Mistrial in David Prevatte Murder Trial — Juror Misconduct Derails Verdict Watch

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Good day, Crime Talk aficionados. We've got another great show for you. First, a juror's been removed during the David Previtt verdict watch. Brian Koberger's family backs his bid to undo his guilty plea. Lindsey Clancy, the holdout juror, he breaks his silence. We've got an arrest in the Michelle Parker Cole case nearly 15 years later. And the Cornell Jane Doe reportedly targeted in multiple swatting attacks. And guess what? The Fort Hood shooter, the execution, not going to be televised. We've got some legal history, a quote, and of course, our dumb criminal. Let's talk about it. Good day, everyone. My name is Scott Reich and this is Crime Talk. Thanks for joining us. You know the drill. Subscribe if you haven't. Like if you do. Leave me a comment below and make sure you hit that little bell so that you receive notifications of when we go live or put up new content. All right, let's go ahead and get straight to the docket today. So let's go ahead and open the record for Thursday, October 15th, 2026. And we begin with some unexpected courtroom drama out of North Carolina, where jury deliberations in the murder trial of David Prevett have brought to a halt over allegations of juror misconduct. Prevett is accused in the 2017 death of his five-year-old niece, Peyton Fields, who prosecutors say was sexually assaulted and strangled. The jury had already spent two days deliberating and had been working through photographs, documents, and other jurors. According to juror number two, juror number three indicated that she knew information about Prevett that had never been introduced into evidence, allegedly telling the panel, I know things, but I can't say it. Other jurors said she also made comments suggesting Prevett was not a member of the KKK, that he could not be a racist because he had a black girlfriend and a child with her. This was one of the biggest cases Pender County had seen in years and that Prevett had essentially been blackballed by the community and forced to move after becoming a suspect. Now, those comments immediately raised a major concern. Was a juror bringing outside knowledge into a murder trial and allowing it to influence the deliberations. While that's especially significant because photographs showing the letters KKK written on a bedroom wall had actually been introduced during the trial. The jury was allowed to consider that evidence. What it was not allowed to consider was personal details, rumors, or community information that never came from the witness stand or exhibits admitted into court. Once the allegations surfaced, the judge stopped everything and began questioning members of the juries individually in an effort to determine exactly what had been said and whether the rest of the panel had been compromised. Now, juror number three denied making the statements, denied conducting outside research, and denied receiving information about the case from any outside sources. But several other jurors independently confirmed hearing at least portions of those remarks. Prosecutors argued that she had violated the court's instructions and had not been truthful when questioned. Interestingly, even the defense agreed that her removal was warranted. The judge ultimately removed juror number three for misconduct while also finding that the remaining jurors could be fair and impartial. She also faces a contempt proceeding stemming from the court's conclusion that she had not been forthcoming about what she knew before trial and had not been truthful during questioning. And that creates another major development in the case. There will not be a mistrial, at least not because of this incident, but an alternate juror must now take juror number three's place. And under the rules, once a new juror joins the panel that has already begun deliberating, the entire jury has to start those deliberations again. So whatever discussions, progress, or tentative conclusions were reached Tuesday and Wednesday effectively have to be completely put aside. So just when it appeared this might be getting close to a verdict in that case, the deliberation clock has essentially been reset. That, ladies and gentlemen, is why we have alternate jurors on complicated cases for this very reason. Jurors are supposed to make up their minds based upon the evidence that presented at trial, applying the evidence that's presented through legal incompetent evidence, through witnesses, exhibits, things of that nature. You can't bring outside information in. Completely improper. And I applaud the judge for setting a contempt proceeding against this juror. I got a real problem with jurors that do not tell the truth during voir dire, which is a French term, which means to speak the truth. And if you're not going to speak the truth and you're going to go in there with biases, guess what? You ruin the whole process for everybody because both sides are entitled to a fair trial. And if you're not going to give both sides a fair trial, then guess what? That's not the right jury for you. It doesn't mean you can't be a good juror. It just means maybe this isn't the right trial for you. So I applaud the judge for holding the juror accountable. She could have caused a complete mistrial and they'd have to start all over again. Breaking update. Since we recorded today's show, there has been a major development in the David Privat trial. The judge has now officially declared a mistrial. The juror misconduct problem apparently went well beyond juror number three. As the court continued questioning the panel, allegations surfaced that other jurors had discussed information that was never presented as evidence, including comments about Privat supposedly having a lengthy criminal record and being known to law enforcement. At that point, concerns about the integrity of the entire jury continued to grow, and the judge ultimately determined that the trial could not continue with this panel. So, no verdict in the David Privat case. The trial ends in a mistrial, and prosecutors will now have to decide whether to try the case again. And obviously, we'll continue to follow it. Brian Koberger continues to attempt to undo the guilty plea that sent him to prison for murdering Madison Mogan, Kaylee Gonsalves, Zena Karnotl, and Ethan Chapin, and his family is standing firmly behind his latest legal fight. Koberger's parents and sisters have continued supporting him as he pursues his post-conviction relief, saying they want what they described as a complete truth about this case to come out. Court filings also show that his parents and sisters were involved in discussions in his defense team before Koberger ultimately accepted the plea deal that spared him the possibility of a death sentence. Now, Koberger pled guilty back in July of 2025 and admitted in open court that he murdered the four University of Idaho students inside their off-campus Moscow, Idaho home. He later received four consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole, along with additional 10 years for that burglary charge as well. Now, at the time, the plea appeared to bring one of the most closely watched murder prosecutions in the country to an end without a trial, but approximately a year later, Koberger began trying to undo the deal he had accepted. Now, in his post-conviction petition, Koberger claims ineffective assistance of counsel and argues that his guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered into. He alleges that members of his defense team pressured him into taking the deal by presenting what is now described as misleading information, threats, false promises, and frightening descriptions of what his life could look like on death row. He now claims actual innocence, despite having personally admitted to the killings in court and signing a written factual basis and acknowledging that they were willful, deliberate, and premeditated. His family involvement has also received new scrutiny. Koberger's parents have continued communicating with him and financially supporting his legal effort while family members maintain that they support his attempt to challenge the conviction. Now, that creates a remarkable contrast with what happened at sentencing when the victim's family finally had the opportunity to confront Koberger after he admitted responsibility for killing all four students. And Koberger was actually scheduled to appear virtually in court today in connection with the other part of this legal fight. He once judged Steven Hippler, the same judge who accepted the guilty plea and sentenced him removed from the post-conviction case. But Hitler issued an order for canceling today's appearance, previously scheduled status and evidentiary hearings for June of 27, 2027, were also vacated. And Koberger's attorneys have now until August 2027 to request a new date. Now, prosecutors are asking the court to dismiss Koberger's petition in this entirety. And obviously, one of the biggest hurdles he faces is his own record. He stood in open court, pled guilty to murdering four people and formally admitted the factual basis supporting those charges. Now he wants the court to conclude that those admissions should be set aside and that he should receive a trial that he originally wanted to avoid. And if Koberger were somehow successful in undoing the plea, guess what? Prosecutors could potentially seek the death penalty all over again. Now, we don't know why the court vacated it, but my guess is the defense thinks that they ultimately need more time. I also believe that the defense now says they need this more time because maybe things aren't panning out exactly the way they wanted them to. If they thought they had a slam dunk case to get rid of Judge Hippler, they would have wanted to proceed. Now, Idaho has a tendency for doing a lot of stuff kind of behind closed doors, which I don't like. We saw that in the Lori Vallow and Chad Day Bell case. Literally, the whole case was pre-trial was in chambers. And I don't know if that's what's taking place here. Hopefully, we'll get to see the reason for the request to vacate today's date or whether it was done sua sponte, which means by the court alone. But the reality of it is the defense says they need more time. Remember, his original attorneys needed two, two and a half years to get up to speed. Then they guilty plea. Well, the other attorneys are going to have to need that additional time as well. They got to review the discovery, go talk to the defense attorneys if they'll talk with them, look at their investigation that took place and determine what other investigation needs to take place. The bottom line is it's going to be a mess. It's going to take years. This thing's going to drag out forever. And like I said, we talked about this, I think, yesterday. One of the things about what you need in criminal courts is finality. Like I said, we don't want innocent people going to prison for something they didn't do. But when you plead guilty, I mean, that's just a flat out no brainer, right? If you were innocent, you'd say, no, I'm not pleading guilty. We're talking about life in prison. And frankly, I don't buy this. Oh, I was scared to be on death row and all that other stuff. Okay. Yeah, they're going to kill you. Like at that point, you'd probably realize, all right, they're going to, you know, if I get convicted, I'm going to die in like 30 to 35 years. It's really not going to happen. Let's get for real. So the court's going to have to set a hearing, bring in the previous attorneys. Did you threaten Mr. Koberger? No. Did you lie to Mr. Koberger? No. Did you put any pressure on him? Like, hey, I told him, I think you're going to lose. I've, you know, the attorneys are going to be able to lay out that we believe we were going to lose, that there was overwhelming evidence. And that's why we recommended that he take the plea deal. It wasn't just about the death penalty. I guarantee it. This is very experienced attorneys. And if they thought they had a shot at winning the underlying case, they would have gone for it, but they didn't because they knew evidence was overwhelming. Next on the docket, the lone holdout juror in the Lindsey Clancy trial is now speaking publicly for the first time about why he refused to join the other 11 jurors who wanted to find Lindsey Clancy not criminally responsible for killing her three young children. So Michael Desrinville says he had no reasonable doubt about his position and believe the evidence supported holding Clancy criminally responsible. He described her actions as methodical and said the planning and thought process surrounding the deaths was extremely significant to him when deciding the case. Clancy was accused of strangling her three children, Cora, Dawson and Callan before attempting suicide at the family's Duxbury, Massachusetts home back in January of 2023. Her defense maintained that she was suffering from severe postpartum psychiatric illness and could not appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions. Prosecutors, however, argued that evidence surrounding the time of the killings, her behavior and statements afterward showed that she understood exactly what she was doing. And after seven days and more than 38 hours of deliberation, the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict. The final split was extraordinary. 11 jurors wanted to find Clancy not criminal responsible while Desrinville alone held out for criminal responsibility. Now Desrinville says one of the pieces of evidence that affected him deeply was Patrick Clancy's 911 call after discovering what had happened. He described hearing the desperation in Patrick's voice and said the recording stayed with him. He also says there was other evidence supporting his decision but does not want to publicly reveal all the reasoning while the case remains active. Now that interview comes as Desrinville himself has become part of the illegal battle surrounding the mistrial. Other jurors have claimed that during deliberations he expressed doubts about whether prosecutors had proven criminal responsibility but still refused to change his vote. Desrinville disputes that account and maintains that he was firm in his position based upon the evidence that he heard during trial. While the defense attorney Kevin Reddington is now trying to investigate what happened inside the jury room and he's seeking to access records including Desrinville's juror questionnaires and potentially cell phone related information while raising questions about possible misconduct. Desrinville has retained his own attorney as that fight continues. So even though the first trial ended without a verdict, the battle over juror number 12 and exactly what occurred during those 38 plus hours of deliberations has essentially become a separate legal controversy before the Clancy case even gets back in front of another jury. Next, nearly 15 years after Florida mother Michelle Parker disappeared, police have arrested the man investigators have long scrutinized, her former fiancé, Dale Smith Jr. All right, now Smith was arrested on Wednesday and charged with second-degree murder. Parker disappeared back on November 17, 2011 after dropping their three-year-old twins off at Smith's condo. Just hours earlier, an episode of The People's Court had aired featuring Parker and Smith arguing over an engagement ring. Parker's Hummer was discovered abandoned the following day and her iPhone was recovered from a lake weeks later. Her body was never found. Now the Orlando police say investigators recently re-examined evidence and conflicting statements while also using advances in digital forensic technology. Police now say the evidence points to Smith as the person responsible for Parker's death. Smith maintains his innocence through his attorney. Prosecutors have also said the second-degree murder charge could potentially be upgraded if additional evidence supports doing so. Parker's twins were just three years old when their mother vanished. They are now 18. And another disturbing development in the Cornell Seven case. Jane Doe, the former Cornell student accusing seven former Chi-Pi fraternity members of sexually assaulting her, has reportedly become the target of multiple swatting attacks, along with hundreds of threats since filing her lawsuit. None of the seven men have been criminally charged in connection with her allegations and the men have denied any wrongdoing. During one October 6 incident, an anonymous caller allegedly told 911 that family members had been murdered inside Jane Doe's home and more violence was coming. Police responded heavily armed and reportedly held Jane Doe's boyfriend and brother at gunpoint before realizing the call was a hoax. The caller allegedly contacted 911 again while officers were still at the house claiming to have an AR-15 and threatening to kill everyone inside. Now other false emergency reports have reportedly involved bombs and fires while Jane Doe also has been doxxed and threatened online. The criminal investigation surrounding her original allegations has meanwhile received renewed attention as the controversy surrounding the Cornell case continues. And listen ladies and gentlemen, this is like any other case. People can make an allegation. They can sue for anything they want. Eventually they have to back it up in court, but doxxing people and threatening people, that's not the way our system is supposed to work. I don't care if you support her or think she's the biggest liar around. The reality of it is she's entitled to her day in court and the truth or a pretty darn close version of that truth is going to come out between now and trial if it ultimately gets there. But threatening people, we're better than that ladies and gentlemen, everybody's better than that. Let it play out in a courtroom. And finally, President Donald Trump says the December execution of Fort Hood shooter Nadal Malik Hassan will not be live streamed, reversing an earlier Pentagon plan. Department of War Secretary Pete Hegsest had announced that Hassan's firing squad execution would be publicly broadcast, but the proposal drew bipartisan criticism. Now, Hassan killed 13 people and wounded another 30 at Fort Hood back in 2009. His execution remained scheduled for December 3rd by firing squad with immediate family members of the victims permitted to attend. And it would be the first U.S. military execution since 1961. I don't know. I really think it should have been televised. I think it would have been good to let people know what happens when you kill 13 people. Okay. You don't get a volume discount for crime. And when the president says, "Oh, it wasn't really terrorism. It was just workplace violence, even though the guy was saying Ali Akbar as he was killing everybody." Next, how about a little legal history? October 15th, 1914, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Clayton Antitrust Act, strengthening federal antitrust laws and targeting monopolistic and anti-competitive business practices. October 15th, 1970, President Richard Nixon signs the Organized Crime Control Act. Title IX created a racketeering influence and corrupt organization act, better known as RICO, giving federal prosecutors a powerful tool to target organized criminal enterprises. And finally, October 15th, 1991, the United States Senate confirms Clarence Thomas as an associate justice to the United States Supreme Court by a vote of 52 to 48. How about a legal quote of the day? "The life of the law has not been logic. It has been experienced." Oliver Wendell Holmes, 1881. What Holmes was saying is that the law isn't created by just sitting down and applying perfect logic. It develops through real cases, real people, and real life situations. Court learns from those experience, society changes, and the law evolves along with it. In simple terms, the law may be written on paper, but it is shaped by what actually happens in the real world. And that's why we have case law. You have got a general law, but what about this fact that nobody considered? And that's why we have case law, and that's why we have attorneys. And finally, our dumb criminal of the day. And today's dumb criminal apparently understood that when you are trying to escape from police, you should leave quickly. He just forgot the part about not leaving your identification behind. Oklahoma County deputies say 24-year-old Raveen Lee Wooten was caught allegedly stealing copper wire from a dishwasher inside a vacant house. Body cam video shows a deputy ordering Wooten to surrender. Instead, Wooten apparently decided doors were overrated and launched himself head first through a closed living room window, smashing through the glass and then ultimately running away. And believe it or not, the escape actually worked temporarily. Wooten got away on foot. Unfortunately for him, deputies found the bicycle and backpack he left behind. And inside that little backpack, yes, you guessed it, his driver's license. So as performing his own low budget action movie stunt to keep police from catching him, he apparently left them a convenient little card telling them exactly who they should be looking for. Wooten now faces charges including burglary, resisting arrest, and obstruction of an officer. Apparently, he remembered to bring something to identify himself. He just forgot to take it with him when he jumped through that window. Unbelievable. Ladies and gentlemen, you'd be surprised how many times that happened. I had a guy once that was accused of being a exposing himself to young children at the park. How did they find him? That's right. When he dropped his trousers, his wallet fell out and fell on the ground right there on the little playground. Needless to say, the children said, but he dropped his wallet. Needless to say, they found him as well. Be smart, ladies and gentlemen. Don't commit crime. All right. Coming from a criminal defense attorney, save yourself some time, concern, and money. Just don't commit crime. All right. That's all we have for today. Be safe out there and remember, the Constitution matters.