37:00.620you know, where Crystal Mangum, the alleged victim in that case, made the whole thing up.
00:37:06.040And we know that she's admitted it. But she had these three lacrosse players very much in the crosshairs. They were charged criminally with rape. I mean, it was about as serious as a heart attack.
00:37:17.460And, you know, that's why the law is controversial that Victoria put through, because those guys would absolutely, in a civil matter, if she sued them, have said, we're 100 percent counterclaiming against you for defamation.
00:37:31.700And they would have under her bill potentially recovered if they could prove she filed her claims against them with malice.
00:37:39.720Now, those guys would have had zero problem proving that because she made the whole thing up.
00:37:43.380What what what other motive could there be? Of course, it was malicious.
00:37:46.660Baldoni, if he's actually forced by this judge to have some sort of an evidentiary hearing or post-trial trial, I don't even know what they're suggesting.
01:01:40.020What would you do, Dave, if you if you walked into a courthouse for an explosive case like this?
01:01:45.580I mean, for sure, this is a very, very hot case where they've already injected race.
01:01:50.340I mean, I mentioned this guy, Dominique Alexander, because he's been all over the place.
01:01:53.000The family hired him. He's not just like some friend who's like piping off on his own. The
01:01:57.600family hired him. This is early on in this case. I'm going to play this and I'm going to show you
01:02:01.040what's happening outside the courthouse this week. He got out there on April 17th, 2025. This is
01:02:07.380right after it happened and gave a presser. And Carmelo Anthony's mom is right behind him as he's
01:02:13.200doing this nonsense. Watch and listen to SOT10. Black people in America, while the current
01:02:19.860occupant sits at 1600 Pennsylvania. Black people in America don't have to pull the race
01:02:27.380card. It's what we live as a reality every day. It's what we have to teach our children.
01:02:35.220We don't want to, but we have to. We don't like to, but if we want to sleep at night,
01:02:43.600we got to. I ain't pulling no race card. I live it. I'm reminded all the time that I'm a black
01:02:53.420man in America. Oh, Lord. All right. So we had that. And there's a bunch of those, by the way,
01:02:59.160we could spend the next half an hour of me playing Dominique Alexander and his racial grievances.
01:03:04.080On behalf of the family, for listening audience, the mom and the dad of Carmelo Anthony are holding
01:03:07.160each other behind him, listening to all of that. Obviously fine with it. Now you show up to be a
01:03:12.260jury. And of course, it starts as a jury pool. Everybody's been there. You get the summons to
01:03:17.700appear for jury service and you show up. You're a potential juror until you're actually selected.
01:03:21.980And that's what they're doing this week. And this is what they see. Here's thought five.
01:03:25.480Okay. There's that. There's protesters, well, supporters for Austin Metcalfe as well. We've
01:03:46.980got video here of their outside where they have a large banner and their banner reads
01:03:52.880Justin for Austin Metcalf, which seems pretty benign, but I declare, I decree Carmelo Anthony
01:03:59.500is free. Not even sure what that means, but this is what the jury is going to have to walk through.
01:04:03.340All the jury pool members understanding this is like the gauntlet that's going to await them.
01:04:07.760And to telegraphing, there's extra scrutiny on this case. You're going to get it. You're going
01:04:13.480to get it either way. So what do you do as the prosecutor or the defense attorney in that
01:04:17.540situation? Well, the judge issued the gag order, but you can only do so much because people had
01:04:22.720the First Amendment right, but you want to at least keep the protesters far enough away from
01:04:27.260the courthouse where they don't intimidate the jurors. You know, you saw this also in the Karen
01:04:31.140Reid case. You had all these people wearing pink in solidarity with Karen Reid. And it's hard to
01:04:35.760argue that it doesn't affect the jurors. Those jurors have to go home to that community and
01:04:40.420they're going to have to answer to their neighbors why they found the beloved defendant guilty. And
01:04:44.820so that's why it is tough. It's intimidating. And judges can only do so much with gag orders
01:04:50.500and orders of removing people from the courthouse a certain number of feet.
01:04:55.180But ultimately, because we have the First Amendment,
01:04:57.340it is something that prosecutors fear so much, jury nullification.
01:05:00.600I think that's what the defense is hoping for here,
01:05:02.960that even though the evidence here is really strong,
01:05:05.000and really, there's such a weak claim of self-defense,
01:05:07.300you can't take out a knife and stab someone to death for pushing you,
01:05:11.260and you can't be the instigator and then claim self-defense.
01:05:14.540But you still have the prospect of jury nullification.
01:05:17.960We may have seen it in the O.J. Simpson case, and we could see it here.
01:05:20.500the saying the little chance always remind me of back in i think it was 2011 they sent me down to
01:05:28.720texas to cover the indictment of tom delay who was in the republican majority leadership and he got
01:05:35.380indicted for i think money laundering around his campaign funds something something involving
01:05:39.540finances and um they they were protesting and they were chanting behind me and i remember the anchor
01:05:44.960i think it was shep smith said what are they chanting behind you megan and i was very serious
01:05:49.500back then and not at all really in touch with my sense of humor but i remember repeating they are
01:05:54.880chanting tom delay is a stinker he'll be headed to the clinker back to you show
01:06:00.680and he he was convicted so they weren't they weren't wrong the power of a local d.a so are
01:06:09.600we all in it yeah it's yeah the power of a local district or no you took down the powerful speaker
01:06:14.480of the house yeah that that's true yeah well so are we all in agreement that carmelo anthony's
01:06:20.160got a very difficult task in front of him that lawyer like the odds are overwhelmingly that
01:06:26.660he's going to be convicted i don't know i'm concerned about a stealth juror that's what
01:06:31.640i'm afraid of you know we the judge asked the lady who got them on tape well the see the judge
01:06:36.780asked uh the entire panel an interesting question uh the judge says despite our flaws we are the
01:06:43.120greatest country in the world. Do you agree? Several jurors apparently disagreed. Reporting
01:06:49.760is that a few potential jurors say that we are not the only great country. And one juror says
01:06:55.380our country has a long and complicated history. And so this is a relatively small community. And
01:07:00.940so what I wonder, I don't think there's going to be jury nullification. I don't think there's going
01:07:05.600to be an acquittal. But I think the more likely scenario would be a hung jury if you have one or
01:07:12.460two people that intentionally sort of work their way on to that jury by not answering questions
01:07:18.500truthfully just so that they can engineer a certain outcome. If you have one or two stealth
01:07:23.600jurors, we could see potentially a hung jury. By the way, what did you make of that? Yeah,
01:07:30.240go ahead. I would argue that would also still be jury nullification, because even if you have one
01:07:34.140juror who's hung on this, it's hard to ignore the evidence. The evidence is what it is. And the only
01:07:40.240way in my mind that you would find him not to be to be not guilty or to be hung as a hung juror
01:07:46.280would be saying that I'm going to ignore the evidence. I'm going to ignore the law and self
01:07:50.240defense. And I'm going to refuse to go along with the conviction because I don't like the direction
01:07:55.760our country is going. I don't like the fact that you have a defendant who is in a position of being
01:08:02.740really in a state in their mind where they are the victim, not the other way around.
01:08:08.600Do we have, I am interested in that judge's question and where, like, where did that come from?
01:08:13.680That seems like an odd jury question to me, but I could be wrong.
01:08:17.140But what did you make, what do you think the, this is an important question, Ashley, and I just lost it, about the self-defense claim and how he's going to argue that he had a reasonable fear that somebody was coming for him.
01:11:47.700But the judge did the work for the parties because that that question will elicit those kinds of answers.
01:11:53.860My big concern is not really what the judge asked.
01:11:56.720I just want to make sure I hope that the judge allowed the parties to use their for cause challenges,
01:12:03.340Meaning that when the lawyers try to knock off jurors, they have a certain amount of of what are called peremptory challenges, which means I can get a jury out for any reason, as long as it's not a bad reason.
01:12:14.200It's not because of race, et cetera. I hope that the judge would allow the parties to invoke what's called a for cause challenge.
01:12:23.380I mean, I'm going to strike that juror because there's a good reason for it based on their answer to the judge's question.
01:12:28.980As long as that was done properly, I don't think that an appeals court will overturn a conviction here.
01:12:35.480I think if you really wanted to get to somebody's party affiliation, I mean, you could do so much.
01:12:40.160You could you could be like, how do you feel about the following like four things?
01:12:45.560The color orange, gold, McDonald's and the ballroom.
01:12:54.040We should just ask people what kind of bumper stickers they had on their car.
01:12:57.380I don't think people really drive around with bumper stickers nearly as much as they used to.
01:13:02.040But that was a good way because it seems like people who are inclined to use bumper stickers, they're either going to be on the far left or the far right.
01:13:14.000But I think the judge is honestly, to me, I think he's trying to weed out the possibility of people who have ulterior motives for trying to get on that jury.
01:13:25.620Yeah. My favorite bumper sticker ever is it read, I want to die quietly in my sleep like my grandpa, not kicking and screaming like the passengers in his car.
01:13:36.980Oh, no. I've seen that. You know, Megan, nowadays when you do jury selection, you go online immediately and you look for their social media posts.
01:13:45.780So you may not even need to ask them questions. Yeah. You go on their Facebook and you see, oh, this person likes.
01:13:50.960It's true. It's not hard to figure it out.
01:16:21.660and on top of all that it's come out that she was extremely abusive toward her boyfriend
01:16:33.600verbally abusive and possibly more than that um she was ultimately convicted
01:16:38.920was it it was murder right she was convicted of murder uh of both of these boys and she went away
01:16:46.440to jail where she's been for over a year. And now we get reports that, first of all,
01:16:53.780one appeal has failed, but she's pursuing a separate appeal now that is going to go up to
01:16:58.660the Ohio Supreme Court. There is a question about whether she was adequately assisted
01:17:04.880by counsel in meeting a filing deadline for, among other things. And she's only, what,
01:17:11.56017 years old. She was 17 when she did this. So she's been sentenced to life in prison,
01:17:17.460but with a minimum of 15 years before she can be considered for parole. So she could get parole.
01:17:24.120But the news is not only is she inching closer to an appeal or actually having an appeal heard,
01:17:30.140but the latest drop shows that her behavior in jail, you guys, has been absolutely awful.
01:17:37.960Law and Crime was reporting on this, and she has been violating the rules in jail seemingly every other day.
01:17:46.280It varies from more minor things like cinching or somehow tailoring her jail-issued sweatshirt so that it's tight and kind of saucy looking on her, which is not allowed,
01:24:23.120If you do not let me in the house that I sleep in every night, we are done.
01:24:29.020Some of the text messages that were introduced in the trial were her writing to Dom,
01:24:34.860I told you it's my way or the highway.
01:24:37.080I would watch your back from now on and your house and your car and your life and any of your friends.
01:24:44.380And Dom responds, Kenzie, this isn't right and you know it.
01:24:47.240Just two, three days ago, they released additional texts. This is from March 2022, in which the boyfriend allegedly texted that Mackenzie, quote, hit me and, quote, tried to throw a rock at me. Later that month, he also warned her that she was, quote, driving like a maniac, according to the documents.
01:25:11.560I mean, they had this girl dead to rights, Dave.
01:25:16.440That's, I think, why they decided to go for the judge and maybe just throw themselves on the mercy of like an older man who might have mercy on this 17-year-old girl in the way juries probably wouldn't.
01:25:29.160That's my guess, that they thought this older male judge might feel some speck of empathy for her or might bite on the blood pressure thing.
01:25:36.880But her her bad behavior in the prison dovetails perfectly perfectly with her bad behavior in life.
01:25:43.020And I would be remiss if I didn't point out it's her parents fault. Yes, it is.
01:25:47.900The mother is a complete enabler. If you watch this show on Netflix, the mother and the father, the father.
01:25:54.020I mean, the only ones who came out, too. Yeah.
01:25:55.960The only ones who came off worse than Mackenzie in that show were her parents who just enabled her, explained away all of her issues.
01:26:03.280they came across so terribly and they're still standing by their daughter claiming that she is
01:26:09.780innocent and that the system is rigged against her because apparently the boyfriend's family
01:26:14.480are well connected. It's awful. One small correction. The trial judge was an older woman
01:26:19.420and perhaps she thought that she would get a better shape from her. But, you know, although
01:26:24.200the trial judge was tough and she dressed down Mackenzie's mother when Mackenzie's mother tried
01:29:01.740Back with me now, Phil, Ashley, and Dave from the MK True Crime Show.
01:29:05.640Go and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.
01:29:07.580Just type in MK True Crime and you will see their show.
01:29:10.560Hit subscribe to get all of their great legal content on the best cases that you're interested in.
01:29:15.960This one over in the UK has been horrific.
01:29:19.940This poor kid, Henry Nowak, was on his way home in the evening and was attacked by a man who happens to be Sikh.
01:29:30.020And it is relevant because he's walking around London with an enormous sword or three on him.
01:29:38.980We have video that we released exclusively last week or before the verdict that showed him on another day walking with a sword that was as long as most people's leg just casually affixed to his hip walking down the streets of London.
01:29:53.800You know, it's this is a lot to allow somebody in the name of religion.
01:29:57.840And this guy had multiple weapons on him where you're not allowed to conceal, carry or otherwise carry a gun.
01:32:18.420In fact, Henry told officers that he could not breathe nine times.
01:32:25.200He told them he had been stabbed four times.
01:32:29.000The response from one officer was, I don't think you have, mate.
01:32:34.780The police have said they were misled by the murderer
01:32:37.940and that the scene when they arrived was complex.
01:32:42.200Unfortunately, it seems to us the truth is much simpler.
01:32:48.420The police were told by our son himself and by a member of the public who called 999 that they heard someone shout that they had been stabbed.
01:43:40.200He was not handcuffed when transported to the police station.
01:43:43.920As far as we understand, he was never handcuffed at all.
01:43:49.120And, as Vikram Digwar himself told the court,
01:43:52.760whilst under arrest for Henry's murder,
01:43:55.400Police even took him to the kitchen so he could choose his food.
01:43:59.240That's the father of victim Henry Novak, who was murdered by Vikram Digwa, who's been found guilty.
01:44:06.140The father, in an extraordinary display of dignity, calling out the police and Keir Starmer's government, to some extent, on their cold, callous behavior toward his dying son.
01:44:21.080We're back with the hosts of MK True Crime, Ashley Merchant, Dave Ehrenberg and Phil Holloway.
01:44:25.360Dave, pick it up where you left off on the subject of Keir Starmer, because just to remind the audience now, there is a picture here of him kneeling, kneeling post George Floyd.
01:44:35.340So he felt totally fine getting down on one knee and stirring up racial controversy after that death of somebody who wasn't even his constituent.
01:44:45.140But when Henry gets murdered back in December of 2025, from that day to yesterday, he said nothing.
01:44:54.300He didn't even do the pablum of we're deeply sorry for his family's loss and we'll let the legal process play out.
01:45:01.820You know, the benign we're sorry for what's happened here.
01:45:07.020He waited until the whole thing was over and then came out and said, this is an awful, shocking case.
01:45:11.820Henry's loved ones have gone through the trauma of a long trial and endured Henry's killer making up appalling claims about their son, who was thoughtful, kind and deeply loved.
01:45:22.540That's that's really not the trauma. Like the trauma is that Henry's dead.
01:45:26.760But OK, he took a shot. It's right that the police are being investigated and we must end the cycle of tragedy by tackling the horror of knife crime.
01:45:37.760Henry's family, friends in New Year's University
01:45:39.320and the city of Southampton will continue to feel his loss.
01:45:41.780Our thoughts will always be with them.
01:46:34.240You could argue that that type of appeasement, that culture he's created, helped lead to an innocent 18-year-old dying in the streets in handcuffs, gasping for air while the police were coddling his murderer.
01:52:33.760They began around 6 p.m. this evening, British time, to hold a moment of silence for the teenager with shouts of shame on you also being heard.
01:52:42.320They are reporting at GB News that there's a strong police presence at the protest as well, monitoring.
01:52:47.700Let's take a look at how that is, and then I'll tell you the latest news about the cops.
01:53:03.760Just jammed in like smacked sardines outside of this police station, you can barely move.
01:56:15.020for sticking around late. I know Phil and Dave just
01:56:17.020had a piece out and you got to go too, but it's
01:56:18.980been great having you. No, it's good to see you. Thank you for
01:56:20.960all the great work over at MK True Crime.
01:56:23.240All right. Well, thank you for having me.
01:56:25.060All right. To be continued. Wow. We're taking your thoughts on the Henry Novak case. Email me. It's Megan at Megan Kelly dot com. My God, we'll stay on it tomorrow. We are back with the results. Maybe they take forever. They are like a third world country in California. So we may have some indication of how the vote went at the L of the L.A. mayor's race and the gubernatorial level. And our guest is perfect. It's Adam Carolla. So no matter what's in the news, we have the perfect guest and we'll see you all then.
01:56:55.060Thanks for listening to The Megyn Kelly Show. No BS, no agenda, and no fear.