Aug. 13, 2026
Nick Reiner Pleads Not Guilty, Facing New Allegation He Was “Lying In Wait”
Apple Podcasts 
Spotify 
Castro 
RSS Feed An LA grand jury’s indictment of 32-year-old Nick Reiner was unsealed on Wednesday, revealing new allegations against the son accused of killing his parents, Hollywood legends Rob and Michell Reiner. Reiner is now facing the added special circumstance of “lying in wait” which gives prosecutors the option of seeking the death penalty. Reiner pleaded not guilty to the charges and will be back in court in a matter of days fighting to free up at least $1.5 million from a trust set up for him by his parents to rehire high profile criminal defense attorney Alan Jackson.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
00:00:02
Speaker 1: Hey, that folks, it is Thursday, August thirteenth, and Nick Reiner could be facing the death penalty because of three newly revealed words that are in his indictment. And with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Robes. This case has been moving along. Rob Reiner and his wife's murder son is facing charges, and we are getting some an updated look, or our first look really at a newly released indictment.
00:00:33
Speaker 2: That's right, the grand jury there in LA has officially indicted Nick Reiner, and that indictment was unsealed on Wednesday. And what was new, Well, there was an added allegation that Nick Reiner was lying in wait. Those are the three words you just reference, that he was lying in wait before attacking his parents. They also added this special allegation of use of a deadly weapon and they specified it was a knife. And that also could contribute to a stiffer sentence for Nick Reiner if he's found guilty. And I say if he's found guilty, because we finally got the official plea from Nick Reiner.
00:01:15
Speaker 3: He has pleaded not guilty.
00:01:18
Speaker 1: Okay, the lying in wait robes cut. Yet it's important for a couple of reasons and uh yes, legally speaking when it has to do the death penalty, but also robes of what does this add Now we heard that, like, wait, what happened? This was a premeditated, planned attack. He was there waiting for the lying in wait robes, it sounded ominous.
00:01:45
Speaker 2: Ominous is a very good word to use, and lying in wait officially means that the suspect waited for or hid from his victims in order to ambush them. That is the legal definition. And yes, it is meant to show premeditation.
00:02:01
Speaker 1: Well whatever reason. Yeah, it always sounds a little ominous. But it's his parents. I don't know why to him being accused of killing his parents. It's terrible enough. There was something about that that raised the ick factor.
00:02:13
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's chilling. It's chilling to hear that.
00:02:16
Speaker 2: It sounds sinister, and just to know that it was planned and premeditated versus again having this notion of emotions erupting and something happened in the moment, a crime of passion. A lot of people can get their heads around that kind of a thing. But to imagine that you are lying in wait for your parents to ambush them, and that you then choose a knife, which is such a personal way to attack someone.
00:02:43
Speaker 3: It's just you.
00:02:45
Speaker 2: Get a sense of what it must have been like in those final moments for Rob and Michelle Reiner who were found in their master bedroom with quote multiple sharp force injuries. And look, it was noted by folks, And the indictment's pretty short.
00:02:59
Speaker 3: I read it. It's not that long. It's what a page and a half.
00:03:03
Speaker 2: But of note, the indictment did not show or reveal what the grand jury thought about how or why.
00:03:13
Speaker 3: Reiner was lying in wait, we don't know.
00:03:15
Speaker 2: Grand juries are convened in secrecy, so we only got to find out what prosecutors wanted us to find out. And by having this grand jury, they avoid having a pre trial hearing, which we just saw with the David case, and.
00:03:32
Speaker 1: That would have been a lot. That would have been a lot going on for them to present their evidence. And if you will have been following that David case, so you know exactly what we're talking about, the number of things that came out in the preliminary hearing were jaw dropping, So we could have potentially gotten our hands and the public could have seen all that, but that is not going to happen, and maybe, thankfully and mercifully so.
00:03:55
Speaker 2: Yes, so there have been plenty of folks who've worked in the DA's office.
00:04:00
Speaker 3: I guess I didn't realize this. It's true when you think about.
00:04:02
Speaker 2: It, it's fairly rare that you actually have a pre trial hearing. What we saw in the David case was yes, as you pointed out, jaw dropping, but rare. You don't usually get what is essentially a mini trial before the trial, and the purpose of that is prosecutors present their evidence.
00:04:20
Speaker 3: We get to hear and see a lot of it.
00:04:22
Speaker 2: They don't give it all, but they give the most damning parts of it, so that a judge will say, yep, you've got enough evidence to go to trial, which is what happened in the David case.
00:04:31
Speaker 3: The other way you go about it is you enlist the.
00:04:34
Speaker 2: Help of a grand jury and there you have a secret proceeding and you can control the evidence that's released or at least revealed to the public ahead of your trial. And in this case they say it was almost certainly a deliberate choice because of who would have been testifying in any sort of pre trial hearing with Nick Reiner, given the events of the evening before the murders.
00:05:01
Speaker 1: Damn. I mean, I'm trying to think. I'm trying to think of the names who were attached to that holiday party at Conan O'Brien's house. But obviously there were a bunch of big names there. And if you had Rob Ryaner there and even his son, I'm saying it wasn't just Rob Ryan or like by extension, other people in his family were invited. You might have had a bunch of celebrities and by extensions, family members. Who knows how many people would possibly be hauled in And still the trial goes forward, will be hauled in, But let's do it once instead of twice.
00:05:36
Speaker 2: Exactly because people who are saying in terms of like the why prosecutors went the grand jury route, they said, if they had had a pre trial hearing, it would have been a circus.
00:05:46
Speaker 3: It would have been a spectacle given.
00:05:48
Speaker 2: All of the high profile, star studded witnesses that would absolutely have had to have testified because lying in wait, in order to get that charge, they would have had to have put up some of these partygoers who witnessed the tension and this reported argument that took place between Nick and his father Rob at the party in front of a bunch of people, and by proving that this was happening, that would be one way to show that he had been premeditating his parents' murders from the night before.
00:06:22
Speaker 1: Oh, they're going to need those folks who are at that party because they're going to be able to establish there was tension, there was heat, that was emotion, I mean, how fiery. There are reports out there about what happened, but this would have to go officially on the record. Just how explosive of a fight that could have been between those two with that party.
00:06:38
Speaker 2: Can you imagine that pre trial hearing, because we haven't gotten any of those details yet, and obviously this would be of absolute public interest to hear how we got to this moment where Nick Reiner brutally, savagely murders his own parents after having just been at this party with them hours earlier, in front of hundreds of guests.
00:07:02
Speaker 3: It's wild.
00:07:03
Speaker 2: The LADA did also release a statement, by the way, and I thought it was interesting because, look, this is part of the reason why they chose the charges they did, or at least they asked the grand jury to return these charges. But he said there was a profound betrayal by someone who was loved and trusted by the very people he is accused of killing. We hope that by having a grand jury return an indictment in this case, it will bring us one step closer to trial and to achieving justice. You're getting a little idea of what the prosecutor will be presenting in trial and the narrative he is going to be telling jurors at Nick Reiner's trial.
00:07:42
Speaker 1: Yeah, you can see this, you can see this kind but still, I mean, wasn't it the case that they were talking that was possible mental illness?
00:07:52
Speaker 3: So that's where so we got the not guilty.
00:07:53
Speaker 2: Please, So we finally got that, and so yes, is the question is it going to be not guilty by reason of insanity?
00:08:00
Speaker 1: But what I am trying to recall though it did we know for sure? Do we know? Is it on the record? What was going on with him? I remember reports at the time, what was it?
00:08:09
Speaker 3: Schizophrenia?
00:08:10
Speaker 2: Okay, so he had been actively treated for schizophrenia and the reports are that within I guess the last month he switched his medication, his drug treatment changed, but that he was actually under a conservatorship with his parents starting in twenty twenty because his mental health had deteriorated so much.
00:08:30
Speaker 3: That's why he was living. I believe it was in the poolhouse.
00:08:33
Speaker 2: He was on their property, on their grounds because they wanted to keep an eye on him. They were worried about him. They were worried about his mental health, they were worried about his physical health. And yes, so it's been fairly well documented that yes, he in fact was and had been treated for schizophrenia. So I think most folks are anticipating and insanity defense and thus the not guilty plea. But when we come back, we're to tell you why Nick Reiner is going to be back in court next week. He's trying to get his money that his parents left him. And welcome back everyone to Amy and TJ. We are talking about Nick Reiner and what is next for him in his case, he was just well, he just entered a not guilty plea and he had some new additions to his indictments. He is now being accused of lying in wait before attacking his parents with a knife and killing them, and so that will make him eligible for the death penalty if he is convicted. But he's going to be back in court next week. Because he's trying to hire back his high profile criminal defense attorney. Remember, Alan Jackson was initially his attorney, that he was an expensive attorney, and pretty quickly his siblings stopped paying him. They refused to fund his defense, so we ended up having to go with a public defender. Well, he wants Alan Jackson back, but to get Alan Jackson back, he needs money, and a lot of it, and he claims he's entitled to it.
00:10:12
Speaker 1: He claims. I wonder what a judge ultimately is going to have to decide that rals But that was my first question was this. It doesn't sound right that he should benefit from money that I guess he gained after killing his own parents. But that's not the case here, right.
00:10:30
Speaker 2: He's claiming this isn't money that came from his parents will, Because yes, that would make a lot of sense that you would never have access to money you would inherit upon the deaths of your parents if you're the one who's accused of killing or ending your parents' lives. No, he is saying that he actually files a petition saying he is seeking unpaid money from a trust his parents established for him, and it wasn't meant for him to receive it after their death. Upon their death, this was money that was put into a trust for him while they were still alive.
00:11:06
Speaker 3: So, look, this.
00:11:07
Speaker 2: Happens with a lot of wealthy families. They just sometimes there are stipulations on where the money can be spent, how the money can be spent, when somebody is eligible to receive the money based on how old they are. But he's claiming that there is at least one point five million dollars in his trust that he should have legal access to. And if he can get access to that one point five million dollars, he can then pay Alan Jackson the money. So he's saying, I need this money for my legal fees, and this is money that I'm absolutely legally entitled to.
00:11:41
Speaker 1: We'll see. I wonder how quickly they could decide that, And was it Alan Jackson?
00:11:45
Speaker 2: Alan Jackson, not the singer, but a very famed Los Angeles criminal defense attorney.
00:11:51
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's going to gobble up that one point five.
00:11:53
Speaker 3: And how long is that going to even last?
00:11:55
Speaker 1: Yeah?
00:11:55
Speaker 3: I don't even know.
00:11:56
Speaker 2: But I thought this was interesting in the petition that he filed for this hearing that's happening next week. I thought this was an interesting way to word it. They said Nick loved his parents and he is devastated by their deaths, but the facts about what did and did not happen to them are not at issue. That was how it started this legal briefing. And then they asked for money and access to the money that is in his trust.
00:12:22
Speaker 1: They're interesting, nothing that's going on with him right now has any bearing on his right to this money. Eh, that's the right way to do it. And remember his attorney at the time that he's trying to get back now came out hard out in front of the courthouse saying he is not responsible for their deaths. We all kind of sat up.
00:12:41
Speaker 2: Okay, yes, because when he made that yes, very bold statement and carefully worded statement. We immediately I feel like everyone at that point was believing that they are going for the insanity defense, much like the Lindsay Clancy trial. Yes, you can absolutely admit that you killed someone, but if you were not in your right mind, if you were not responsible because of a mental illness you were actively suffering from. That is basically the essence of an insanity defense, and historically speaking, it's a really tough defense. It's really hard to prove that you were insane. But look in the Lindsay Clancy case, she has documentation and it appears with Nick Reiner's history. As far as we know it, he has medical documentation of suffering from schizophrenia.
00:13:34
Speaker 1: So another trial and the battle of the medical experts.
00:13:38
Speaker 3: I guess it.
00:13:39
Speaker 2: Honestly, what we're watching with Lindsay Clancy might be just some homework and certainly a foundation for at least being able to view this Nick Reiner trial through that lens, because we're learning a lot about what defense attorneys have to prove in order to get a not guilty verdict by reason of insanity. I don't know will this even go to trial at this point if.
00:14:00
Speaker 1: He gets Alan Jackson, I mean, you're going to try to They're dangling the death penalty again, so possibly that's the negotiation or a plea just to take that off the table. But if he had legit mental illness, that's yeah, you might as well go to trial and try to flesh that.
00:14:18
Speaker 2: Out, Yeah, because then you could be committed to a state hospital rather than a prison for the rest of your life. But look, we do know his siblings seemingly are completely taking a backseat, a step back.
00:14:31
Speaker 3: They had zero comment.
00:14:32
Speaker 2: In fact, they were asked, as you might imagine, following the indictment that was unsealed yesterday, and they said no comment. So we'll continue to follow this, see what happens next week for his petition, because yeah, if he gets that one point five million dollars, his defense just completely gets an upgrade, I guess, is one way to put it. But we'll keep our eye on this situation. As always, we always appreciate you listening to us. I'm Amy Robock alongside TJ.
00:14:58
Speaker 3: Holmes. We'll talk so
00:15:01
Speaker 1: The kit Shop PA
Speaker 1: Hey, that folks, it is Thursday, August thirteenth, and Nick Reiner could be facing the death penalty because of three newly revealed words that are in his indictment. And with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Robes. This case has been moving along. Rob Reiner and his wife's murder son is facing charges, and we are getting some an updated look, or our first look really at a newly released indictment.
00:00:33
Speaker 2: That's right, the grand jury there in LA has officially indicted Nick Reiner, and that indictment was unsealed on Wednesday. And what was new, Well, there was an added allegation that Nick Reiner was lying in wait. Those are the three words you just reference, that he was lying in wait before attacking his parents. They also added this special allegation of use of a deadly weapon and they specified it was a knife. And that also could contribute to a stiffer sentence for Nick Reiner if he's found guilty. And I say if he's found guilty, because we finally got the official plea from Nick Reiner.
00:01:15
Speaker 3: He has pleaded not guilty.
00:01:18
Speaker 1: Okay, the lying in wait robes cut. Yet it's important for a couple of reasons and uh yes, legally speaking when it has to do the death penalty, but also robes of what does this add Now we heard that, like, wait, what happened? This was a premeditated, planned attack. He was there waiting for the lying in wait robes, it sounded ominous.
00:01:45
Speaker 2: Ominous is a very good word to use, and lying in wait officially means that the suspect waited for or hid from his victims in order to ambush them. That is the legal definition. And yes, it is meant to show premeditation.
00:02:01
Speaker 1: Well whatever reason. Yeah, it always sounds a little ominous. But it's his parents. I don't know why to him being accused of killing his parents. It's terrible enough. There was something about that that raised the ick factor.
00:02:13
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's chilling. It's chilling to hear that.
00:02:16
Speaker 2: It sounds sinister, and just to know that it was planned and premeditated versus again having this notion of emotions erupting and something happened in the moment, a crime of passion. A lot of people can get their heads around that kind of a thing. But to imagine that you are lying in wait for your parents to ambush them, and that you then choose a knife, which is such a personal way to attack someone.
00:02:43
Speaker 3: It's just you.
00:02:45
Speaker 2: Get a sense of what it must have been like in those final moments for Rob and Michelle Reiner who were found in their master bedroom with quote multiple sharp force injuries. And look, it was noted by folks, And the indictment's pretty short.
00:02:59
Speaker 3: I read it. It's not that long. It's what a page and a half.
00:03:03
Speaker 2: But of note, the indictment did not show or reveal what the grand jury thought about how or why.
00:03:13
Speaker 3: Reiner was lying in wait, we don't know.
00:03:15
Speaker 2: Grand juries are convened in secrecy, so we only got to find out what prosecutors wanted us to find out. And by having this grand jury, they avoid having a pre trial hearing, which we just saw with the David case, and.
00:03:32
Speaker 1: That would have been a lot. That would have been a lot going on for them to present their evidence. And if you will have been following that David case, so you know exactly what we're talking about, the number of things that came out in the preliminary hearing were jaw dropping, So we could have potentially gotten our hands and the public could have seen all that, but that is not going to happen, and maybe, thankfully and mercifully so.
00:03:55
Speaker 2: Yes, so there have been plenty of folks who've worked in the DA's office.
00:04:00
Speaker 3: I guess I didn't realize this. It's true when you think about.
00:04:02
Speaker 2: It, it's fairly rare that you actually have a pre trial hearing. What we saw in the David case was yes, as you pointed out, jaw dropping, but rare. You don't usually get what is essentially a mini trial before the trial, and the purpose of that is prosecutors present their evidence.
00:04:20
Speaker 3: We get to hear and see a lot of it.
00:04:22
Speaker 2: They don't give it all, but they give the most damning parts of it, so that a judge will say, yep, you've got enough evidence to go to trial, which is what happened in the David case.
00:04:31
Speaker 3: The other way you go about it is you enlist the.
00:04:34
Speaker 2: Help of a grand jury and there you have a secret proceeding and you can control the evidence that's released or at least revealed to the public ahead of your trial. And in this case they say it was almost certainly a deliberate choice because of who would have been testifying in any sort of pre trial hearing with Nick Reiner, given the events of the evening before the murders.
00:05:01
Speaker 1: Damn. I mean, I'm trying to think. I'm trying to think of the names who were attached to that holiday party at Conan O'Brien's house. But obviously there were a bunch of big names there. And if you had Rob Ryaner there and even his son, I'm saying it wasn't just Rob Ryan or like by extension, other people in his family were invited. You might have had a bunch of celebrities and by extensions, family members. Who knows how many people would possibly be hauled in And still the trial goes forward, will be hauled in, But let's do it once instead of twice.
00:05:36
Speaker 2: Exactly because people who are saying in terms of like the why prosecutors went the grand jury route, they said, if they had had a pre trial hearing, it would have been a circus.
00:05:46
Speaker 3: It would have been a spectacle given.
00:05:48
Speaker 2: All of the high profile, star studded witnesses that would absolutely have had to have testified because lying in wait, in order to get that charge, they would have had to have put up some of these partygoers who witnessed the tension and this reported argument that took place between Nick and his father Rob at the party in front of a bunch of people, and by proving that this was happening, that would be one way to show that he had been premeditating his parents' murders from the night before.
00:06:22
Speaker 1: Oh, they're going to need those folks who are at that party because they're going to be able to establish there was tension, there was heat, that was emotion, I mean, how fiery. There are reports out there about what happened, but this would have to go officially on the record. Just how explosive of a fight that could have been between those two with that party.
00:06:38
Speaker 2: Can you imagine that pre trial hearing, because we haven't gotten any of those details yet, and obviously this would be of absolute public interest to hear how we got to this moment where Nick Reiner brutally, savagely murders his own parents after having just been at this party with them hours earlier, in front of hundreds of guests.
00:07:02
Speaker 3: It's wild.
00:07:03
Speaker 2: The LADA did also release a statement, by the way, and I thought it was interesting because, look, this is part of the reason why they chose the charges they did, or at least they asked the grand jury to return these charges. But he said there was a profound betrayal by someone who was loved and trusted by the very people he is accused of killing. We hope that by having a grand jury return an indictment in this case, it will bring us one step closer to trial and to achieving justice. You're getting a little idea of what the prosecutor will be presenting in trial and the narrative he is going to be telling jurors at Nick Reiner's trial.
00:07:42
Speaker 1: Yeah, you can see this, you can see this kind but still, I mean, wasn't it the case that they were talking that was possible mental illness?
00:07:52
Speaker 3: So that's where so we got the not guilty.
00:07:53
Speaker 2: Please, So we finally got that, and so yes, is the question is it going to be not guilty by reason of insanity?
00:08:00
Speaker 1: But what I am trying to recall though it did we know for sure? Do we know? Is it on the record? What was going on with him? I remember reports at the time, what was it?
00:08:09
Speaker 3: Schizophrenia?
00:08:10
Speaker 2: Okay, so he had been actively treated for schizophrenia and the reports are that within I guess the last month he switched his medication, his drug treatment changed, but that he was actually under a conservatorship with his parents starting in twenty twenty because his mental health had deteriorated so much.
00:08:30
Speaker 3: That's why he was living. I believe it was in the poolhouse.
00:08:33
Speaker 2: He was on their property, on their grounds because they wanted to keep an eye on him. They were worried about him. They were worried about his mental health, they were worried about his physical health. And yes, so it's been fairly well documented that yes, he in fact was and had been treated for schizophrenia. So I think most folks are anticipating and insanity defense and thus the not guilty plea. But when we come back, we're to tell you why Nick Reiner is going to be back in court next week. He's trying to get his money that his parents left him. And welcome back everyone to Amy and TJ. We are talking about Nick Reiner and what is next for him in his case, he was just well, he just entered a not guilty plea and he had some new additions to his indictments. He is now being accused of lying in wait before attacking his parents with a knife and killing them, and so that will make him eligible for the death penalty if he is convicted. But he's going to be back in court next week. Because he's trying to hire back his high profile criminal defense attorney. Remember, Alan Jackson was initially his attorney, that he was an expensive attorney, and pretty quickly his siblings stopped paying him. They refused to fund his defense, so we ended up having to go with a public defender. Well, he wants Alan Jackson back, but to get Alan Jackson back, he needs money, and a lot of it, and he claims he's entitled to it.
00:10:12
Speaker 1: He claims. I wonder what a judge ultimately is going to have to decide that rals But that was my first question was this. It doesn't sound right that he should benefit from money that I guess he gained after killing his own parents. But that's not the case here, right.
00:10:30
Speaker 2: He's claiming this isn't money that came from his parents will, Because yes, that would make a lot of sense that you would never have access to money you would inherit upon the deaths of your parents if you're the one who's accused of killing or ending your parents' lives. No, he is saying that he actually files a petition saying he is seeking unpaid money from a trust his parents established for him, and it wasn't meant for him to receive it after their death. Upon their death, this was money that was put into a trust for him while they were still alive.
00:11:06
Speaker 3: So, look, this.
00:11:07
Speaker 2: Happens with a lot of wealthy families. They just sometimes there are stipulations on where the money can be spent, how the money can be spent, when somebody is eligible to receive the money based on how old they are. But he's claiming that there is at least one point five million dollars in his trust that he should have legal access to. And if he can get access to that one point five million dollars, he can then pay Alan Jackson the money. So he's saying, I need this money for my legal fees, and this is money that I'm absolutely legally entitled to.
00:11:41
Speaker 1: We'll see. I wonder how quickly they could decide that, And was it Alan Jackson?
00:11:45
Speaker 2: Alan Jackson, not the singer, but a very famed Los Angeles criminal defense attorney.
00:11:51
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's going to gobble up that one point five.
00:11:53
Speaker 3: And how long is that going to even last?
00:11:55
Speaker 1: Yeah?
00:11:55
Speaker 3: I don't even know.
00:11:56
Speaker 2: But I thought this was interesting in the petition that he filed for this hearing that's happening next week. I thought this was an interesting way to word it. They said Nick loved his parents and he is devastated by their deaths, but the facts about what did and did not happen to them are not at issue. That was how it started this legal briefing. And then they asked for money and access to the money that is in his trust.
00:12:22
Speaker 1: They're interesting, nothing that's going on with him right now has any bearing on his right to this money. Eh, that's the right way to do it. And remember his attorney at the time that he's trying to get back now came out hard out in front of the courthouse saying he is not responsible for their deaths. We all kind of sat up.
00:12:41
Speaker 2: Okay, yes, because when he made that yes, very bold statement and carefully worded statement. We immediately I feel like everyone at that point was believing that they are going for the insanity defense, much like the Lindsay Clancy trial. Yes, you can absolutely admit that you killed someone, but if you were not in your right mind, if you were not responsible because of a mental illness you were actively suffering from. That is basically the essence of an insanity defense, and historically speaking, it's a really tough defense. It's really hard to prove that you were insane. But look in the Lindsay Clancy case, she has documentation and it appears with Nick Reiner's history. As far as we know it, he has medical documentation of suffering from schizophrenia.
00:13:34
Speaker 1: So another trial and the battle of the medical experts.
00:13:38
Speaker 3: I guess it.
00:13:39
Speaker 2: Honestly, what we're watching with Lindsay Clancy might be just some homework and certainly a foundation for at least being able to view this Nick Reiner trial through that lens, because we're learning a lot about what defense attorneys have to prove in order to get a not guilty verdict by reason of insanity. I don't know will this even go to trial at this point if.
00:14:00
Speaker 1: He gets Alan Jackson, I mean, you're going to try to They're dangling the death penalty again, so possibly that's the negotiation or a plea just to take that off the table. But if he had legit mental illness, that's yeah, you might as well go to trial and try to flesh that.
00:14:18
Speaker 2: Out, Yeah, because then you could be committed to a state hospital rather than a prison for the rest of your life. But look, we do know his siblings seemingly are completely taking a backseat, a step back.
00:14:31
Speaker 3: They had zero comment.
00:14:32
Speaker 2: In fact, they were asked, as you might imagine, following the indictment that was unsealed yesterday, and they said no comment. So we'll continue to follow this, see what happens next week for his petition, because yeah, if he gets that one point five million dollars, his defense just completely gets an upgrade, I guess, is one way to put it. But we'll keep our eye on this situation. As always, we always appreciate you listening to us. I'm Amy Robock alongside TJ.
00:14:58
Speaker 3: Holmes. We'll talk so
00:15:01
Speaker 1: The kit Shop PA