Josie Dikeman Sentencing — What Punishment Will She Receive? — WI v. Josie Dikeman

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Ah, take it to trial Take it to trial Welcome in, grab a seat, hit the like and subscribe The sweet peas on the mic with that spicy little vibe Got the courtroom streaming in the chat going wild We're debating heavy topics but still laughing like a child From objections to confessions to the judge's side-eye If it's justice and it's messy, we gon' talk about why Every day's a new case, every moment's a ride And when Sweet Pea's in the building, we be learning with pride My eyes on deck, keep the room running smooth Film-free therapist, you know, keeping everyone in the groove Rachel with the facts, pretty brown girl with the stats Morildia and Fowler keep the peace in the chat But Jason walks in and the ladies collide Take it to trial Where the truth gets loud and the laughs run wild Sweet Pea's got the spice, she's the queen of the aisle Chat fam rolling deep, we been here all the wire Lights on, mics up, we gon' do this ride Take it to trial Every day, every now and Take it to trial Morning shows are sharp, afternoon is on fire And we catch every moment that the court might inspire From witnesses whispering, the lawyers trying to hard You know Sweet Pea breaks it down like a legal tarot card Chats cracking jokes, dropping theories on the fly We're serious when it counts, but we still testify Minds hold it down when the trolls try to play If you ride a line, boom Court adjourned for the day But when Jason logs in with that deep hello sound The ladies in the chat, man, they all fall down Take it, take it, take it, take it, take it, take it, take it Take it to trial Where the truth gets loud and the laughs run wild Sweet Pea's got the spice, she's the queen of the aisle Chat fam rolling deep, we been here a while Lights on, mics up, we gon' do this ride Take it to trial Every day and every night Take it to trial When the sun goes down and the cases get deep After dark gets spicy, no secrets still keep Taboo topics, big laughs, slap, happy crew Sweet Pea says behave, but we never really do It's opinions, confessions, stories untold But we handle it with heart like the chap made a goal Take it to trial From day to night and every wild mile Sweet Pea's kneeling strong with her trademark style And the fam in the chat always makes it worthwhile Turn it up, show some love, hit the light on sight Take it to trial Yeah, we live tonight Take it to trial Yeah, we live tonight Take it to trial [00:02:43] Josie Dockerman: Hopefully everybody made it over here safely for our Josie Dockerman case For those that don't know Josie, she was actually convicted I'm gonna show Well, convicted, right? If we're here for a sentence And duh Then you know she was convicted Um, she, um, was, uh, convicted of first degree intentional homicide In the death of her six-year-old, um, boyfriend's son Who they call AJ Um, authorities say that, uh, Dyke, Dykeman called 911 in February of 2023 Uh, when the child was unresponsive And an autopsy later revealed He passed away from blunt force trauma Um, also with a sedative, um, also contributing Investigators alleged Well, uh, investigators brought forth a case Um, that alleged a history of abuse Not only, I don't, you know, I don't know Cause they, she tried to blame it on The boyfriend The baby daddy His dad Um So she is facing the, uh, up to life in prison You know, without parole So we are gonna go into our sentencing here But before we go into our sentencing here I did wanna show When the verdict was read Cause I thought it was kinda interesting Like her attorney He was one of these attorneys like I am down for my client In all shape, way, forms, and fashion Like, even if y'all think she guilty I say she not guilty And I'm down for my client He was one of those So I wanna just play The actual sentencing here And that, um We watched a couple months ago Okay Here we go Oh, let me move all this Lindsay stuff off of here Woo, we got all her stuff still up here We don't need the sidebars We don't need The week three We don't need any of this stuff right now Cause we're in a whole totally different case At this point in time I'll put me up here You'll just see me Okay And let's, let's listen in Now this is the verdict She was out She, she's out on bail at this point in time And I'll tell you She should not have came back from lunch This is the one Where she should've just kept moving She should've just kept it moving Like I guess they thought That they was gonna win this case Like Can you imagine Like she's under there Drinking her nice blue drink It looks cold She had a nice refreshing lunch And she coming back Because the verdict is here And Here we go Like Uh, no She should've ran Run, Josie, run She didn't listen [00:06:09] Speaker 3: It's okay At least one of you's here So So all the parties are here Everybody's present Except for Mr. Troverson Because of Conflict One thing I do want to say Before I Before we bring the jury in Um This case is obviously Very emotional Very difficult for everybody And I Just want you all to realize That This is the process Um I still expect there to be decorum I don't expect I expect there not to I'd ask you not to shout out Not to Say one thing or another Um You know Please leave orderly at the end Whatever the result may be Um And I'll say And just one last thing Is that A case like this And I've had a number of them It is raw emotion Which is there And I know that It is Um Very important that we deal with this In this way Um And so I ask for all of you To take that into consideration And Um And ultimately We all are grieving Over this situation So Having said that Let's Um Let's bring the jury in [00:07:30] Speaker ?: If you haven't [00:07:31] Speaker 4: Turned off your cell phone Or I don't see any cell phone [00:07:36] Speaker 3: No thank you Sorry about that I should have said that Thank you. All right, everybody may be seated. And has the jury reached a verdict? We have not. Okay, could you hand it to Terri and she'll hand it over to me? Thank you. Let me make sure we have all the six pages. [00:08:46] Josie Dockerman: Okay. Thank you. [00:09:20] Speaker ?: State of Wisconsin versus Josie Dykeman, La Crosse County case number 23 CF 475. Count one. [00:09:28] Speaker 5: We the jury find Josie Dykeman guilty of first degree reckless homicide as charged in count [00:09:34] Speaker ?: one of the information. [00:09:34] Speaker 5: Signed by the foreman. Count one. We the jury find Josie Dykeman guilty of first degree reckless homicide as charged in count [00:09:48] Speaker ?: one of the information. [00:09:48] Speaker 5: Count two. Signed by the foreman. Verdict for count two. We the jury find Josie Dykeman guilty of chronic neglect of a child consequences is death as charged in count two of the information. Signed by the foreman. Count three. Count three. We the jury find Josie Dykeman guilty of physical abuse of a child. Of a child repeated acts causing death as charged in count three of the information. Did at least one violation cause the death of the child? No. Did at least one violation cause the death of the child? No. Did at least one violation result in great bodily harm to Alexander Pendron? Yes. Signed by the foreman. [00:10:27] Speaker 3: So as to those verdicts, I'm going to ask you as a joint, you just say yes at first, but then I'm going to go through each verdict. First question is, is that your verdict as a jury? [00:10:42] Speaker 6: Yes. [00:10:43] Speaker 3: Okay. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to go through each one. I'm going to pull the jury. Then I'm going to go through each one of you. I'm going to use numbers one through -- one through seven -- one through five here. One through seven to -- or 12, excuse me. Is that your verdict is to count some information we're handing out for these type of trials. I'll enter them into the record. The court is going to order a pre-sentence investigation and order a sentencing -- it's probably going to be more like 60 days, just simply for the complexity of this. Given the seriousness of these charges, given everything else, I am going to revoke the bond at this point. [00:11:36] Speaker 7: I'd like to be heard on that, Your Honor. Go ahead. Judge, since the state's primary witnesses, one of them is an admitted perjurer, the other two were obviously lying, given Ms. Deichmann's bond compliance throughout the course of this case. Given the fact that the man actually responsible for this child's death is seated free in the back of this courtroom, we're asking that the court continue her bond while we prepare her sentencing. [00:12:03] Speaker 3: The state's position? [00:12:04] Speaker 8: The jury's found her responsible for the death of this child. The presumption of innocence is gone. She should be remanded. [00:12:10] Speaker 3: The court's remanding her into custody at this point in time on the basis -- not only -- I know she's been very compliant with bond, but these are very serious charges. She is found guilty at this point. I agree with the state. I think the other issue we raise is not for this court to decide, but I agree with the state. [00:12:30] Josie Dockerman: Basically, I'll rewind it for you pretty, but basically what he said is, look, they was up there committing perjury, and when he talk about perjury, he talk about the kids, and he lied, and the person that's actually guilty for it is right here in the courtroom. So my client should stay out here on bail until sentencing. Oh, my goodness. I thought he was all in for his client, baby. That's why I wanted to show this again, because this attorney was all in. I'll enter him into the record. [00:13:03] Speaker 3: The court's going to order a pre-sentence investigation, and order a sentencing -- it's probably going to be more like 60 days, just simply for the complexity of this. Given the seriousness of these charges, given everything else, I am going to revoke the bond at this point. [00:13:26] Speaker 7: I'd like to be heard on that, Your Honor. [00:13:28] Speaker 3: Go ahead. [00:13:29] Speaker 7: Judge, since the state's primary witnesses, one of them is an admitted perjurer, the other two were obviously lying, given Ms. Deichmann's bond compliance throughout the course of this case. Given the fact that the man actually responsible for this child's death is seated free in the back of this courtroom, we're asking that the court continue her bond while we prepare her sentencing. [00:13:51] Speaker 8: The jury's found her responsible for the death of this child. The presumption of innocence is gone. She should be remanded. [00:14:00] Speaker 3: The court's remanding her into custody at this point in time on the basis -- not only -- I know she's been very compliant with bond, but these are very serious charges. She is found guilty at this point. I agree with the state. I think the other issue we raise is not for this court to decide. It's for a different form. With that, the court will remain during the custody right now. As far as the case goes, we are concluded as of today. I'll get a date for the sentencing. There might be an alternative PSI, maybe? [00:14:41] Speaker 7: Judge, a couple things. One, Ms. Dykeman maintains her fifth and sixth amendment rights to silence and does not wish to be questioned by any law enforcement officer or agent of the state while remanded. Two, I'm asking the court to order that the PSI not come with a specific recommendation due to the anchoring effect and due to the fact that the recommendations vary widely and are inconsistent with State versus Galeon. Number three, I can tell the court that we're going to advise Ms. Dykeman not to cooperate with the PSI and meet with the agent. And number four, I am told that there should be some exculpatory reports that we have not received regarding at least three different witness interviews and the laboratory testing of the substance, which proved to be sucrose, allegedly. So, I'm putting that on the record that we are still requesting those reports. [00:15:34] Speaker 3: Okay. So, obviously, I'm still going to order a PSI for the background information, even if she doesn't participate. As far as the issue of get a date, if you end up doing an alternative PSI, just let us know. Obviously, we need to give enough notice for everybody to be here for the sentence and plus for the victims to make their statements. Anything else today from the State's perspective? No. Thank you. No, Judge. All right. So, what I would ask is why don't we have one of the families, please leave the other families. Stay here. Those in support of Ms. Dykeman, just stay here for a bit. Those who are other, please, if you want to go ahead, you can go ahead and file out. We just like you to sort of go at separate times. Correct, Brandon? We do that out of security just to make sure everybody's safe. All right. We're adjourned. [00:16:32] Josie Dockerman: Now, watch this. Watch this, y'all. [00:16:34] Speaker ?: Okay. I'll be back soon. She get to hug her sister. [00:16:37] Josie Dockerman: She get to hug all her attorneys, pass off her water, take off her jewelry. I'm telling you, if it was anybody else, baby, they would have been back there handcuffing you. I seen one trial. I think the lady who pew-pewed the guy through the door, they was handcuffing her before she could even blink. They couldn't even get the verdict out and they was handcuffing her. He was right behind her thing like, clink, clink. Like, I wish you would, but this one, she get the hug and, I don't know. I just thought it was interesting. Yeah. So, we see how she went in. Get another drink. Like, y'all, he just waiting on her, just patiently waiting on her. Whenever you're ready, ma'am, we'll take you back here. We're going at your pace. Oh, you need to go back? Sure, no problem. You need to take another drink? Absolutely. We're doing this all on your time. This is all about you. So, we go from that to, let's get where we are currently today, to our sentencing that is happening. Let me get our sentencing up. [00:18:45] Speaker 9: She got on that little, like, vomit green. Where is her attorney that was mad? I don't see him. [00:18:55] Josie Dockerman: Thank you. [00:19:25] Speaker 3: There are a couple people on Zoom. Just media, please don't show the Zoom. If they have pictures up, I don't see that they do necessarily. [00:19:48] Speaker ?: I'll be waiting a minute. Sorry, we have to wait until everybody's present, I just have to wait for the person to hear. [00:20:10] Speaker 3: Sorry, we have to wait until everybody's present, I just have to wait for the person to hear. It's up to you, if you want to or not. I just wanted to give you that option, okay? All right, so this is 23 CF 475 State of Wisconsin versus Josie Dykeman appearances. [00:20:59] Speaker 8: Matthew Torbenson and Emily Rood appear for the state. Also present at the state's council table is investigative Sergeant Rich Amundsen. Good morning, Your Honor. [00:21:08] Speaker 7: Good morning. Your Honor, Ms. Dykeman appears in person and in custody with their attorneys Chris Zacher and David Bowles. [00:21:14] Speaker 3: All right, there's a time for the sentencing. There was a couple things. The state, I believe, has complied with pre-victim notification. There's a number of people present. Any concerns about that at all? No, we are in compliance. One thing I just want to put on the record is we did offer for individuals to be present. Some have chosen. Some have chosen. Some have chosen to appear by Zoom. I just want to make sure we know that we're trying to abide by the desires of the individuals. So, the court has reviewed, at this point in time, the court has reviewed, there was a pre-sentence investigation, which was document 588, which was submitted on July 28th. The court has reviewed that. The court has reviewed that. The court has also reviewed letters submitted by this defense. That was document 592. That was submitted on August 3rd. That consisted of five different letters. There's also document 594, which is the defense memo on sentencing. The court has reviewed that. There was a -- and I'll address this right now -- there was an error in how the verdict was noted, and the state pointed this out. That has been changed. The count three was -- she was convicted of physical abuse of a child, repeated acts causing great bodily harm, not bodily harm, which it was listed under 948.03 parent 5, parent A3, which is a class C felony, not a class E felony. I'll also indicate that, you know, the verdict happened back on May 15th, with the conviction to, in count one, to the first-degree reckless homicide under 940.02 parent 1, which is a class B felony, and then count two, which is chronic neglect of a child, consequent death, in violation 948.215 parent 1. Going on with what the court reviewed, the -- also, the court has reviewed the letter from the state, considering similar cases under document 598. That was submitted August 5th. Then there was a victim letter by MH, the court reviewed that, and that was document number 599. And then there was a document from Alex Xavier, which the court reviewed, document 600 on August 6th. The reason I'm listing all that, have I missed anything? I just want to make sure I've reviewed everything. From the state, no. From the defense? No, judge. Okay. I should also say, I reviewed -- I have my own notes from testimony of the trial. I've reviewed bits and pieces of that over time. Well, I think the way we should begin is with statements by individuals. And then we'll go on to the argument from the state and the argument from defense, unless there's a -- unless otherwise. Any objection to that? [00:24:56] Speaker 8: No objection to that, Your Honor. I would ask for one minor deviation from that. Sure. I would ask that the last person that addresses the court from the state's side, after I make my comments, be Ms. Love, the mother of Alex. I would like her to have the last word. [00:25:09] Speaker 3: Okay. And so -- but that would be before defense speaks. Yes. And that's fine. I mean, it's up to you. And then -- and then after that's done, actually, I would have defense statements. You have people making statements, too, for Ms. Degman. No. All right. All right. With that, why don't we begin with statements by individuals. Go ahead and call them if you would like to come up. Just so the press knows, these are individuals making statements. Some are victims. Some aren't. Maybe the state can indicate if they're a victim or not. [00:25:48] Speaker 8: They're all family members. I would consider them all victims, Your Honor. Does the court wish to have these individuals take the witness stand to make their statements? Or what is your preference? Traditionally, we use the podium. [00:26:00] Speaker 3: Okay. If people feel comfortable. Or we have them make statements from the state's table, too. Okay. If they feel comfortable. [00:26:08] Speaker 8: And we've also advised a number of the individuals that want to make statements. This is going to be emotional for them. That if there's any concerns that we can take over in reading the statements. We've addressed that with all of them, as well, Your Honor. [00:26:21] Speaker 3: It might make sense to have, if we can get another chair there, have them sit right next to you and make statements. That way, individuals. Do we have another chair? [00:26:32] Speaker 7: Yeah. [00:26:34] Speaker 3: While they're doing that, just for everybody's sake. Obviously, this is going to be very emotional for everybody. Just to -- this is tragic at every level. I think I said this at the end of the trial to everybody. It's really important that we keep decorum in the courtroom. You've heard me say that before. I know it's hard. But obviously, if you're telling me something, you let me know what you feel. That's what is important. The other thing is, it's also important that when a decision is finally made, my experience -- I'm not saying this will happen here -- is that people will react one way or another. I'd ask you to react as personally as you possibly can and then, you know, keep the decorum as best you can here. I know it's going to be difficult. So, remember we're here because a young child has died. Xavier died. And so, in respect to that, we have to have the system be in a way that's respectful to everybody. So, having said that, I'm going to call up your first person. [00:27:58] Speaker 8: First person would be Jackie Scholl. My name is Jackie Scholl. [00:28:15] Speaker 10: I'm Alex Xavier's maternal aunt. I cannot express enough how much Alex Xavier meant to me and my family. He and his sisters had been intertwined into my family's daily life from the day they were born. When my sister went to prison for her wrongdoings, my mom and I took them in fully and provided ongoing love, care, safety. The transition was natural. Then, in 2021, Derek pulled Alex Xavier from our care and put him in the hands of Josie Dyckman. Alex Xavier cried and begged not to go. The look on his face, the tight grip he had around my body, and the intense pain in my upper arms from his fingernails digging into my arms as he was being ripped away will always be embedded into my memories. For two years, we reached out and expressed our concerns of abuse and neglect with CPS, the principal, and law enforcement to no avail. Josie was confronted, and through her lies, deceit, manipulation, and blaming others, she was not stopped. And the abuse and neglect continued without further ado. It is clear Josie is a victim of physical abuse, but this should not be allowed as an excuse or justification for her actions. The torture Alex Xavier endured was not a one-time mistake or a lapse in judgment. This occurred over a period of time. It was intentional. Alex Xavier was just a little boy. He was entirely dependent on her. He could not protect himself, remove himself from danger, or seek help on his own. I cannot fathom what he went through the last years of his life. Between being withheld from family, school, friends, having a broken femur, being pushed down the stairs, being punched, kicked, choked repeatedly, she failed to provide Alex Xavier with love, safety, nutrition, education, and medical care. Her actions were purposeful, thought out, and hidden from plain view. She knew her actions were sinful. The consequences of her actions are irreversible. He lost his life. He was deprived of the opportunity to grow, pursue his dreams, and experience the future. Our family received a life sentence of grief, and her sentence should adequately reflect the magnitude of that loss. Josie Dykeman's children were also victims of this tragedy, as they were exposed to this horrific home environment and were witnesses to the repetitive torture and neglect of their stepbrother, Alex. Josie's previous convictions of neglect and physical abuse in 2011 and 2013 involved a different child. This is a horrendous trend. If this case had been taken more seriously and allowed her prison time instead of probation, maybe 2013 and 2023 would have never happened. The children all need to feel safe, knowing she will remain in prison so they can have the opportunity to grow and heal. Children are entitled to safety and protection, and those who violate that must face meaningful and serious consequences. Josie should remain incarcerated to the full extent, as this is necessary to affirm her conviction of the abuse and neglect resulting in Alex Xavier's death, accountability, and to protect the children. This should not be taken lightly and should set a precedence. Not imposing the maximum sentence permitted by the law in this case would demonstrate failure of the court to recognize the seriousness of the offense and the suffering Alex Xavier endured. Thank you. Thank you. [00:31:17] Speaker ?: All right. [00:31:18] Speaker 8: I'm going to call your next person. In our next, we have Annie Anderson. She's going to read a statement on her behalf, as well as a statement from Justin Anderson. And I think your honor is going to hear about the special, a very special relationship that existed between Justin and Alex. She's not here yet. I apologize, your honor. She's not here yet. So we're going to have Cheryl Phelps read her statement. [00:31:45] Speaker 3: Okay. [00:31:46] Speaker ?: Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Your honor. I'm Alex Xavier's grandma, and I called him AJ. He was my little AJ. [00:31:59] Speaker 11: AJ lived at my home with his, um, he lived at my house and had his own room, even a red car bed. Red was his favorite color. He would also stay at his aunt Jackie's a lot. We did a lot as a family, a lot of family activities. AJ loved his older sister, Aubrey, and called her his big sissy. And his baby sister, Azalea, brother junior. AJ was born July 10th, same day as one of his cousins. And eight days before one of his other cousins, they were the three musketeers. When you see one of the boys, you most likely seen the three of them. AJ's birthdays are very hard. We still have birthday parties for him, but it's not easy for his cousins sharing the same birthday. They were so very close. AJ liked Woody from Toy Story. He even had a Woody doll that he would take in our vehicle and put in a car seat. He picked out a Woody backpack for school. He was so proud of that. AJ also liked Lightning McQueen, Spider-Man, playing with cars, running, playing basketball. AJ was making tents in the living room, dancing, playing games. Loved going to watch his uncle race, especially Uncle Justin. That was his buddy. He and AJ would say how, "Now buddy, don't hit the wall or don't have a flat tire." Uncle Justin meant the world to him. AJ loved it when I would rock him and he would sit on my lap and rock with his little sister. There are days that I see his pictures. I smile. I'll laugh. I'll cry. I go through stages. Losing him broke me. I will never recover from that. Then it came a time where we started spending more time at his dad's. We would say, "AJ, do you want to take some toys and some clothes with you?" And he'd say, "No," because Brant would just get them. I would take him to go visit his mom, which he loved to see her. And one of our trips, out of the blue, he said, "Josie smacks him in the face and makes me drink my spit." That shocked me. And I said, "What?" And he repeated it to me and also threw his arm back and said, "You want some of this?" When we got back, I had to drop him off at his dad's and I told them what he said. And that was the last time we got to have him. One exception was when his buddy got married and AJ was in the wedding. AJ was able to be able to be there, but not very long. He wasn't able to finish taking pictures, eat, or be there for the reception. This was the last time our family got to see him running around playing with his cousins, his best friends. He didn't want to leave. We had a tree for AJ at the place we as a family got to see him happy for the last time. We go there a lot. We miss him so very much. It hurts. I still will collect Woody things and Lightning McQueen and I have his pictures and butterflies all over my house. I will never forget when he told me, Grandma, they won't let me go with you. I said, I know, honey, and we're trying so hard. I wanted to get you back. His eyes were so swollen and red bloodshot like we were told he got bug spray in his eyes. We did try very hard to get him back. Grandparents have no rights even though his sister still lived with me. I can't imagine what AJ had to go through, the terror and the fear, the pain. For over two years of his little life, his siblings that he lived with at that time, what they had to witness. What a nightmare. They were victims to his sister that he didn't get his sisters that he didn't get to see our whole family. He didn't get to see. We had to feel like he had to feel like we abandoned him. We tried very hard for over two years to get him back. We love our AJ and miss him so much. We are heartbroken and will never get over him being murdered and beaten. Hot sauce, et cetera, over a long time of his last years. AJ wasn't able to grow up, do what kids do, teenagers, be the adult, have a family, search his dreams. He got a life sentence and so did we. Joji should get the max. This isn't the first time she has hurt a child. She should not be around any child. The trauma she caused her own children to have them see a lot of what she did to AJ. We miss and love AJ every day. We should still, he should still be here with us. Justice for Alex Xavier AJ, thank you. [00:37:47] Speaker 3: Thank you, ma'am. [00:37:50] Speaker 8: I would ask that Annie Anderson come forward next to share the statements that she's prepared as well as the statement on behalf of Justin Anderson. [00:38:01] Speaker 3: Thank you. [00:38:02] Speaker 12: Your Honor, my name is Annie Anderson. Thank you. My name is Annie Anderson. The victim impact statement that I have to share is how Josie's actions have forever changed the lives of my husband, our children, and me. Our lives changed the day Alex Xavier was taken from this earth. The last day my husband got to see his buddy was at our wedding. We never imagined that this would be the last memory with AJ. The fact that we were never allowed to see him again has been devastating. Since losing him, our family has struggled with overwhelming grief, depression, anxiety, and heartbreak. There isn't a day that goes by that we don't think about him or wonder what he endured. As a mother, I have to answer questions no parent should ever have to answer. How do I explain to my children why their cousin was hurt? How do I explain that someone who was supposed to protect him, the person that needed, was the person that he needed protection from? There are no words that can make this make sense to a child. My children miss AJ every day. They miss playing with him, laughing with him, and making memories with their cousin. It breaks my heart knowing that they have to grow up without him. My heart also breaks for every young child who has been in Josie's care. Knowing the fear, confusion, and lasting pain of her actions. I cannot begin to imagine the fear AJ felt in her care. What is so difficult to understand is how someone could torture a child behind closed doors while presenting herself to the world as a loving mother. A loving mother protects children. She comforts them. She makes them feel safe. She did the opposite. She became a danger to every child who depended on her. She took away a piece of our family that can never be replaced. AJ was priceless, yet she treated his life though it had no value. Instead of directing her anger where it belonged, she took it out on a little boy who had done nothing wrong. AJ became the target of emotions that were never his to carry. The AJ I remember was happy, silly, and full of life. He loved to play outside. He loved watching his Uncle Buddy race. I still remember how happy he was the night that he won a new bike at the racetrack. I can still hear his giggles and his jokes he would tell. He had the biggest heart and had so much love for everyone around him. He deserved to grow up surrounded by love, safety, and people who cherished him. Instead, she broke that sweet, innocent little boy. She took away his spark, his joy, his sense of safety, and ultimately his life. As difficult as it is to say, I know that holding onto hatred forever will only continue to hurt me and my family. For my own peace, I know that one day I can truly forgive her. Not because she deserves forgiveness and not because what she did can never be excused, but because I refuse to let her actions continue to plague our lives forever. Forgiveness does not erase the accountability. It does not erase AJ's suffering, and it does not lessen the sentence she deserves. Justice is still necessary. My hope is that today's sentence is one step toward allowing our family to begin healing. Nothing will ever bring AJ back, but knowing that she will never have the opportunity to harm another child will give us a measure of justice as we learn to navigate through life while carrying AJ's memory with us. For these reasons, I respectfully ask the court to impose the maximum sentence allowed, not only because of what she did to AJ, but because every child deserves to be protected from someone capable of such imaginable cruelty. Justice cannot undo what happened, but today I ask the court to speak for AJ by ensuring she never has the opportunity to hurt another child again. Your Honor, I thank you for allowing me to share how AJ's loss has affected our family. Before I continue, I do want to... I would like to read my husband Justin's victim impact statement. While we've walked through this grief together, AJ was his buddy and the bond they shared was one of the greatest joys of his life. His perspective is different than mine and I respectfully ask the court to hear his words as well. Thank you. My name is Justin Anderson. AJ was my nephew, but more than that, he was my buddy. I will spend the rest of my life remembering the moments I got to spend with him. Meeting him for the first time in the hospital. This little human being staring up at me. I remember the sleepovers we would have, watching movies together and playing with my dog. I remember looking up to the stands when I'd be racing and always be able to see him smiling back at me from the crowd. We would take trips to the beach and spend lazy afternoons just laying inside, laying side by side. It didn't matter what I was doing. He would always wanted to join me. He was always able to brighten my day and bring a smile to my face. He was an innocent little boy who deserved a childhood filled with love, safety and happiness. I cannot begin to understand how anyone could justify what was done to AJ. Every child deserves to be protected. AJ deserved that. And he was denied it. AJ wasn't a weapon. He wasn't something to control or manipulate. He was a little boy and he deserved kindness. He deserved compassion. He deserved to know he was safe and loved every single day of his life. I'll never forget him. I'll never forget what happened to him. I hate knowing that his final days were filled with suffering when all he deserved was love. That thought will stay with me for the rest of my life. Nothing this court does today can bring AJ back. Nothing can erase what he endured or the pain his family, friends and everyone else who loved him continues to carry. But this court does have the opportunity to hold the defendant fully accountable. Your Honor, I respectfully ask that you impose the maximum sentence allowed by law. Not out of, not out of revenge, but because AJ's life mattered. Because the suffering he endured matters. Because children deserve to know that when someone chooses to abuse, torture and take the life of an innocent child, there will be serious consequences. My hope is that the defendant never again has the opportunity to harm another child. I also hope she spends the rest of her life reflecting on the choices that led to the death of an innocent little boy. I believe there is a place where people who commit acts like this will ultimately answer for what they have done. Until then, I ask the court to deliver the justice that AJ can no longer ask for himself. AJ, you were loved more than you could ever know. You changed so many lives in the short time you were here. And you will never be forgotten. I promise as long as I am here, your name will be remembered. Thank you. [00:46:47] Speaker 3: Thank you. [00:46:48] Speaker 12: Thank you. [00:46:49] Speaker 3: Thank you, Ms. Anderson. [00:46:50] Speaker 13: Individuals in the back, we're going to need you to find a place to sit. Thank you. Thanks. [00:46:56] Speaker 8: The honor, the next person would be on Zoom and that would be Ms. Raven Holzer. Okay. [00:47:06] Speaker 3: I just saw that you're on, can you unmute yourself? Yes. And we're ready for your statement. All right. [00:47:20] Speaker 14: Well, just one moment. I just got into this live Zoom. I didn't know it was my turn. [00:47:28] Speaker ?: Okay. All right. [00:47:30] Speaker 3: Did you, were you able to watch it earlier? [00:47:34] Speaker 14: Not sure. That's funny. [00:47:36] Speaker 3: Yeah, that's okay. Go ahead. [00:47:38] Speaker ?: What was that? [00:47:39] Speaker 14: Go ahead. [00:47:41] Speaker 3: If you want to make a statement, Ms. Holzer. [00:47:44] Speaker 14: Yep. I'm just pulling it up here. [00:47:54] Speaker 11: All right. [00:48:01] Speaker 14: Your Honor, before Alexander became the victim in this courtroom, he was simply a six-year-old little boy. He was not defined by the lawyer. He was not defined by police reports, medical records, court exhibits, or photographs. He was a son, a brother. Yes? [00:48:13] Speaker 3: Sorry to interrupt you. Can you just slow down just a little bit? I know you're probably reading it. Remember, we've got to transcribe it. Go ahead. [00:48:23] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:48:24] Speaker 3: Take a deep breath and then go ahead and do it. [00:48:28] Speaker 14: Your Honor, before Alexander became the victim in this courtroom, he was simply a six-year-old little boy. He was not defined by police reports, medical records, court exhibits, or photographs. He was a son, a brother, a grandson, a nephew, a cousin, and a child who deserved the same love, protection, and opportunities as every other child. When I think of Alexander, I don't think first about how he died. I think about how he lived. I remember his smile, his gentle heart, and the kindness he showed to others. One of my favorite memories is from the summer of 2022 when he met my infant daughter. Although she was only a few months old, he immediately smiled at her, called her beautiful, and told us how cute she was. The small moment perfectly captured the kind of child he was. Kind, thoughtful, and full of innocence. That is how I chose to remember Alexander. "Not as a victim or a homicide case, but as the little child who deserved to feel safe, to feel to be loved, and to grow up surrounded by people who protected him. Like every six-year-old, Alex Xavier should have been making friends, celebrating birthdays, discovering his interests, and dreaming about his future. Instead, those dreams ended before they ever had the chance to become reality. We were not only robbed of the little boy he was, but of the young man he would have become. Our family will never celebrate another birthday with him, watch him graduate, see him build a career, or witness the life he deserved to live. Before this court considers anything else, I ask that Alex Xavier be remembered not only for the way his life ended, but for the child he was. He was deeply loved. His life had immeasurable value, and he deserved every opportunity to grow up. Before February 11, 2023, I had a very different vision for my life. I was 19 years old, raising my daughter as a single mother. She was just 9 months and 30 days old when Alex Xavier was murdered. I was determined to build a better future for both of us. His murder changed the direction of my life in ways I could never imagined. Instead of focusing slowly on raising my daughter and completing my education, my life became consumed by grief, unanswered questions, and a desperate need to understand how a 6-year-old little boy could lose his life. I spent countless hours reviewing medical records, school records, child protected service records, law enforcement reports, court filings, dispatch logs, body camera footage, and testimony. I read those records because I wanted to relive the tragedy. I read them because I needed to understand what happened to someone I loved. Every document represented another piece of Alex Xavier's life, and every page reminded me that behind the paperwork was a little boy who should still be here. The emotional weight of this case affected every part of my life. There were days when I struggled to get out of bed and nights when I could not fall asleep because my mind replayed conversations, recordings, hearings, and unanswered questions. Eventually, I was diagnosed with CPTSD. That diagnosis put a name to what I had been living with for years. The intrusive memories, the constant replaying of events, the overwhelming anxiety, and the guilt that so often accompanies traumatic loss. I would like to speak about Alex Xavier a little bit here. For me and for my family, we believed that Alex Xavier had been checked on and was safe during the welfare check. Less than 24 hours later, I learned that my six-year-old cousin had been murdered. I learned the overwhelming, shocking disbelief. My mind struggled to accept what I was hearing because children are not supposed to die this way. They're supposed to grow up. They're supposed to go to school. As this reality began to set in, the questions came just as quickly as the heartbreak. I wondered what his final moments were like. I wondered if he was scared. I wondered if he knew how much he was loved. Those questions followed me every day since, and I know they will remain with me for the rest of my life because there are some questions that grief can never answer. One of the most heartbreaking parts of this tragedy was knowing that Alex Xavier's mother Jenner was incarcerated in Missouri when her son was taken from this world. She had spent years fighting to remain part of his life and desperately wanted the opportunity to raise him again. Instead, she received the unimaginable news that her little boy was gone. She was never given the chance to run to him, hold him one last time, kiss his forehead, or tell him how much she loved him before saying goodbye. That is a pain no mother should ever have to endure, and it is something that can never be repaired. The impact of Alex Xavier's death extended far beyond that single day. His siblings lost their brother, his grandparents lost their grandson, his aunts, uncles, cousins, and teachers. And teachers. [00:53:21] Speaker ?: Hang on. I just need a minute. [00:53:21] Speaker 14: Sorry. It's all right. [00:53:23] Speaker ?: It's all right. It's all right. It's all right. It's all right. [00:53:24] Speaker 14: I just need a minute. [00:53:25] Speaker ?: I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. It's all right. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. [00:53:39] Speaker 4: I just need a minute. [00:53:40] Speaker ?: I just need a minute. [00:53:41] Speaker 4: I just need a minute. I just need a minute. [00:53:43] Speaker ?: I just need a minute. I just need a minute. [00:53:45] Speaker 3: I just need a minute. [00:53:46] Speaker ?: I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. It's all right. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. I just need a minute. [00:53:53] Speaker 14: I'm just going to start here. As I stand before this court today, I'm not asking for vengeance. I'm asking for accountability. There is a profound difference between the two. Nothing this court does today can give Alex Xavier his life back. No sentence will allow him to celebrate another birthday, start another school year, graduate from high school, find love, build a family, or grow into the man he was meant to become. No sentence will erase the pain his family carries or restore the future that was taken from him. But accountability matters because Alex Xavier mattered. He was six years old. He was completely dependent on the adults responsible for his care. He could not choose where he lived, who cared for him, or whether his basic needs were met. He relied on the adults around him to protect him, comfort him, seek medical care when he was injured, and provide him with the love and safety every child deserves. Children cannot protect themselves. That responsibility belongs entirely to the adults entrusted with their care. When that responsibility is abandoned, the consequences are irreversible. Far and far, accountability is about recognizing the value of Alex Xavier's life. It is about acknowledging that this was not simply the loss of a child, but the loss of an entire lifetime. I also think about the children who survived Alex Xavier. They have endured trauma that no child should ever experience. They have lost their brother, and their lives have been forever changed by what happened. My hope is that they are given the opportunity to heal in an environment where they are safe, supported, and surrounded by adults who placed their well-being above everyone else. Over the last few years, I have often asked why I continue to speak publicly, why I continue reviewing records, and why I continue advocating for change. The answer is simple, because Alex Xavier no longer has a voice. If those of us who loved him stop speaking his name, then his story becomes just another case file stored away after sentencing. I cannot allow that to happen. His life deserves to be remembered for more than the way it ended. It deserved to inspire change. I have accepted that I will carry this grief for the rest of my life. I will carry Alex Xavier with me in everything I do, and I will continue speaking his name. The truth is there are no words that can fully express how much I miss him. I miss the little boy he was, and I believe the young man he does not have the opportunity to become. I think about this constantly. Sometimes I think about his smile and the kindness he showed to everyone around him. Other times I found myself wondering what he would be like today. What grade he would be in, his favorite class, his favorite hobbies, what dreams he would have become inspired to become and chase. Those of them already some milestones our family was robbed of. And that loss is something we will carry for the rest of our lives. And sorry, I've carried guilt with me every single day since Alex Xavier died. I know in my mind that I cannot change the past, but my heart still wonders. [00:57:13] Speaker 15: Whether there was something more I could have done. [00:57:18] Speaker 16: I replayed the phone calls. The conversations, the welfare check, and every memory I have. [00:57:33] Speaker 15: Having somebody after they are gone often means carrying those questions forever, and I suspect they will remain for the rest of my life. I found a purpose I never expected. [00:57:47] Speaker 14: I continued my education not just for myself, but because I wanted to become someone who could help children and families navigating the legal system. I spent years confiding myself to this case and advocating for change. And telling his story. I want the world to know that this little boy was not just a tragedy that brought us into this courtroom. I cannot promise that our family will ever stop hurting. Someone else has become part of who you are, and losing him was one of them. [00:58:19] Speaker 15: My mom, can I use this? Sorry. He deserved a lifetime. [00:58:25] Speaker 14: I wish more than anything that I could tell him these words in person instead of a courtroom. I wish I could watch him grow up. I wish I could hear his laugh one more time. I wish I could tell him how proud I am and how strong he is. Because since I cannot do that, I will spend the rest of my life making sure his story continues to matter. He was never just a case. He was never just a victim. He was our family. He was left behind words and always will be. And we love him. [00:59:03] Speaker 15: I don't have anything else to say. [00:59:05] Speaker 3: Thank you, Ms. Holzer. I'm going to leave you on Zoom. I'm sorry I didn't put you on earlier. Okay. [00:59:12] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:59:14] Speaker 3: You're welcome. [00:59:15] Speaker 8: All right. Next person. Next will be Brenda Pedron. Okay. [00:59:19] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:59:20] Speaker 3: Thank you. Take your time. [00:59:50] Speaker 6: My name is Brenda. I'm sorry. [01:00:09] Speaker 3: Just take a couple deep breaths and you can do it. Don't worry. If you don't, just ask them. I'll help you out. [01:00:17] Speaker 6: Okay. And now Xavier's paternal grandmother. I'm here today to speak about the impact this has had on our family. I want the court to understand the emotional trauma this has caused. And how our lives are forever changed because we lost a member of our family. Now Xavier J. Pedron. That day was the worst day of my life. Arriving on the scene. Hearing he was dead. Hearing that the house, his little body was still in. It was a crime scene. It was a crime scene. Having to tell my son that his oldest son was no longer with us. Watching the light in his eyes disappear in that moment. Seeing a pain in his face that I'd never seen before. And I never want to see on the face of anyone I love again. Hearing the screams of family members as we told them he was gone. And it didn't end there. Those screams who stayed with me. The look on my son's face is embedded in my mind. Every day since we have been trying to figure out how to live without Xavier. Watching everyone try to adjust to this loss has been incredibly hard. Our family lost not only a son, but a sibling, a grandchild, a cousin, and a nephew. Our family is left with a space that can never be filled. And every one of us feels that absence in our own way. Now Xavier was loving, funny, and protective. He had a laugh that could fill a room and a smile you couldn't ignore. He would have been 10 this July getting ready to go into the fifth grade. Now videos are all we have left. They're the only way we can still hear his voice, hear his laugh, and see his smile. Instead, we're left thinking about everything he will never get to experience. He'll never have an eighth grade graduation. He'll never go to prom or homecoming. He'll never graduate. He'll never become the police officer he dreamed of being. Those aren't just missed moments. That is an extra life. Sorry, an entire life that was taken in a future our family will never get to see. This loss has changed who we are as a family. It has changed how we feel, how we live, and how we see the world. It is something we will carry with us for the rest of our lives. Because Alex Xavier's life was taken from him, he will never have the chance to grow up, to live his life, or to become who he was meant to be. For that reason, I'm asking the court to impose a sentence that ensures that the person responsible, Josie Dykeman, will never have that same freedom again. A life was taken that should be reflected in the maximum sentence that the law allows. Thank you. [01:03:20] Speaker 3: Thank you. [01:03:24] Speaker 8: Any? Next would be Brittany Hoops. [01:03:27] Speaker ?: Okay. [01:03:48] Speaker 17: My name is Brittany Hoops. I am the paternal aunt of Alex Xavier J. Pedron. Alex Xavier was not just my nephew. He was part of my heart. Watching him grow up and seeing the person he was becoming is something that I will always hold on to. He was loving, caring, smart, funny, and playful. He was a light in our lives that could never be replaced. That is who he was, and that is who was taken from us. When Alex Xavier's life was cut short, it didn't just take him. It shattered our entire family. It took the future we were supposed to have with him, but he will forever be six years old. Now we are faced with the moments we will never get back and the memories that will never be made. Prior to his life being taken, you alienated my family from seeing the kids in Derek. He inflicted pain countless times and in countless ways on every member of his family by not allowing them around. My own children included. The last time we were allowed to see him was August 6, 2021. That was one year, six months, and five days before you took his life. Well, Xavier made me promise that day that we would come back to visit, and you made sure that didn't get to happen. And you made sure you made me break my promise to someone I loved. The morning of February 11, 2023, my husband, my younger brother, my oldest daughter, myself seen the emergency vehicles and police at the house. We were extremely concerned, and I knew my brother was in jail. We stopped to make sure everybody was okay, only to find out that Xavier had died. The pain of telling my brother that his son had died and watching everything in his light leave his eyes, having to tell him through the glass at the jail and not being able to hug him forever gives me nightmares. My brother loved Xavier, and you hated him for it. The impact of this loss has reached into every part of our lives, including my own children, and they were heartbroken when they learned of his death. But beyond that, they were afraid, afraid to go to school, afraid to be out of their parents' sight. They no longer felt safe in a world that once felt normal to them. And for my youngest daughter, this is a loss that's something she will carry in a very specific and painful way. She owns only 11 days younger than Xavier. They should have celebrated their 10th birthdays this year together. They should be growing up side by side. They should be reaching milestones together. And they should be graduating together in 2034. Instead, she will have to face these moments without him, always knowing that someone that should be there is missing. That was what was taken. As his aunt, I was supposed to watch Alex Xavier grow into his future. My children are supposed to have their cousin. Instead, we're in love with memories, videos, and silence where his voice should be. Every family gathering, every holiday, every milestone, there will always be a space where he should be. It isn't. You didn't just take his life. You took a brother, a son, a nephew, a grandson, and a best friend of many. You took a person who was deeply loved and the pain you caused continues every single day. Not just for us, but for the next generation of our family who now lives in fear and loss because of what you did. But because of that, I asked the court to impose the maximum sentence. There should be no opportunity for freedom after what was done. Now, Xavier does not get another chance at life and neither should the person who took his. [01:07:54] Speaker 3: Thank you, ma'am. [01:08:02] Speaker 8: Judge, we have two more people before I would ask the court to hear my comments. The next would be Mr. Pedron, who is on Zoom. [01:08:09] Speaker 3: Okay. Mr. Pedron, do you want to just unmute yourself? [01:08:17] Speaker 4: Yeah. Alex was a very, very sweet boy. Very kind, loving. He loved cars and Lightning McQueen. I remember he got these Lightning McQueen shoes. And as soon as he put them on, he thought he was really, really fast. We have a boy star, mainly Woody. He loved riding his bikes with his brother and playing with his sister. He would have given the shirt off of his back to anybody. He loved being in the garage with me and helping work on things. He loved racing and race cars. And his brother loved riding their bikes down big hills and building jumps together. He loved running fires. He was funny. He would always dress up in his chase from Paw Patrol costume and act like he was a police officer and pull his brother over on their bikes. He was an amazing kid and he will never forget you, Alex. We will never stop celebrating your life or your birthdays or holidays with you. We always look up to the sky for you and look for you in the form of a coroner so that we know you are there with us. You always so loving and made everyone smile and laugh. I regret deeply ever trusting Josie with my son and I regret not letting his family see him because you didn't like them. He never deserved what you did to him. Nor did any child. Never a million years did I think I would wake up one day and hear the worst thing someone could possibly hear and that was that my son was murdered. She took him from everyone that actually loved him. He will never get to meet his new brother. He will never get to watch his brothers and sisters grow up, be happy. He will never get to watch Alex get married or live his life. Graduate or anything. Josie took all that away from us, his brother, his aunts, uncles, cousins. We talk about him every day. They write his name everywhere and on everything we go, including my cars in the dust. [01:11:36] Speaker 8: The next person major asked that his statement be read into the record. [01:12:03] Speaker 18: Judge, I'm major. I miss Alex every day. He was probably the best of the bunch of us. And she lied about what she did to him. It hurts. I miss him. [01:12:21] Speaker ?: I miss him. [01:12:21] Speaker 18: A lot of things still remind me of him. And when they do, it just hits me hard. I get so upset inside. I know it wasn't my fault. But I still blame myself for not being able to stop it. Some nights I cry so hard about him being gone and beat myself up over it. I couldn't save him. This messed me up in ways that won't go away. It follows me into school and everyday stuff. I fell behind because my head's been somewhere else. She put Alex in a place no kid should ever be. I saw things that broke something inside me. And you can't fix that. [01:13:06] Speaker ?: I want her in jail. [01:13:08] Speaker 18: I want her far away from me, my family, and every other kid. So she doesn't get to hurt anyone else. Thank you. Major. [01:13:22] Speaker 3: Thank you. We'll just put it on the record. That's document 599 also that's in the file. I think you wanted to make the state's argument. And then Ms. Love was going to make a statement. [01:13:36] Speaker 8: Is that correct? [01:13:37] Speaker ?: That's correct. [01:13:37] Speaker 3: Okay, go ahead. The state's then argument. [01:13:41] Speaker 8: When considering the serious nature of this defendant's offenses, this defendant's character, and the need to protect the public, the state is recommending that this court sentence this defendant to 45 to 50 years of initial confinement. We are leaving the extended supervision up to the sound discretion of this court. The maximum sentence that this court can impose is 180 years with 105 years of initial confinement. We are not seeking that. We are not recommending a sentence out of vengeance. What we are recommending is a sentence that will remove Ms. Dijkman from this community and protect the children of this community for a substantial period of time. There are diametrically opposed versions of the facts in this case. When you read the defense memorandum versus what the state presented at trial and what the jury found. This community has been crippled by the crimes of this defendant. There are representatives of the medical community in the courtroom today. There are representatives of their jury in the courtroom today. They have been forever impacted by the actions of this defendant. The defense tries to sell this court on a version of events that Alex somehow got into the medication on his own. That is not what the jury found. The jury found that it was the criminally reckless conduct of this defendant that caused Alex's death. Her conduct. It is understandable why the jury didn't come back guilty on first-degree intentional homicide. Because to do so they would have found not only that she had drugged Alex Xavier intentionally, but she did so to take his life. What is clear is that she did drug Alex Xavier intentionally to quiet his cries. After she mercilessly beat him. How often does this court see a case in which a person could have died two different ways? The only reason Alex didn't bleed to death is because the Xanax stopped his heart. The only reason the beating didn't take his life is because the drugs took it first. How cruel. To beat the life out of a child. And then to drug the child so that you don't have to listen to the ramifications of your own actions. This court has two options before today. It has the ability to accept what the defense is saying. Or it has the ability to wholly reject it. In its comments and in the sentence that it hands down. We are asking this court to tell this defendant that you see her for who she is. That you know what she did. That you agree with the verdict of the jury. I thought about putting up the photographs of Alex's body at autopsy. Especially after reading the defense sentencing memorandum. When they say that there was no intent to cause bodily harm. I'm not going to do that because doing so would traumatize everyone in this room one more time. Those pictures are etched in my mind. I think they are etched in everyone's mind. Who bear witness to the testimony and evidence in this case. But if this court has any question about her intent. I ask this court to look at those photographs one more time. This court has any question about her intent. Read that autopsy report one more time. The defense quibbles with the fact that there are three charges here. Most homicides this court sees are one moment in time. That result in the taking of a life of a human being. This defendant engaged in a pattern of conduct that targeted Alex. She dehumanized him in front of the other children. She treated him differently. He ate different foods, sat in different places. He was treated completely different for all the other children to witness. Over an extended period of time she choked him. Kicked him. Hit him. Punched him. This was not one moment in time that resulted in the taking of Alex's life. This was a pattern of behavior that targeted a six year old child. A six year old child. Who had the ability to perceive everything that was being done to him. So many of the homicide cases I handle involve infant children. And the one. If there is a blessing with those cases. Is that they can't fully comprehend everything that's being done to them. Because they are so young. In their developmental age. Not so with Alex. Alex knew what was being done to him. He felt those blows. He looked at this defendant's eyes. He felt terror in those moments. That was his life. In getting to know the family. Over the course of this trial. And especially last night. One of the. Comments made by the family today. Stuck out to me. And it's something that I heard before. When they wanted to give Alex something. For him. He said no. Because if I take it home. It becomes Brantley's. Alex wasn't allowed to be a child. Not only did this defendant beat and drug Alex. She staged a scene. To try and escape her criminal responsibility. I had the opportunity to stay in La Crosse for three weeks. Through the course of this trial. What a beautiful community. I would get a cup of coffee. About a block from the courthouse. And the cars actually stop for you. When you cross the street in La Crosse. People say hi to you. Despite the large area. It feels like a small town. Where everybody really cares about you. La Crosse is a special place. And La Crosse has a special district attorney. It has a special deputy district attorney. And it has a special investigator. On the morning of February 11th. Carson Jarre responded. And he performed CPR. And what he saw. Didn't fit. He was in the first year of his career. In law enforcement. And the observations of Alex's body. And his efforts to save Alex for those minutes. Resulted in him having to go outside. Lean against a squad car. Take a lap around the squad car. And just absorb it all. There's Joseph Kernine. Who responded one night previously. The last person from law enforcement. To see Alex alive. Who second guesses everything he did that night. And there's nothing more he could have done. Because it was this defendant. That made sure he couldn't see any more. Of Alex. It was a deputy district attorney. That responded to the scene. Along with investigative sergeant. Amundsen. Who observed the body. And knew that. There was so much more. That happened to this child. Than just drugs. Getting into his system. Thank goodness. The deputy district attorney. To my right. Set up the forensic interviews. Of major. And Brantley. Children who continue to be attacked. For providing the truth. I think about those statements. And how critical those statements were. They were separated that evening. Put in different homes. With different caretakers. And they both. Talked about. What this defendant did. My God. The parallels in those statements. The head district attorney. The head district attorney. Tim Greinke. Attends the autopsy. That's a rare occurrence. For anyone. In a district attorney's office. He wanted to make sure. That this was handled. And handled right. During that same time frame, this defendant is deleting videos, hiding evidence, doing everything she can to escape her criminal responsibility for these actions. We know that some of the most powerful evidence in this case were the statements of Major and Brantley. Statements that to this day the defense challenges. Statements that the defense at trial thought were so remarkably consistent that they had to be coached and interviewed in advance. Which is ironic when you consider the fact that this defendant rehearsed her testimony every week with Mr. Zacker. Those statements were so consistent and yet when you read the memorandum that was filed with the court, they can't be believed. Major, I believe you. Brantley, I believe you. We believe you. The jury believed you. They believed you so much. The last piece of evidence that they asked to see before they rendered their verdicts were the forensic interviews of those children. When we look at the gravity of this defendant's offenses, it doesn't get more serious, more painful than this. The life of a child has been lost. The potential of what Alex could have been has been lost. Nelson Mandela says there is no keener revelation of how a society reveals its soul than how it treats its children. Alex was the most innocent of innocents. When this court considers the crimes, this court must consider as an aggravating factor under 973.0176, that this defendant was a caretaker. Following the state's recommendation tells this defendant that this court sees her for who she truly is. When we look at this defendant's character, this court is aware of her prior record. It is, nevertheless, worthy of talking about. During the course of this investigation, I think it's important that children that this defendant babysat for years and years ago came forward and wanted to talk about how she harmed them. It's remarkable that Haley, from 2011 and 2013, has attended virtually the entire trial. In 2011, she suffered a traumatic brain injury and skull fractures from what this defendant reported was a fall down stairs. Medical experts who have reviewed that have said that it was concerning for abuse. This court is well aware of that based on the Daubert hearing that we had with Kristin Anikas. Charges were issued against this defendant. And this defendant received services through the child welfare system. As a result of those services, the charges were ultimately dismissed because of her cooperation. I note that because this defendant received services, and it didn't change her behavior. In fact, it got worse. In 2013, this defendant is charged with child neglect. Because Haley goes from the 85th percentile to the 6th percentile on weight. She's missing hair. She has fractured bones in multiple different areas of her body that are consistent with abuse. And multiple people within the home talk about how she is targeted and treated differently than this defendant's children in the home. And multiple parallels when you look at what this defendant would later do to Alex. This defendant received drug treatment court. This defendant received services from this community. Services that are meant to rehabilitate and treat the defendant so that she does not come back before your honor. And here we are today for something far, far worse. There are comments made through the course of this investigation, and one sticks out as haunting. This statement is from Dr. Allison Glowacki. After seeing Alex admitted to the hospital with a bruising on multiple planes on his body that she discussed during the trial, as well as his fractured femur, the statement that she told a colleague is, "If he comes back, he will be dead." Those words are hauntingly prophetic. So when this court considers this defendant's character, the pre-sentence investigation outlines her criminal record, but she has received services twice. And twice, she has not been rehabilitated. Each time, her conduct has gotten worse. This defendant has an absolute constitutional right to have a jury trial. And she received a jury trial over the course of three weeks. She cannot and should not be punished for exercising that right. But this court can take into account her conduct at trial and her lack of acceptance of responsibility. There is no acceptance of responsibility here, none. That makes her all the more dangerous. And then there's the need to protect the public. This case screams out for specific deterrence and punishment. What court-ordered services has this defendant not received that could rehabilitate her at this point? Parenting, she's received it. Child protective services, she's received it. Drug treatment, she's received it. And her behavior has not changed. This case cries out for specific deterrence and punishment. It also cries out for general deterrence. I know many people don't like talking about general deterrence. And general deterrence, depending on the nature and the type of case, may not be possible. Not every case has the community's attention. But this one certainly does. And that's an opportunity for this court to talk about what children mean to this community. It's an opportunity for this court to tell this community that we don't tolerate child abusers. It's an opportunity for this court to say that protecting children is of the utmost importance. The honor based on all the factors before the court, I'm asking this court to tell this defendant that you see her for who she is. That you agree with the jury. That she targeted Alex. That she almost took his life through her abuse of Alex, only to finally take his life through the drugging of Alex. That she staged the scene to try and escape responsibility. And all of that deserves consecutive sentences. Because it's consecutive, different, painful, horrific, tragic conduct. That no innocent child in this community deserves. For that reason, I ask you to follow the recommendation of the state. I'd ask that the final words be from Ms. Love. [01:33:46] Speaker ?: Okay. [01:33:47] Speaker 3: Um, you have the microphone? Okay. Um, sorry. Go ahead, Ms. Love. [01:33:57] Speaker 13: The day Alex Xavier was born. Aubrey. [01:34:02] Josie Dockerman: Now, I don't know why I just turned black. I don't know why I turned black, but let me figure this out. [01:34:10] Speaker 13: I know, whoop, whoop. When I asked her what was wrong, she replied, "Tears of joy, Mom. Tears of joy." The day the jury came back with guilty verdicts on all three charges, Aubrey, and I looked at each other. Tears of joy. That's the only real feeling of joy we've had since you took my sin from us. [01:34:29] Speaker 8: And general deterrence to say... Okay. Um, do you have the microphone? Okay. I'd ask that the final words be from Ms. Love. [01:34:43] Josie Dockerman: Oh, this the mom about to speak. [01:34:46] Speaker ?: Okay. [01:34:47] Speaker 3: Um, do you have the microphone? Okay. [01:34:52] Speaker ?: Um, sorry. [01:34:53] Speaker 3: Go ahead, Ms. Love. [01:34:55] Speaker 13: The day Alex Xavier was born, Aubrey Heldemann started crying. When I asked her what was wrong, she replied, "Tears of joy, Mom. Tears of joy." The day the jury came back with guilty verdicts on all three charges, Aubrey and I looked at each other, tears of joy. That's the only real feeling of joy we've had since you took my son from us. You not only took his life from me, but his siblings, his aunts and uncles, his grandparents, his cousins, his friends, his classmates, extended family, and the world. My son was always so full of life, so happy, well-mannered, smart, caring, and spread his love to everyone. Maybe besides you and your mother, everyone who met my son experienced joy in his presence. The torture you put my son through for your own demonic self is just pure evil, and I hope the judge sentences you to the max, the max prison sentence possible. And I hope you take that experience with the same love, care, support, and treatment you showed my son. Hell on earth. And since you still have a life to live, unlike the one you took from Alex, you best be thankful that you get to still wake up and breathe every day. That your family still has a living child. That your brother has a sibling. And you have gotten away with your lies and abusive behaviors far too long. When you abused Haley, you got away with drug court. That's it. What a slap on the wrist. The girl still lives with issues every day. But I'm so grateful she was lucky enough to get away from you. Unlike my son, why is it that you target other people's children? Why the horrible acts you perform? How? They're so disgusting. Starving him, making him wear diapers, putting hot sauce on apple wedges and forcing them down his throat. Putting hot sauce on pizza crust because you know even that he's starving. He's going to eat what he doesn't like. How do you live with yourself? [01:37:13] Speaker 3: Ms. Love, can you do me a favor? Talk to me. Okay. [01:37:22] Speaker 13: It's disgusting. How many kids fall down the stairs? Why so mean to children? My son had a broken pelvis, broken femur, broken fingers, head fractures, bruises everywhere. Deep down into his bones. His organs were completely fucked up. His ribs, everything. You literally beat him to death, but not before you would aggravate every bone on his body. Bending his legs to his head, stomping on him over and over as if letting him have time away from you would even be an option. You wouldn't allow him to school. You kept him from an education, friends, playtime, and food. You always played the victim. Oh, poor you. The beatings you lived through. My God, I hope the next time I hear about a TBI is when you actually are a victim of an experienced one. I hope you experience every bit of pain and maltreatment you caused for my son. My son was a great kid. How could you even hurt a child, especially to the extent, and then lie and play the victim, cover it up? How do you live with yourself? My family and I, we all begged for Alex to get to come home, but you just controlled and wouldn't let that happen. I knew you were so serious about hurting my kids when we were in Missouri. When you came into my house and attacked me with the bat, breaking my arm and wrist while walking away, you said you were taking my kids and I would never see them again. And then I grabbed the bat and hit you with it because I'll be damned if your abusive ass was taking my kids anywhere. And damned I am. Because 42 days before I was released from prison for an assault charge due to pressing charges on me and me owning up to my wrongdoings, unlike you would ever do, my son's life was taken by your demonic behavior. And why? You play like you were the only victim. How when we were treated at the same hospital and you were so scared of me, but yet bailed me out with my own cards the next day and continued to live with me until my money was gone. You were no longer able to use me, so you changed. You started telling lies to everyone, started playing this victim role, manipulating everyone. It's sad to say that I'd like to really call you a dumb bitch, but for the shit you've done and gotten away with the people, you've manipulated your lies, you're actually smart, psychopathic smart. It's gross how you decided to use it, to be honest. I remember Alex's fifth birthday. Aubrey went to your residence with a hammer, brass knuckles, pepper spray, and a rape whistle. When asked why she thought she needed to take those items, she replied with, "They're in my backpack because nothing is going to stop me from seeing my brother." She was so scared of you, why would a child need to use those items in her backpack to feel safe? I was able to call Aubrey's phone and I talked to Alex. I remember his sweet, innocent voice. It plays over and over when I reminisce on the last conversation we had. "Mom, when are you coming home? I don't want to be here." "Soon, buddy. Real soon. Before you know it, you'll be with me and your sisters." "Okay. I can't wait for you to hold me." I said, "Alex, when mom comes home, I'm going to get you and you never have to go back there again if you don't want to." He said, "Are you going to hold me?" I said, "Yes." And the tone in his voice changed. I said, "I'm going to hold you and never let you go." And happier and more hopeful, he said, "Mom, I can't wait." I said, "Me neither. I love you and miss you every day." I never thought that I'd be waiting forever to hold him again. I never thought that he wouldn't be home with me and his siblings again. He used to play with his cousins all the time. They shared a birthday and one birthday just a week later, we threw a big party. And now I tell myself he's with his grandma or taking a nap. Just to try and enjoy the day for my nephews for their birthday. It hurts me every day. I'll never see him at a school concert, never see him at prom or graduation. I never get to see him become a dad or an uncle. He stole his life from all of us. And I was clean during my jail and prison time, and I was clean for two and a half years after that. I see an autopsy photos. I read part of the extent of his injuries described in those photos. And I relapsed. I was trying anything and everything to escape my own mind. Those images were not how I wanted to remember him, yet they played in my head like a horror film. But why would you keep him captive? What could possess someone to do such hateful things to another? And you do it so nonchalantly like, hey, can't wait for a date. Meanwhile, you're beating my son and drugging him. We know the truth, that you staged the scene. You lied about CPR. You laid next to my son's dead body. You allowed your own children to witness the abuse. Sometimes, even forcing them to be in on it. Do you realize the positions you put your own children in? Do you realize you took a life from them too? Even with all the hate I have for you, I'd never do anything to arm your children. Or have your kids in the environment. They should never have to fight to get out of a life. Instead, you fight to keep them living in hell every day. You sit there in your chair and pretend to cry as a way to manipulate your children while testifying. I'm glad your children were strong enough to speak the truth despite your manipulation attempt. I got to know your kids. And they got to know me. And I'm thankful for that. I'm happy you haven't hurt them to the extent you did, Alex. We often share memories of their favorite brother, my son. And the bullshit you shared, like Alex's favorite color being blue. I don't know if you did that to spite me or what, but everyone knows damn well his favorite color was red. He looked up to his big sissy, Aubrey. He loved riding his bike and anything close to Uncle Buddy, my brother Justin. He loved watching my brother race. He loved the weekends when Buddy would stay over and teach him things. He loved basketball. He loved ranch. He loved helping adults with any task they were trying to complete. He loved his Aunt Jackie and swimming at her house with his cousins. He loved helping Buddy and Uncle Seth fix cars. He loved to do anything sissy was doing. And he loved keeping his baby sister Azulia safe. When we went for walks, he held her hand. He was his buddy's number one fan at the races. He was his sweetest grandkid. And he loved his Grandma Cheryl. And he loved that she loved him. And was nice. Because being forced to call Becky Grandma, he stated she's not a real grandma. She doesn't love me. Only Grandma Cheryl is nice. Grandma Cheryl loves me. Crazy how you and your family forces children to call you by the name you choose just to look good to the community. Like you forcing to call you Mom multiple times when Alex was alive and my family still able to take him, mind you. Only when they'd pay you guys a cost designated by you, then he was allowed to leave. And he would remind me, Josie's not my mom. You're my mom. I love my mom. And I'd always say, I love being your mom and I love you. And he'd say, I know, I love you too. And guess what? You got a friend at me, Mom. Always like it. But his pal the Sheriff Woody would say, we'd smile and cuddle. And he'd say, I love you to infinity and beyond. And of course, was also a huge fan of Lightning McQueen. Definitely his favorite movies. He never got to experience life fully. You already experienced more than he has. Life is a blessing. And I hope you get it. I don't care what the PSI recommends or what the state is asking. And I'm asking the judge to please give her the max on each case consecutively. And I hope that Josie finds that as a blessing. Because behind bars, you should be thankful that you breathe every day. You're fed every day. Medicated at the appropriate dose. You get to seek medical treatment. It's needed. Education is offered. And there's cameras. But not one from your bed to your food. And if there's a threat to your safety, you're removed. Risk is relocated. Your health needs are met. Food is provided. Education is available. And you're safe. None of which my son got to experience in your care. When you manipulated others and forced him to be kept. I wish you'd be sentenced to your own treatment. But that's not an option. So, Your Honor, I'm asking for the max today for the safety and security of any and all children she could come in contact with any of the individuals she could manipulate. We have a tree for his memory. Placed in the last place he got to take pictures with his sisters. Where he was like a miniature groom at his buddy's wedding. And the growing of the tree is the only growing old we get to see now. We serve birthday parties. We gather at his tree. We water it. Plant flowers. Plant flowers. Put cars. Stuffed animals. Headphones. So he can still play, cuddle and listen to music. Make the area look good. So when others see it, they smile. That's what my son would do for others. He'd make them smile. He would always tell Joke, "Hey, I must ask you a question. Never mind. I'll shave it for later." Hey mom, why does a soldier flush the toilet? It was his duty. Ha, ha, ha. He was always being so goofy. Trying to make the next person laugh or smile. He enjoyed singing his favorite songs. And now his younger sister sings songs about hoping he's dancing in the sky. And how lucky the angels are now that he's in heaven. Is it peaceful? Are you free? Does the sun shine down? Are you happy? Are you more alive? Because on earth every day, everything good is missing since he left. I hope you get the sentence to the max and live the same way you forced my son to leave. Starved, beaten, neglected, and scared until ultimately you die from the injuries you endure. I do not forgive you. I never will. How could I? I would have loved to. But you don't own up to your own shit, honestly. You continue to play the victim and place blame on others. I do not hope you someday. Rest in peace. I hope every day you rot in hell. The same place you made my son be. Heaven is no place for people like you. And I'm so thankful my boy will truly never be near you again. Rest in peace, Alex. We all love and miss you more than words can describe. Justice for Alex. It's up for the judge to decide. Thank you. [01:49:22] Speaker 3: Thank you, Ms. Love. All right. I'm trying to decide if we should take a break here or not. It's a little bit hard with this many people. Can we just move forward? [01:49:38] Speaker 7: Yes. [01:49:39] Speaker 3: Okay. [01:49:40] Speaker ?: Go ahead. [01:49:41] Speaker 7: Judge, we've never said that this was anything other than tragic. Can you pull the microphone a little closer? Community lost Alex. Community lost somebody that a lot of people in this courtroom still love and care about today. And Josie's included in that group of people. Josie's life has similarly been tragic. Every step of it uphill. Every step of it laced with trauma. Nearly every single person who was ever supposed to love, protect, and care about this woman has abandoned or failed her throughout the course of her life. As long as I've done this, Judge, I've become more and more aware that most of my clients, before they end up in the defendant's seat, are victims first. Many, many times. And in Josie's case, that's no different. She's been so traumatized and through so much that the fact that she's even sitting here today, I think is a miracle. Anyone who wants to look at Josie and what she's been through and what we're going to discuss about her life and say, screw her, I want her to suffer, needs to grow some compassion. They need to grow a heart. Because Josie didn't ask for these circumstances. She didn't create these circumstances. She was made by the experiences of her trauma. Who is Josie? The state asked the court to say -- Ms. [01:51:18] Speaker 13: That is not appropriate. [01:51:20] Speaker 7: Ms. Love, be quiet. All right. So who is she? The state asked the court to see her for who she is. I'll tell the court who we saw in Josie. [01:51:31] Speaker 3: Josie is a survivor. Can I just stop here for a second? I know this is going to be hard for a lot of you in the back, but I really need you not to respond. If you do, I have to have you go. So please just listen, just like you gave the state the respect. Please give the defense the same respect. Go ahead. Thank you. [01:51:53] Speaker 7: Dr. Josie is a survivor. She's a survivor of childhood, teenage, and adult sexual trauma. Before she could even read and write, she was a victim of sexual assault. Before she entered the formative teenage years, she was being groomed and sexually assaulted. As she grew into adulthood, that sort of trauma normalized. Where she was involved in relationships. One in particular where she was sexually assaulted repeatedly again. Josie survived being a teenage mother. Gave birth in her junior year and graduated her senior year. She survived years of horrible abusive relationships at the hands of Mr. Hellrud and Mr. Pedron. She survived poverty, homelessness, addiction, and every single day she survives her disability. Again, not something that she gave to herself, not something that she ever asked for. And in the process, she's persevered. She's raised six wonderful children. That includes Alex Judge. She has achieved sobriety from two of the most difficult drugs that one can do so from. She has managed to face her disability every single day with a smile and a vow that I'm going to try and make today better than the last, despite the fact that she's never going to be the same. And what we saw of Josie, the reason that I met with her so frequently, and I don't think it was every week, Judge, but towards the end it might have been. But the reason that we met with her so frequently was that we were taking the counselor role of our job seriously. She wasn't able to go to a counselor and get treatment to deal with the loss of Alex, to deal with his grief, because all of that would have been admissible and discoverable under the patient privilege exception. So we're trying to help her work through this trauma. And seeing Josie, I wish we would have recorded some of this and we could play this in court. Seeing her break down, sob, talk about how much she misses Alex, how much she loved Alex, how much she didn't want Derek to harm Alex. That was months, months and months of work. We saw Josie have vivid flashbacks in our meetings. We saw her throw up. We saw her have a seizure at one point, talking about the trauma that went on in that home. The domestic violence and the violence towards the children at the hands of Mr. Pedron. This is not somebody who cares nothing about what happened to Alex or what happened in that home. She cares a great deal. She has trouble processing it and I expect one of the silver linings of the sentence is that maybe she's going to have time to actually start processing things now with the help of professional assistance. This was a traumatic process for everybody. I thought that it was ironic that the jurors were offered counseling after this trial verdict, but the one person who really needs to process this hasn't had it yet. Her world was turned completely upside down with Alex's death. And in the process, she was created in this image and the public image of something that she's just not. The villagers heard that there was a monster living up in the castle. So they showed up with their torches and their pitchforks and we saw shades and sheets of misinformation everywhere. I heard so many lies and ridiculous claims throughout the course of this trial on social media. And yes, today that I know to be untrue, but she's not allowed to respond to that. They've created this monster without ever meeting her. There's a reason that victims aren't allowed to sentence defendants. Because simply put, the sentence in every case would just be the death penalty. We'd be killing people on the whole courthouse lawn. Our legislature has determined that we're more sophisticated. That there are many parts and that the vindictiveness and vengeance is just one to a sentence. That's why judges sentence defendants. Not victims. We entrust this process to somebody who's neutral and is guided by the clear sentencing factors. Not by the emotions involved. I don't fault anyone for their emotions. I don't. I can't imagine it. But that is not a basis to decide this case upon. And I'll be the first to acknowledge, Judge, that a sentence that is decided on legal standards, the galleon standard, the facts of conviction, the logic, that's not always going to make everyone happy. The court is in a tough position, but it's the court's role to sentence Ms. Dykeman here today. Let's talk about some of this trauma. When Ms. Dykeman was four or five, she was sexually assaulted by a caregiver in her home. To this day, she suffers from the effects of that. She suffers from flashbacks. She suffers from trauma. As a teenager, she was groomed and sexually assaulted by a man who had access to her and victimized her yet again. As an adult, she was raped repeatedly by Derek Pedran in the course of this relationship. Confronting him via social media messages. Confronting him with attempts to get restraining orders. And none of it ever worked. And it should be crystal clear from the evidence that was presented throughout trial that Josie is without a doubt a survivor of domestic abuse. One of the saddest parts about this case was when Josie told us during a meeting at some point after she had gotten out of jail that the first time in years she felt safe was when she was placed in the jail. Because she knew that she was going to be able to wake up the next day. Because she knew that Derek wasn't going to be in there strangling her or killing her. And we know a lot about domestic violence now. I think even our knowledge has increased in the 20 years that I've been doing this. That we know a lot about why domestic violence victims behave the way that they do. And at its core it reprograms people. It turns them into somebody that they're not. And people in Josie's position are gaslit in the cruelest possible way to believe that what's happening to her is normal. And that their abusers love them. It took her years after the fact to realize that what she experienced with Derek was not normal. That she deserves better than that. And I think it's a particularly aggravating case to Josie's victimization here is that her abuser was working at New Horizons. She would call up Josie and encourage her to drop the no contacts. To tell the police that she didn't want charges pressed. To contact the district attorney's office for leniency. The very people who were supposed to be protecting her in this system were enabling the abuse. She literally had nowhere to go. And we know all about abuse. But yet Josie is being faulted for behaving exactly like victims do. She was blamed because she had Sergeant Williams' phone number. Why didn't she just call him and tell him all about this abuse and the child abuse that was going on. She was blamed because she took back or minimized allegations against Derek. She was blamed for protecting her abuser. This is what abused women do. It's not a fair proposition to blame Josie for behaving exactly how we know domestic violence do. And we can't view her culpability in this case outside of this lens of domestic violence. When people asked why Alex wasn't protected in that home, we showed you the reason why. We showed you, rather the state showed you, videos of Mr. Pedron's nightly behavior in that home. Drunk, high, violent, out of control, hitting her on camera, choking her on camera, screaming at his six-year-old son, Alex Xavier, "Do you just like getting your fucking ass beat?" Whatever Josie's faults are in this case, she didn't create that hell. She did what she needed to survive in it. I think one of the most poignant quotes from the videos during trial came from Josie herself. And that was when she said, "Every night this is my life, you standing over me drunk. Not letting us go to sleep, not letting us feel safe." She was narrating out loud what hers and the children's existence was every single day. And the part about this trial that I frankly found pathetic was the efforts that the state went to to justify and explain this violence. Saying that Josie was at fault because she was pushing his buttons. That she was instigating him. They allowed Mr. Pedron to offer obviously perjured testimony about a supposed encounter that never happened as an explanation for putting her head through a wall several times. They made an intentional choice to protect an abuser because he was on their side in this case. And it was a clear double standard throughout this process. That Josie was deemed responsible for everything, Judge. Kids didn't get to school on time. That's Josie's fault. House was cluttered. Josie's fault. Alex needed his health insurance transferred or his dental care set up. Josie's fault. Everything that Mr. Pedron agreed he could do, he wasn't blamed for. It was all placed on her. Anything to deal with the housekeeping or with the childcare. And she was blamed for not being able to live up to the standard despite the fact that she was seriously disabled and struggled every single day. And one of the things that I'm going to address here is this claim that Josie alienated Alex from Ms. Love's side of the family. That's a lie, ma'am. It is an absolute lie. [02:02:16] Speaker 3: Hey, Ms. Love, please be quiet. [02:02:19] Speaker 8: If you can't be quiet, I'll have to have you go back to the jail. Judge, I would just know for the record that attorney's actor looked at her and said to her that's a lie, ma'am. And his comments also should be directed at your honor. Be directed at me, not at Ms. Love. [02:02:31] Speaker 3: I didn't see him look at Ms. Love. But please, Ms. Love, please don't say anything. [02:02:35] Speaker 7: Go ahead. Back to the matter is that I think we had five or six different recordings of Mr. Pedron saying explicitly that it was his decision to deny Alex contact with Ms. Love's family and loved ones. He told Ms. Love's daughter on a recorded call that her family behaved like assholes. Which is why he refused to let Alex see them. He told his daughter Aubrey that it was his decision to withhold care from the family. He told that to Ms. Phelps on a recorded call that we received in discovery as well. He admitted it during his testimony. This was not Josie manipulating and withholding care. This was entirely Mr. Pedron who alienated this child from the side of the family. And it's not fair to blame her based on a misrepresentation of the objective facts that we know. Let's talk about her disability. We can't ignore that fact. We can't ignore the fact that she didn't do this to herself. She was made that way at the hands of Ms. Love and Mr. Pedron. And yes, her brain injury is real, Judge. Multiple medical providers have said so. A forensic evaluator has said so. The Social Security Administration says so. She didn't ask for this. She didn't ask to have to relearn how to walk, how to drive, how to hold her baby. She didn't ask for constant left-sided weakness. She didn't ask for chronic pain, splitting headaches, and to suffer from seizures as a result of this. And it's important to understand her disability because when we're looking at Ms. Dyckman's purported failures to protect Alex here, you have to look at her capacity here. This was what she was living with, with a permanent disability, with the man who initiated it and gave it to her under circumstances where he was incredibly abusive. This is not somebody who was capable of fully protecting herself and others at all given times. And I am going to address one other fact here that we know in the record about what Ms. Love said. We have a recording as well of Aubrey discussing bringing her rape whistle and a hammer or a screwdriver, I believe it was, to visit her father. And you know what she said? She said that she needed it to prevent Derek from raping her. That was recorded. Ms. Love was not the victim of the Missouri attack. Josie was. What she told the police, or what Ms. Love told the police when she was arrested as to why she hit Josie, it wasn't Josie attacked me and threatened to take my kid. It was, she pissed me off. That's what she told the Joplin, Missouri Police Department. And then, Judge, the reality is, is that Mr. Pedron and Ms. Love also discussed the events of Joplin over recorded prison calls. Where they discussed the fact that this happened because Ms. Love was high on methamphetamine and the fight got out of control. The facts matter. And I want to make sure that they're correct in the record. Perhaps the biggest, the biggest injustice in the course of this trial is the fact that we have somebody who was a verified monster who's just not going to be held accountable. The state lied in its closing argument when it said that Mr. Pedron was under investigation and will one day be held accountable. That hasn't happened. It's never happened. He's been arrested or investigated or suspected repeatedly and has been given a permanent get out of jail free card. He perjured himself at trial repeatedly without consequence. He admitted to being a drug dealer who very likely brought in the Xanax that killed his son a day or two before his death. He admitted that he threatened to murder Ms. Dykeman and then murder his other partner, chop off her head and send it to her mother in a box. He intimidated witnesses. He alienated these children and he is getting away with it. And judge, when you look at accountability here, it has to be individual. You can't ignore the fact that you have this complete sociopath all over this situation that has been treated like a victim. Mr. Pedron was arrested just this week after what I am told included video footage of him beating or hitting three different women over the course of a month as well as his son. They are still hitting those kids. I guarantee the court that. I guarantee that. We are getting calls from people in the community that have nothing to do with this case. Asking why nothing is happening. Why these kids are still in his care. And I really, really hope that I'm not in a position one day to say I told you so. But when it comes to what we agree on with Ms. Lowe's side of the family, I agree. Like CPS, do something. Do something. Investigate this. Because it's going to happen again if not. And Josie is not going to be responsible to blame for this one. Let's talk about the kids. The remaining kids are in a tough position now. I know that. I know who they are living with. I know how the people feel about Josie that they're living with. What she'll say to the court about her kids was that raising those children was the best thing she ever did. She's loved being a mother more than anything else. And it was heartbreaking to see those two children, Major and Brantley, robbed of their good memories through the gaslighting that obviously went on before their testimony. I'll say it explicitly, and I'm not going to back off of that claim. The fact that Brantley and Major suddenly became consistent immediately after trial preparation with the state, and not at all during their forensic interviews, leads me to believe beyond the shadow of a doubt that those kids were coached, manipulated, and alienated. And it's heartbreaking for Josie to see that. To see them come in there and refuse to call her mom. To see them come in there and deny that they ever had one good memory with her. That's not true. We have thousands of photographs to the contrary. But these kids were manipulated and lied to and brought to the point where we saw them at trial here today. And I get it that they're doing what they need to do to survive. Josie gets that as well. But she also gets that soon enough these kids are going to be old enough to realize that not everything they've been fed is the truth. That not everything they were told to believe about their mom is real. And she wants them to know right now that when they get old enough to Google this she loves you. She loves all of you. And she will never turn you away when you're ready for a relationship. So let's talk about the elephant in the room. I've alluded to it several times and I am just going to say it out loud now. Josie says that she's innocent. That's what she's always said. For the record, I believe her. A lot of people do. We've gotten calls from all over the nation of people sad and upset at what they saw or what they consider to be a miscarriage of justice. And I'm not here to second guess the work of a jury or the work of this court. But I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that our own data says that it's a statistical certainty. We will convict and imprison innocent people. The data from, this was Trump administration data by the way, says that 11.6% of people convicted by a jury of a serious offense that being defined by sexual assault or homicide are factually innocent. And I feel like I failed Josie in this case. I'm going to remember this case forever. I'm going to remember her for the person that she is and for the fact that I believe that she's innocent. I get asked so often when I'm talking to new clients how many trials I've had and how many I've won. And like the truthful answer is I don't know. I stopped keeping track. But I do know the number of people that I've represented that I believe to be innocent that are now heading to prison. And Josie makes number three. And I just want her to know that when she tells people in the future that she didn't do this, there are people in this community who believe her. I believe her. The galleon factors are clear, Judge. And I'm going to start with protection of the public. Josie is not dangerous. Let's look at the factors that we always look at. Her criminal history is minimal. It's dated. She has no intentional violent offenses. This is another area where the incidents from 2011 and 2013 were grossly inflated beyond what actually happened in those cases. And I'm asking the court to make some findings on that. Because we had a stipulation whereby even the state agreed there wasn't intentional abuse. This was charges neglect. It was something that she admitted to. It was something that she took accountability for. It's something that Mr. Barnes was clearly culpable for as well. It's something that multiple witnesses described as Mr. Barnes withholding food because he believed that Haley was overweight and disciplining Haley with physical discipline. Josie was at fault for that neglect. She admitted that. She pleaded guilty to that. And she accepted the consequences of that. But this is not evidence that Josie has a pattern of targeting and physically abusing children. That's simply not supported by the evidence that we have. I note that the 2011 incident as well was so weak that it was dismissed outright without a formal resolution. Not a diversion. It was just dismissed. That was Emily Hennick who I was around for that time frame. I severely doubt that Ms. Hennick would have dismissed that case if she believed that she could have proven it. But yet we're forced to answer for it and we're forced to answer for something that simply didn't happen. And I explained in my memorandum some of our issues with the contested facts here. And the problem with the verdict is that Josie was convicted of reckless and negligent acts, at least with respect to the death. If the state's theory was true, if the state's theory was proven, she would have been convicted of either of those two accounts that are effectively intentional homicide. That wasn't established. The verdict doesn't tell us which facts the jury found to be true or untrue. If she threw Alex down the stairs or bent his leg backwards. If she put hot sauce on his food or starved him. These daily beatings that came out for the first time at trial that supposedly happened the night of his death. We don't have answers on any of this and those are contested. Those are contested. But I maintain that the findings here on what the convictions were, including the state's own theory and the defense theory, is that this verdict is most consistent with death being caused through the administration of Xanax. Recklessly, negligently in this case, but that's it. It is effectively a reckless and biased homicide. It's effectively a reckless and biased homicide based on the state's own theory. Based on what the state argued here today. That Ms. Dykman gave him a Xanax and didn't expect him to die. That is what we're looking at here. Not the scene, not the events that have been described so vividly throughout the last three years. We're looking at what was actually supported. What else do we know about Josie's ability to be supervised in the community? She completed probation. She completed drug court. I have represented lots of people in drug court. It is a difficult program that requires participation. That requires people to actually put in an effort. She maintained long-term sobriety. She maintained a long period of time without criminal justice involvement. And she did something that few people were able to. She beat methamphetamine and heroin addiction. She was released on bond in this case. I have had a few clients released on bond on first degree intentional homicide. And it always scares me because I worry about the clients being able to comply. But Josie did her job here. She was perfect. She was on bond for so long without a single conduct violation. Without a single report from justice support services. Her grandfather trusted her enough to put up her bond and house her with him. And the JSS workers were so impressed with her performance that they unsolicited requested that the court release some of her restrictions. It's also important to note that Josie is not in the same position now that she was before Alex Xavier's death. She's not in an abusive relationship. As hard as it is, she's not allowed to see her kids at this point. The chances of Ms. Dykeman becoming a risk even if the court buys that version of her humanity are practically non-existent. She proved that she's not a risk during the year plus that she was on bond. And that galleon interest requires the court to assess whether or not somebody can be supervised safely in the community. Our position is that she can. I'll reiterate as well the data that we have on length of sentence being tied to public safety. What we have in both the federal and the state sphere is that adding additional years, adding additional times, adds virtually nothing to the risk of recidivism or the risk that Ms. Dykeman will reoffend. It will cost the state millions upon millions of dollars, especially if the court adopts the DOC's recommendation or the state's here today. But we get that with basically zero increase in public safety. Which brings us to rehabilitation. Josie has rehabilitative needs. But that's not the question in galleon. The question in galleon is whether those needs are more effectively addressed in custody or elsewhere. Nothing in the PSI suggests that she's going to receive any treatment or any programming in custody that will be more effective than what she's already receiving in the community. She has a strong support structure within the community. She has SSI income. She has mental health care providers. She has medical providers. She has close supervision. The rehabilitative interest of galleon not only does not support a lengthy term of imprisonment. It actively contradicts it. Which brings us to punishment. Retribution is indeed part of sentencing. And I don't care if we call it accountability or vengeance or retribution or a punitive aspect. It's all the same thing. But it's important to note that this is just one component of a much broader sentence. And the court is required to impose the least amount of time necessary to achieve the goals of that punitive sanction. What can the court take from Josie that she hasn't already had ripped from her? Kids? Her reputation? Her health? How does hurting Josie more for the sake of hurting her make any of us better? We have this sick focus on retribution in our criminal justice system. And it's only getting worse every single day. We believe and we tell ourselves that this pain that we're feeling, this loss that we're experiencing, it's going to feel better once we know that somebody else is suffering. In the course of this case, people have repeatedly threatened to have Josie killed. We got death threats. I closed down my office for a couple of days. And people feel empowered to say these things out loud because they believe that they're morally right in the sense of, it's okay for me to hurt somebody if I'm angry at them. It's not okay. And it's not okay when we do that in our court system to somebody in Josie's position either. I quoted from Bryan Stevenson's book, Just Mercy, in my sentencing memorandum. And I think this is probably the best way that I've ever heard it explained from somebody who's worked within this system my entire life. But he talks about brokenness. How every single one of us, me included, are just broken people practicing in a broken system. And broken people only know how to break others. I break others. So does everybody else in this room. In the process, we forget our own humanity. We forget to see the brokenness in the people that we're hurting. We forget how broken that makes us when we wish and hope and pray for Josie to suffer and then apparently get murdered in prison. The reason that people say these things out loud is because we're broken. I want to read a quote from this book that I'll never forget. I found it in a time when I was having a hard time in my career as well. That I think sums all of this up perfectly. [02:21:08] Speaker ?: Thank you. [02:21:09] Speaker 7: Sometimes we're fractured by the choices we make. Sometimes we're shattered by things we never would have chosen. But our brokenness is also the source of our common humanity. The basis for our shared search for comfort, meaning, and healing. Our shared vulnerability and imperfection nurtures and sustains our capacity for compassion. We have a choice. We can embrace our humanness, which means embracing our broken nature and the compassion that remains our best hope for healing. Or we can deny our brokenness, forswear compassion, and as a result, deny our own humanity. If Josie Dyckman came before this court not having been accused of killing Alex Xavier, do you think that anybody would have said after hearing what she's been through, the life she's lived, the scars that she's developed, that they'd say, screw her. I want her to suffer. It doesn't make it any more right just simply because she's been accused and charged with this crime as well. I do want to address general deterrence just briefly since the state broke it or brought it up. Quite frankly, general deterrence does not work. General deterrence will not work against people like Mr. Pedran. The experiences or if he sees this sentencing, he's not going to stop hitting people. He's not going to stop abusing children. It's not going to work against other people. Those are emotional cases. I happen to be the attorney who argued the most recent general deterrence case in front of the state Supreme Court. And frankly, from the research that we briefed and was involved, it doesn't work. It is not a factor that this court should consider. What the court should consider is proportionality. So, talking about the guidelines. This is the state DOC guideline. One page in PSIs for recommendations of what each felony case ought to be worth. These are the federal guidelines, Judge. Hundreds of pages with all of the facts, data, and legal principles that go into calculating the advisory guidelines. I might not always agree with the advisory guidelines, but at least I understand where it's coming from. And what I've been on my high horse about the last couple years at least, with these PSI recommendations, is that DOC doesn't know how they came up with these numbers. It's literally drafted by an anonymous DOC employee in 2016 that said, here's what I think these cases are worth, and left it at that. There's no facts, there's no data, there's no drafting documents, anything to support this. And I think it's nuts that we're relying on something this arbitrary as an anchoring point in sentencing. If you want to send somebody to prison for 7 years, 9 years, 16 years, 40 years, as these guidelines recommend, then tell us what facts and data it's based upon. Don't just slap this in front of us and say DOC's always right. And it's one of the reasons why I thought that this recommendation by the DOC was outrageous. It misrepresented the facts of this trial. Granted, the writer didn't have the same access that we did. And it sets up this arbitrary number that posits Ms. Dykeman is a monster, when in fact she's not. What do we know about the felonies that Josie was convicted of? We know that the legislature has not set a mandatory minimum. Meaning that if the court wanted to, it could place her on probation. It could simply find her and release her at this point. The legislature recognizes that there are circumstances that call for mercy. Had they thought the opposite, they would have imposed a mandatory minimum penalty. We see that all the time. We see that on first degree intentional homicide, what Josie was originally charged with. We also have to ask ourselves whether or not somebody in Ms. Dykeman's position is capable of redemption in prison. The reason that Governor Evers just started the commutation board back up is because we have far too many geriatric prisoners in their golden years who have long since redeemed themselves and are no longer capable of harming anybody. The governor knows that redemption is possible. I believe that redemption is possible for Josie. But the surest way to ensure that we don't have somebody sitting in prison for an unnecessary period of time is not to set it overly broad in the first place. I don't know if this board is even going to exist after Governor Evers leaves office. But I do know that it's something that we should consider. The fact that people can redeem themselves in custody. And it's also worth noting that as somebody who's never been to prison before, the rule of less is more can and should apply here. Less custody is necessary to achieve that punitive effect on Josie than somebody who's more experienced in the criminal justice system. Unless custody is appropriate when we compare this case to others in the La Crosse community that have similar circumstances. The tragic unintended overdose death of a child. I cited the cases in my memorandum. But I think Josie identifies with these cases just as much as I do that these are two people in those cases that had no intention of that outcome. They never wanted that tragedy, but they had to live it nonetheless. And I think that it's an appropriate point of comparison to start with what Mr. Liggins and Ms. Baisley received in this county recently with similar circumstances. Rather than assuming the worst and conflating the facts that weren't established. I'm also asking the court to authorize concurrent sentences. I'm just going to say it. This case was overcharged. She was charged with three different homicides for the same death and all of the behavior overlapped. The state is not entitled to demand consecutive sentences or lengthier sentences looking at all of the time that they chose to stack against Ms. Dijkman. These are the same series of events and a concurrent sentence is appropriate. And I'm not telling the court to give her no time. I realize there's huge pressure to do this. And I'm not here asking the court for probation either. But I am asking the court to give Ms. Dijkman the time that makes sense in light of the galleon guardrails that is intended to achieve some purpose beyond just bringing more suffering into Ms. Dijkman's world. A sentence that recognizes how many times this same system of justice has failed her before she got to this point. The one thing I wish I could say is what I can't. I wish I could tell everybody here that things will get better. I don't know that that will. Sometimes it does. Sometimes it doesn't. But there are a couple of other things that I do know. That Alex in his life knew a lot of things that children should never know. Josie testified herself that his life was hell. But without a doubt Alex also knew love. He knew family. He knew what it felt like to belong. He knew that Josie loved him. And that he loved her. People came here expecting a monster judge. But all we've got is a woman. She isn't perfect. She's made mistakes. But Josie is not the monster that's been portrayed. She's just a person that there's no need to continue breaking day in and day out for the rest of her life. Our recommendation in this case is that the court impose a short period of confinement. Followed by a lengthy period of community based supervision. Combined with either extended supervision or consecutive terms of probation. And we believe that this most effectively achieves the goals of Galleon. And will allow healing across the community. I have 694 days of credit. [02:29:33] Speaker 3: Does the state agree with the amount of credit? [02:29:40] Speaker 8: I trust Attorney Zacher on that comment. Okay. [02:29:50] Speaker 3: Ms. Deitman, would you like to make a statement at this time? It's the opportunity to tell me what you believe I should. If you'd like to fill in. Anything further? But do address the court directly. [02:30:01] Speaker 19: I just want to say that to my kids, Zayden, Jalen, Major Brantley, and Uriah, I love you with all my heart. And I will always be here for you. [02:30:15] Speaker 3: Anything else you would like to add? No, thank you. And can I go ahead and sentence you at this point in time? Yes, Judge. [02:30:24] Speaker 19: Thank you. [02:30:25] Speaker ?: Thank you. [02:30:51] Speaker 3: Give me one moment here, please. So, before I begin, I want to just say that the community is in terrible pain. And I agree with the state that this has had a phenomenal effect across all of us because I think to a certain degree, we all blame ourselves what happened here. Even though Ms. Dykeman is the person who's convicted and the person who's be sentenced, really there's so many things about this case that are so fundamental that we forget one just thing, which is we lost a light. We lost Alex Xavier. Everything I saw, and I have to say the thing that probably one of the most dramatic things or things that I saw was the first grade class piece, which the state submitted. And, you know, I'm here to apply the law to the current facts, but it doesn't take away the humanity that we all have towards each other. And what happens, I agree with Mr. Zacher that we cannot deny our humanity. Part of our humanity, and honestly, Ms. Dykeman, is the sadness that happens when you see Alex Xavier sitting here with his teddy bear, or tiger, actually, and, you know, writes about the things he loves. French toast sticks. Favorite color, black at that point. Likes to play with his brothers. Helping at home. Wants to work at a car wash. What's interesting about that is how many different ways he's reflecting the people around him at the time. His brothers being at home, either with grandparents, or with Ms. Dykeman, or Mr. Pedron, or thinking wanting to be, at this point in time, wanting to be working at car wash like his father did. What it shows is how children are so precious because they see and hear and feel everything. Everything we do. So violence in a household, violence between children that, when children are looking over and they see violence between the adults in their household, one thing we know is it damages children long-term. And quite honestly, Ms. Dykeman, I'm here to sentence you. I am not here to sentence anybody else. But it doesn't mean that this is out of context of the violence that you lived in. Not that you, you know, there was violence perpetrated against you, but there's also this violence which I believe the jury found that you perpetrated against the innocent child. They found that. They've, that's their verdict. After hearing all the evidence. And that's what I have to rely on. You know, I, you know, I, it, it also means I don't ignore what's happening here. I, I, I, the families should be grieving. They are angry. They're frustrated. And they don't understand why this happened. How did, how did Alex get taken away from a family which was loving and then placed into a family that was not? That's what's sort of the story here. Well, I'm going to just say it's somewhat not completely one way or the other. So I'm talking about the facts in this situation, but I do want to talk, this is the sort of the background what I think I have to acknowledge is that I think the reality is Mr. Pedron is both can be a monster and a loving person. I think Ms. Pedron or, excuse me, Ms. Dykeman probably was somewhat the same way. I can't ignore the domestic violence that happened. I don't think the state's asking me to. But it does put everything to context. It puts a lot more context. And I think this is what's so hard for the community is that why do we let this happen? Why did this happen? There's a lot of blame be pushed around from everything from the CPS, the police. Why wasn't Alex taken out? I think that's what everybody's asking the question is why wasn't Alex taken away at that night before? And I know it's haunting for officers because they're trying to balance what to do. I mean, that's why it's such a horribly difficult job. Being an officer, a police officer, is much harder, quite honestly, than what I do. You know why? Because they have to make the decisions like that. And they have so much power and they have so much weight placed upon them, especially in this moment. So, there are a lot of questions in this case. There's a lot more questions probably ultimately than solid answers. But we do have a couple solid answers. One, is you recklessly caused the homicide of Alex Xavier. Two, you chronically neglected him until he died. And three, you physically abused him repetitively. That caused great bodily harm. The jury decided that beyond a reasonable doubt. They came to that conclusion. And one fundamental that I have to rely on, and what our society of law and order requires us to rely on those decisions, those incredibly difficult decisions that that jury talked about, came to a consensus 12-0. But that was what their answer is. And it's not even an issue of, do you respect the jury? Because I do. It's an issue of, that's what the law requires. And that's what I'm given. And I don't think there's any really dispute among this between the parties. The real question really is, what are we talking about? And probably that's where the unanswered questions are. And I sort of agree with the defense. We really won't know, ultimately, what exactly these, you know, what the exact acts we're all involved with. In fact, the way the law is written is that the jury doesn't even have to agree on three acts. They just have to say there are three acts. And then there's a singular act that they believe is the basis for, for example, the physical abuse of a child. But there was a singular act of great bodily harm. Otherwise, these are reckless acts that happen. So the state's version of battered until he was about to die and then given drugs and died is as plausible as the decision that the drug was given to them or let given to Alex at the time and he died. So that's why it's reckless homicide and not intentional homicide. Chronic neglect is also neglect. It's not necessarily, it's quasi-intentional because if you don't take care of a child, that's intentional. If you don't pay attention to a child, that's intentional. But there's also the reality is that you didn't intend to cause death. What you intended is he became, actually, I like what quite Ms. Love said, this nonchalant. Nonchalant was, I was looking for a word all through this time and Ms. Love sort of gave that to me because that's what's so strange. It's not only the nonchalantness of you, Ms. Deitman, but even the people around you to a certain degree, especially Mr. Pedron. What's scary about that whole situation is Mr. Pedron wasn't even supposed to be there. He shows up. I think that is correct. He admitted he had Xanax with him at some point. Xanax was there. We don't know exactly where it came from. We do know that it ended up in Xavier's body. Was it he the source? Was it Xanax from other sources? Ultimately, we don't really know. But we know that it ended up with Alex Xavier's body. And we also know that you're responsible for Alex Xavier at the moment. Alex Xavier was sitting on a couch with a broken leg from weeks before. In, did not seem like he was happy sitting there. That whole night leads a whole bunch of questions about what happened here. But what we also know is what the state brought to the, you know, is that we have these injuries. We have injuries which are clearly over and over again aged there. That's the abuse. We also have a liver that's bleeding. You know, was it enough to eventually kill the child? Maybe. But the pathologists are a little bit unclear. The explanation by the state is as plausible as the explanation by defense, I think. But we do know either way, the intention was not necessarily to kill the child. It was, the intention was not to kill the child. It was a consequence of your actions. That's what, to be clear. So that's why these are, be felonies in some ways. You know, I'm, I'm just going to address there, you know, the victims in this case, which are family members, mostly, it sounds like from the love family, pedron family, who have spoke here. There are also other statements by others. Obviously, talk about the, the sense of grief, the, the, the idea that, you know, losing him broke us. That, it's interesting because everybody's talking about being broken in this situation. And I agree, there's a, we are hurting. There's a lot of injury here. You know, the fact that the Anderson's not only lost a nephew, but really somebody who was instrumental to their lives, it sounds like. And I think, you know, when you, when I listened to that statement, I listened to a statement of a, of what families should be. And I, I know it's a little bit easier to, to think about this in the past, but the really, reality is family is everybody's, right? It's, it's Love's family, it's Mr. Pedron's family, and quite honestly, it's Ms. Dykeman's family. Before this happened, everybody was part of that family. But probably one of the most, sort of, disastrous things, which led to eventually the situation, was the animosity and the hatred that was going on, without considering the children first. And so, it created isolation, it created, it sounds, you know, as, and I'm sorry if I'm getting the wrong person. But the whole, you know, the fact that people didn't see Alex for so long, because I remember there was testimony about Mr. Pedron not allowing Alex to see the Love family. I, I think there's a lot of speculation about whether Josie was the one who's in charge of that, but I'll tell you Mr. Pedron's behavior is such that it's more believable that Mr. Pedron, Pedron at the time, didn't want that to happen too. I am not going to go back to re-judge what happened in Missouri too. I mean, I'm not here for that. That's, but we know that was part of the past too. So, the last person I'm going to talk about who made a statement, and it was a written statement, is Major. Major talks about this loss of, this loss and this love that he had for his brother. You know, the reality is, is that when I look at the evidence, one thing I think, as indicated, the jury did ask to watch the interviews, more specifically the first interviews. Not the second interviews, but the first interviews. I think the jury wanted to see what the raw response was at that point in time. That seemed to be what the request was. That was pretty obvious from the record. And I think they wanted to see that raw response, because I think there's some, I'll say fear, that maybe there was influence. But the raw response is maybe somewhat inconsistent, but they weren't inconsistent. But one thing was abuse. There was abuse. They both talked about it. Brantley and Major talked about it. There wasn't enough time for them to really align their stories or have people align their stories. You know, they were pretty, I watched those years ago. I watched them a couple times. I watched them over and over again, because I find them to be very believable. Because they don't really have any reason to not respond the way they did. They just did. So, you know, whatever happened in the stand, happened in the stand. But the reality is, is they saw something. They believed you were responsible for this injury to their brother, and they talked about it. At that moment, I'm not saying they even disliked you or they maybe loved you still very much. But the reality was, is they made that choice to say what they saw. Not through the filter of days or weeks or years when they finally testified, but at that moment. So, the reason we have forensic interviews is for exactly that reason. That's why multiple forensic interviews are problematic. It's why we don't want children to keep on saying these things. We want them to say it as much as they can at first. So, I think that's probably one of the most reliable things that the jury worked on. And I actually see it as a fairly truthful statement. Which, with all the physical evidence and what eventually happened to Xavier, corroborates that. It holds it up, supports those conclusions. So, you know, Major and Brantley, I, it's very hard to have children testify. And ultimately, I find it very, it's very difficult. The reason we do forensic interviews is to avoid that if we can. That's why the legislature created the law. That's why it was, it's out there. So, I, I, I just want to say to, I think Major might be watching, pretty sure Major is. It's just that, that took a lot of guts to get up here. It took a lot of bravery as a young, young boy to do that. And I, I, I hope things go better. And I just want to say one other thing. One thing Major did during the trial, which I don't know if people saw, and I, I don't think this is a big problem, is I don't know if all of you saw, but they were eating heart candies. He had heart candies in his hand. He went through a very difficult process of testifying. Oh, there you are, Major. And I just want to say that he did something that a child does, which is in a moment of difficulty and stress, he turned to me and was kind. And that's one thing I was saying that, you know, Major, not only you, but all of us, this was an act of kindness. And the reason I point that out is because there is so much anger and frustration and, and deceit and everything going on in this situation. The one thing we can learn from is that moment of kindness. Even with the people you hate the most. You know, I heard a preacher recently say this, that one thing that Christian doctrine is, is that you should love, you should love even those you hate. And what it really is telling us is that we as a society require that we be kind, even when the worst is in front of us. And by the way, this is the worst. A child dies. This is the worst. So, the reason I am talking about that is I, I think there's a need for healing. And probably the person with the most intelligence and approach and the most kindness in his heart was that moment when Major handed me this. Why is that so important? Because actually the law reflects this. In some ways, the law reflects the need that we treat each other with the understanding of what happened before and what's happening here. I'm going to just, looking at galleon factors, you know, I think it's pretty obvious that the primary factor here is the gravity offense. I mean, I sort of agree with the overall question on, you know, what is it you need for the rehabilitation of the defendant. That is, is nothing that couldn't be done in the community. The reality is, is that for the protection of the public, you probably could, reality is that there's probably some need of incarceration for that. And I don't think that's appropriate, necessarily, to be placed on probation. But the other part of galleon is this, is probation would unduly depreciate the seriousness of the offense. And in this case, that's clear. That's absolutely clear. And I actually don't think either side is saying otherwise. The really, the big question is the question of magnitude of the response to that. I mean, when you look at her record, it's not a long record, but it's not a long criminal record. But there's behaviors out there, which I do support that we should have had better signs that there was this behavior that's out there. And it got worse, necessarily, not necessarily better after a traumatic brain injury. It doesn't mean that people change their behaviors. It just changes how they respond to things. You had a history, Ms. Deichman, of responding to children in ways that was either neglectful or in a way that was irresponsible. And it hurt them. Now, I'm not even talking about, I'm just saying that it's clear that there was something there. We should have been more aware of it. You did a lot of right things, too, at that point. And this is the mitigating factor. It's the fact you responded to it. You dealt with your drug addiction. You went to drug court. You followed through. It is not a slap in the hand. I just want to say that's not correct. Because we can't predict everything people will do in the future. It's impossible. We are not in that position. But we are in a position of saying people need to do what we ask them to do. And you did that. But then you went right back to the most abusive relationship you could be in. And you didn't change your behavior, which is get the heck out of that situation. Children are born. More children are there. So your background, your history is a little bit mixed because of that. You may not have much of criminal convictions, but at the same time, you have behavior, which is undesirable in the background. We talked a little bit about your personality, your traits. Some of that's related to your TBI, but those are also some of it's just related to your, what I think is clear, your own self-protective behavior. You know, there's this whole question is, were you staging it so you, after the, after you discovered El Xavier had passed away, did you stage it? Did you do something? That conversation, whether you remember it or not, that story you told doesn't make any sense. And I think that's one reason why we're all sitting here scratching our head. Did you hold him? Did you put him down? Did you move him off the bed? Did you, he was clearly very sick, if not dead at that moment. You realized it. But I think you did something that I agree with the state. I think you got scared and covered it up. Didn't know what to do. Thought you got into either drugs or you gave him a drug and then you, and that's what eventually killed him. Either way, you're responsible for that behavior. Mr. Pedran's in jail at this point in time. He's not there. You're the only adult in the room at that point. And so you're responsible for that behavior. The result of the pre-sentence investigation. This is a little bit of a mixture because obviously Ms. Deichmann did not participate in the PSI. I don't think the, I'll be frank, I know PSI is pretty well. I know the compass evaluation is sort of useless because they didn't really do an evaluation. There's bits and pieces of it that are helpful. So that's sort of, I don't think that's very helpful. I do think, you know, some of the background that's given, the perception that's given is all appropriate. But I don't necessarily know if the, you know, apartment corrections can make a recommendation that's based on information that they are sure of. Plus, there was, as the state pointed out, they had the wrong information about count three altogether. That was a more severe charge than what they were considering at the time. And I'll get to that in a bit. The viciousness or aggravated nature of the crime. This is part that I think Ms. Deichmann, you just don't accept, which is, I think it's clear the jury thought you were continuously abusive, Alex Xavier. They believe that the children say that they see that the fighting, they see the hitting, they see the kicking. They said, they see a lot of things. We talked about the hot sauce, et cetera. We had the incident with the, with the, Alex Xavier going down the stairs, whether it was intentional or, or a get out of my way down the stairs. Whatever it was, something. There was an agreement that there was a great bodily harm caused to the child. It could even simply be that you didn't take care of them and you didn't take, you abused them by not, by hitting them earlier. And exactly as the state said, eventually died because the medications are in the system. So, I think that's where the aggravated aspect is. I, I, I'll, I'll be frank. I wince at the word torture because I don't, I, I see injuries that are definitely somebody being hit and struck, et cetera. Um, if you believe some of the, the, what was being said, torture is possibly the right word, but I just don't think it is. I think this is abuse. I think it was abuse that was sort of ongoing, hitting, just like the kids talked about. I trust what they were seeing. Um, next question is the degree of culpability of the, of the defendant. You're the only adult in the room when this happens. I mean, one of the arguments by defense during the trial, but I don't think it was necessarily accepted is somehow Mr. Pedron is the one who beat him up earlier. And that's what creates the internal injuries. That's what gets us to the point where the, the blood, the bleeding, et cetera, that they found. I, even if that's true, you're still responsible for the child at that point. I mean, when the police come, you know, the, the argument is you're such an abused individual that when the police came, you made the decision not to tell them that Derek Pedron just beat the crap out of Xavier. That doesn't make any sense. Do you want him to get the heck out of there? Which I don't know if you really wanted to, because it's not clear what's going on. I mean, he was hiding upstairs. That's clear. Um, this case has so many internal contradictions. It's doesn't, it's a little bit hard to come to a final decision, but I have to say that I, when I look at this, the jury came to the final decision, which is you're responsible for it. All right, this, um. Um, the next one is demeanor at trial. I'm, I, I, I don't know what to, the demeanor at trial was you denied it, but you have a right to maintain your innocence. So I'm not sure. I, I, I, I think that's somewhat of a neutral issue here. The, um, your education background, et cetera, that's been brought out by, um, by the fence. Um, obviously the questions of remorse and, um, were you cooperative? Did you, did you be part of this? There's, there's, there's always this issues. You maintain your innocence, uh, which you have a constitutional right, but we don't really have that remorse aspect. I mean, it could have been, let me just say there, that this is not necessarily a case without remorse. You could have very much have remorse over the issue that you even let your children be in this situation. And I don't know if that was necessarily said, but that's not even out there. So assuming that's assuming that you're right, you'd also are responsible for protecting your children. And, and if I accept the argument that you consider El Xavier part of your, one of your children, you have then taken on that responsibility, which the state talked about as a caregiver, somebody who's ultimately responsible for that children, for the, for that child. So, you didn't take that responsibility. You didn't take, take care of El Xavier when you should have, and that's partially what, what happened here. That's where the neglect comes from. Um, obviously, uh, when we talk about these charges, it's, it's ultimately, uh, where the recklessness comes from. And then I, we talked about the child abuse aspect earlier. Um, the need for close rehabilitative control. Uh, again, I, I think that goes down to. The public safety issue. What really is the argument is that we want to take you away. So your ability to be with children, you never have ability to be with children again. I think that's reasonable aspect in here. You were taking care of children and a child dies in your care. Um, I think that's a reasonable request. Not only request, but necessary for the public. The rights of the public. Um, I, you know, um, I, I, I think those who've watched this trial closely know, I, I'm, we are here to follow a process. [03:02:40] Josie Dockerman: I don't know why it does that. Don't ask me why. I know that's all they, the, even, even the cameraman down with him. I know. I don't know why it does that. [03:02:56] Speaker 3: It's not, it's not, is there a certain amount. Is it one year for justice for Xavier? Is it three years? Is it 10 years? Is it 20? Is it 30? Is it 40? That's not really considering what the sentence really should be, which is what's the appropriate sentence for Ms. Dykeman. And part of the gravity offense takes that into consideration. I also think that there is an aspect of some general deterrence. We know it's not very effective. I agree that generally the research going back almost, I don't think, 100 years, the general deterrence is one of the more, it doesn't change general behavior. And in this case, one of the things about this situation is it was so internal, it was so about a family dynamic that was so incredibly screwed up that it is hard to believe that a response to this situation is going to have a major effect on people's behavior. But I will say this, is that the fundamental general deterrence, which is what I think I am trying to create right now, is this. If you're responsible for children, you have to be responsible for them. You don't have a right to children. Children are not your property. They are your precious family. They are the ones you love. We don't own the people we love. We love them. It's a different idea. So when we get these situations, it's my child and I get to do this, that is not love. That is some strange idea about what children are. We also have a responsibility, quite frankly, of being responsible in the community so you're available to your children. And the need to follow the law and follow through what you need to do to make your lives better is the requirement of all parents because you need to be positive. And I agree, people are broken. You have the extra responsibility as a caregiver, Ms. Degman, to address that. And so when I talk about protection of the public, excuse me, when I talk about deterrence, what I'm saying to the community is that the deterrence is not from the sentence, but from the reality that Xavier died. That's where the deterrence is. The deterrence is that we have a responsibility to protect children from this by changing our behavior. So if you're drinking too much alcohol, you're using methamphetamine, you're using fentanyl or heroin, or your household is falling apart because you're beating the heck out of somebody, you are hurting your children. And that's what was going on in your household. And you are responsible to make something happen to make it better for your children, Ms. Degman. Ultimately, from my perspective, that's the question of justice, is how do we say it's just if we don't change what we do as a society and look at ourselves? And in your particular case, specifically, you have to be responsible for this and you're going to go to prison because of that. But that is what is really the issue of justice. So the question then becomes when looking at all these factors and the aggravating factors, as it pointed out, as you were the caretaker, what is the appropriate amount? And I do appreciate the fact both the state and defense have provided me examples and averages out there. I mean, I looked at that, too, and I, you know, I'm not going to make any specific findings based on anybody else's case because I don't think that's appropriate. But it was interesting to look at these statistics, which talk about those who are convicted of first degree intentional or first degree reckless homicide of the women in Tachita, what most of them, the average is 20 years of incarceration. There were four who had significantly more, chronically, the, excuse me, chronic neglect. It was one to 15 years, or excuse me, there was one person with 15 years of incarceration. There was only one person in prison for that type of charge. And then the child abuse causing grave bodily harm averages about 13 years. The question is, is this an average case or is it not an average case, if you want to do it proportionally, but I don't necessarily think that's how you determine the amount, by the way. I don't think, well, this is the average, so you get the average. I don't think that's appropriate either. But I do think the question is, should it be out of, the state said this in the letter, which is, yes, it also has to be in relationship to other types of cases. And I don't necessarily, the case that, the one case which the state sent me, which I looked over, seemed like a horrific case. I, I'll be frank, I think that's a different type of case than the situation. I think there's too many dynamics in this situation. At least it's hard to tell from a complaint, right? You don't always have all the information. So I don't think, those comparisons are tough because I don't think you necessarily know all the details like a jury does when they're sitting there making a decision. They have all the facts that they're considering. But one thing they don't do is the actual sentence. That's what I'm doing right now. Sorry to explain that very basic thing, but that's what a lot of people, just because a jury verdict is there, doesn't necessarily mean that's what the sentence should be, is the maximum. So, I clearly don't agree that maximum sentence is appropriate. I also have a little problem with the fact that I think the Department of Correction recommendations are not based on really full information. That was a choice by, by defense. But there is a lot of information I'm using. I think there is, going back a little bit, I think that that's exactly why looking at these cases in relationship to other cases is important. I don't think it's the same as the other case that happened in La Crosse. That's a completely different one. That was clearly reckless, homicide based on purely accidental situations somewhat. It was not based on this chronic abuse, which I think is going on. So, I think this is more severe than that. I think it's more severe than your average case in some ways. What I think the court is going to do is look at these situations. I also believe that there's a distinction between 1, 2, and 3, which is 1 and 2 are more about that situation that happened in that period of time. And 3 was over time, because the chronic abuse is talked about over a longer period of time. And I think it's appropriate, actually, to look at count 1 and 2 as being the same behavior and 3 being somewhat separate. So, my decision is going to be the first count 1 and 2 are going to be concurrent and count 3 is going to be consecutive. When I looked at this, I thought the recommendation is essentially 20 years plus 6 years for each count on count 1. 1 and 2. As I said, I'm somewhat skeptical of that amount. But I think the combination of the two sentences will reach an appropriate and just result in this situation. And the way I'm going to do it is this. I'm going to, in count 1 and 2, I'm going to impose a 32-year sentence. 20 years incarceration, 12 years extended supervision in both count 1 and 2. They'll run concurrent to each other. In count 3, the court's going to impose 10 years prison with 7 years incarceration, 3 years extended supervision, consecutive. Because I think it's acts that happen over time, and I think it's a separate issue. What that means is that there's, to make it clear, is that, and also just to explain why 12 and not 6 is because I want it to be, I think 15 years extended supervision, long-term supervision afterwards is more appropriate than 9. And I think that, given her age and her background, that is more appropriate. It also, so that is 27 years of incarceration because of how I structured the sentence, and 15 years extended supervision. The conditions of extended supervision is that she be no longer in charge ever of children as a caretaker. If there are children, they, you can be there only if the agent agrees that it's under supervision. Any other, any other, any other, any other programming assessments or treatment as needed, you'd follow through on extended supervision. You do have, as indicated, the 694 days sentence credit towards that incarceration, you would start that incarceration immediately. You're not eligible for the substance abuse program or the, the challenge incarceration program because of the nature of the cases. You, um, there was no restitution, I just want to make sure there was no restitution requirements. That's correct, Your Honor. Um, the cost will be imposed for all three counts, but I'm going to vacate it on two. Um, she'll have one cost to pay for the conviction, um, basically because of her indigency. Um, the other aspect is you'll have to pay for, um, well, you'll have to pay for various things in the prison system. Um, I'm going to ask each of you if there's anything further, but then I have one more thing to say. Is there anything further from the, uh, state? [03:14:26] Speaker 8: Yeah, I would ask for no contact orders with, um, Mr. Pedran and the families as well. I think it's appropriate. [03:14:32] Speaker 3: Yeah, I, I'll just say no contact with any of the victims. Would that cover it? [03:14:36] Speaker 8: It does. [03:14:37] Speaker 3: Yeah, no contact with any victims. I don't think she necessarily was going to have any contact, but, and the victims should be defined as Mr. Pedran's family, Ms. Love's family, um, um, um, and then the children. [03:14:51] Speaker 7: No, Judge, I, I have to object to that. She has a constitutional right to parent these children, even while in custody, um, that requires specific findings beyond what we have here today. [03:15:00] Speaker 3: Not a, she may have a constitutional right, but given her actions, court is finding that, that that's an appropriate condition. She's not to have any child contact with the children. Um, I'll just throw this one last thing, unless the agent sees it's appropriate and if there's a professional who says it's appropriate, and when I say children, I mean children under the age, obviously the age of 18. Um, if her children make a decision when they turn 18 or older, that they want to have contact, then they should contact the agent and they can do that. Um, anything else, Mr. Zacher? [03:15:39] Speaker 7: Judge, I moved the court to, uh, authorize the return of the remaining bond money to the poster, um, and, uh, um, I filed our notice of intent to pursue post-conviction relief. [03:15:49] Speaker 3: Okay, that money may have already been returned because they revoked her bond. Yeah, if it hasn't, it, it should have been returned to whoever posted the bond. Um, anything further, Mr. Zacher? No, does it. Okay, um, obviously, uh, obviously, Ms. Degman, you do have a right to appeal this. You have to do that within 20 days of today. Talk to Mr. Degman, excuse me, Mr. Zacher, Mr. Zacher about that and Mr. Boyles. They would file that notice of intent to appeal. Um, and then we can, if need for further, um, further hearing, we'd have further hearing at that point. Last thing, um, I usually say these, these cases, but we do need to heal as a community. Um, Ms. Degman, my hope is that that helps, happens when you're in, in prison. You need to heal, do what exactly what they, what Mr. Zacher said, take advantage of all the services that are there. Ms. Love, um, I can see that it's very hard and understandably so. I don't want to say anything. And Mr. Pedron, you too, I know you're still watching. Um, and then, uh, for the rest of you, you know, we are a community. We need to be, as I said, as Major said, we need to be kind to each other. Even then, those we don't like. And so, I'm really appealing to all of our humanity. I agree with Mr. Zacher that we can't deny our humanity trying to accept it about how, what's the most appropriate way. So, um, for everybody out there, peace. Thank you all. [03:17:49] Josie Dockerman: Oh my gosh. Did that be a say for everyone out there, peace, love, and so, oh, this judge is hilarious. What the, uh, what is going on here? The judge said to everybody out there, peace. Oh, my goodness. That is definitely a first. Oh, I have never seen, I've never heard anything like that. At the end of a day, he said peace, love, and soul. Oh gosh, I cannot. Okay. So, it looks like she, she received 27 years. I think I got that right. Did y'all get that right? 27 years? So, it looks like she got about 27 years. It's 27 blue. From all accounts that I can see. So, 27. I don't know how old she is now, so I can't even tell you how old she'll be when she get out, because I don't remember how old she is. But I do think the judge is wrong in what he thought he's going to make in regards to her ruling about her kids. I don't think, I don't think he can do that. I don't think he can do that. And I think that's why the attorney spoke up. That it has to be done in like family court or something like that. Okay. So, I do have some updates before we end our day today. While I'm getting the updates in, if somebody can get the discord link for crime club, put in the chat for all our new friends that we have, our new subscribers, and our new chatters, just in case they want to join crime club. Crime club is just like fight club, where the crime just keeps on happening. So, whenever we're not streaming, for the most part, over there on discord, there are movies going on, or some type of show, it's a free-for-all. I want to say like a free-for-all community, I guess, for the most part. Also, when we are covering cases, I try, if I'm doing like getting documents or anything like that, you know, filings, motions, I try to share that with you guys on discord up under different, up under the file name and link. So, we'll be having a couple links that we'll be putting together. I'll be doing one for the Tupac Shakur trial that will be starting Monday, that I do have an update on. And we'll have one for our Mario Fernandez trial that will be also starting on Monday, that I'll also be putting one in there for. But, let me give you your updates, hot off the press, before I let you guys go for the evening. Okay. Okay, so in the Tupac case, a jury has now been officially seated. They have been selected in the Nevada murder trial of Dwayne "Keefe" D. Davis. We will start our case discussion, either Saturday or Sunday, we'll start the case discussion, discussion to get our who's who so people can know what is going on when we get there. The jury is six men and 10 women. They were chose today on Thursday. Opening statements are expected for Monday, August the 17th. The trial is expected to last roughly a month. Okay, so we'll start our coverage of what I am considering the Hail Mary trial. So when you see it out there, that's probably me, because it's like a Hail Mary. Like, I think they're just doing a Hail Mary at this point in time. If you know anything about Tupac, you may just say, oh, Hail Mary. So the trial, like I stated, is supposed to happen on the 17th, which is Monday. You remember, this is like 30 years afterward, so that's your update on that jury. Also, when we are speaking about Mario Fernandez case, let me see. Okay, so this afternoon, the jury was selected and sworn for the Mario Fernandez case, the murder trial. So, Judge Lundin Kite, she seated 12 jurors, plus four alternates. After Neural Naipoo, that originally exceeded 250 prospective jurors, the trial jury consists of seven women and five men. So just so you know, our opening statements for that case are set to begin on Monday, the 17th. Remember, they're three hours apart, so we'll hop into our case Monday in Florida, Mario, to see the opening statements. We will probably put Lindsey, like, we'll figure Lindsey out in some way, shape, form, or fashion. I'll figure that out as we go through this, but yeah, so that case has moved out of jury selection. We're officially about to be into the trial. So we have two new trials that we'll start Monday. We have already did our case discussion in regards to the Mario Fernandez. If you have not seen that case discussion, it is on the channel page. Please go check it out so you can be prepped and ready to know who's who in the game. We will do our Tupac case discussion over the weekend, and that way we'll know who's who in the game for that one. I don't want anybody to be lost. I don't want you to be lost. No, no, no, no, no. But that is our plan going forward. I am going to be looking into Dr. Cohen. He should be having his sentencing hearing tomorrow. I do know court is dark in regards to Lindsey. So I'm hoping that the sentencing for Conan will happen. I am waiting for the Hawaii Judicial Department. I paid for some motions so we could review over his motions. You know, and that's also the delay for the reason why we're not having our delay in regards to why we're not having sentencing for him today. Because they have some motions, so they're going to do the motions tomorrow. But I would love to review over the motions before Hawaii court starts. Now just so y'all know, Hawaii is behind Pacific Standard Time by three hours. So right now there it's like 12:43 if I'm not mistaken. So it'll probably be a later stream for my people that's over there on the East Coast if they do show the sentencing hearing. Because they don't get to court until y'all about to go home from work. Like that's just literally what it is. And that was a brutal trial to cover because it was like we was here all night long. All night long with that one. So that's that. So I think that we are good. Maybe we'll even do some of the Tupac stuff tomorrow. I'll see how much I can get done tonight. Because I was trying to do it kind of like how we did our Mario Fernandez trial. It's just real time consuming. But we'll see. We'll get it together. We'll get it together and go team go. All right, guys. Well, I want to thank you so much for hanging out with me today. I appreciate it. Shout out to all the new subscribers. If you receive the gifted membership, please, please, please say thank you. Even if you do it in the replay, I do see them guys. I do see them and I appreciate it. Although I probably don't tell the person. Because I don't be remembering all the time. But it's also nice to be seeing them. So I definitely appreciate it. Shout out to all the jewels that we received during the stream. All our new subs. I appreciate you all. Mods, chat. And here we go with our outro song. [03:27:06] Speaker 20: Mods, we'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. [03:27:36] Speaker 21: We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. Bye. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. looking for missing kids, hope to truly last. Only fan from Singapore, flag name, but sweet. Still shows up with love every time he takes a seat. And even the part-timers keep this place alive. Curvy up, Irish Amy, Capri Law, Hellcat, our tribe. Hearts wide open, stories shared, holding space because we care. From every corner of the world we climb to spend these nights together one trial at a time. We're a family in the chat side by side through every trial. Sweet Pete leads away with that fire and that smile. Mods and chatters, yet it's love is something rare. A courtroom crew with hearts beyond compare. A courtroom crew with hearts beyond compare. No matter what the case or file, we're forever taking to try. Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh. Just we'll be in the mountains and the child we adore. This isn't just a channel. It's a family. And we couldn't ask for more. [03:31:55] Josie Dockerman: All right, guys. I'll see you in the a.m. [03:31:57] Speaker 9: Peace.