All right. Mic check. Mic check. Let's see here. How's it going? How's it looking? Okay, it comes. There we go. All right. Got my ear. Okay. Hey y'all. So, for anyone that needs a catchup or if you're new here, first of all, I do talk. I'm here to talk. I'm not going to talk all the time in these trial because it's not as strict, but I do talk. Okay, so this is the case of Tennessee versus Latasha Daniels. Latasha Daniels drove from Arkansas to Tennessee to, in my opinion, allegedly, she's on trial for it, to she had the intention of killing her ex-lover, and she did kill him, and she shot his wife when his wife tried to protect his hair from getting shot. Um, he wanted to be and was in some type of polyamorous relationship. Doesn't look like the wife consented to that, though. Um, he used to be a pastor in Arkansas. So, I think that's how she met him. But then he moved to a church in Tennessee and that's why she drove from Arkansas to Tennessee. She bought a gun the same day in Arkansas and then drove and then uh met or went to his apartment, waited with the wife, talked about small talk stuff and then when he got there, she shot him a lot of times. Apparently, I don't know how many bullets, but it was a lot. They've gone over some of this already. Um, what else is going on with her? Oh, with him he had a app that he used so he could um live stream to his other two women that I saw their heads in there in the live stream because the court did play his recording. It sure did. So, we're now on day three. We're just now starting on day three. I'm not sure who's about to get on the stand yet, but um it's still prosecutions witnesses so far. And we'll get started from there and see what happens. Morning. >> Good morning. >> Could you state and spell your name for this record, please? Brock Sane. B R O C K. Last name Sane. S A I N. >> And Special Agent Sain. Where are you employed? >> I work for the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation. >> And how long have you been with them? >> Uh, I'm on my 16th year. >> And what position do you currently hold? I'm special agent in charge in the administrative services division over the support unit. >> Okay. Have you [snorts] always been in that division? >> No, I have not. >> Well, were you where were you prior to that? >> Uh, prior to that, I was a assistant special agent charge in the Medicaid fraud control division. Uh, prior to that, I was special agent investigator in the Medicaid fraud control division. Uh, before that, I worked in the crime lab here in Memphis as a special agent forensic scientist. I worked in the drug identification unit and the firearms and toolark identification unit in the crime lab in Memphis. >> Okay. So, when you were in the crime lab, what did your job duties entail? >> When I was in the firearm and toolark uh unit, that was from 2016 to 2020, um roughly around that time. and identified, examined uh firearms and ammunition components to determine whether or not those ammunition components were fired in a particular firearm and if the firearm was in operating condition. >> So, prior to the TBI, could you tell the jury a little bit about your educational background? >> Yes, I have a bachelor's of science in forensic chemistry from the University of Mississippi. I graduated from there in 2009. Okay. >> And have you ever test about testified about your findings in a firearms report? >> Yes, I have. >> How many times? >> Um, I don't know the exact number. In firearms, more than 10. >> And have you ever been qualified as an expert witness as pertaining to firearm identification? >> Yes, I have. >> Do you know how many times? >> All of All of those 10 to 15 times. >> And was that in Shelby County or other counties? um other counties, federal court in here in Memphis and other counties across West Tennessee. >> Your honor, I would tender special agent saved as an expert in firearms identification. >> No objection. >> All right. [clears throat] We'll tender special agent saying as an expert in firearms identification. >> Agent saying I'm going to pass you a document. Do you know what that document is that I just passed you? >> Yes, it's a copy of my lab report uh for firearms identification on a TBI lab case. >> Okay. And was that case involving a homicide that involved Miss Latasha Daniels? >> Yes. >> Okay. And you completed that firearms report? >> Yes, I did. Your honor, if we could enter the firearms report into evidence as the next number exhibit any. >> All right, we'll show exhibit 20 as the firearms report. >> Thank you. You could pass that back. Thank you. So, agent saying, what evidence did you receive to make that firearms report? I received a Ruger EC9S 9mm Luger pistol, uh, a magazine, and some cartridges. And then I also received seven 9mm cartridge cases from a crime scene. And I received six bullets from the Shelby County from the medical examiner's office. >> Okay. [clears throat] And who did you receive all of that from? >> It was received from Chris Roberts from Collierville PD. Okay. Do you remember the date that you received all of that? >> April 10th of 2019. >> Agent saying, "I'm going to pass you what has previously been marked as exhibit three." >> Okay. Small roll today. Thank you. If you could open that up and tell us what you see. >> It's a Ruger EC9S 9mm semi-automatic pistol. >> And is that the >> I think he's the third person they've had. Look at this gun. This This is the gun she purchased at the sporting goods store in Arkansas. He's the third person they have had. Same gun that you received from Detective Roberts. >> Yes, it is. >> Okay. And agent saying, "I'm going to pass you what has already been previously identified as exhibit six." >> And what do you see? evidence received from uh at the TBI crime lab with my markings on it, my evidence taped, and that it's the evidence examined and reflected in this report. >> Okay. And for all of that evidence that we just went through, were you able to analyze all of it? >> Yes. >> And did you compare the Ruger handgun to the bullets and casings that are in there? >> Yes, I did. >> Okay. And the bullets and casings, were they found on the scene and from the medical examiner? >> According to the um submittal form, yes, they were. >> Okay. And could you walk us through what you did when you examined them? >> Yes. Um you want me just talk about uh in general the firearms. And >> so in the laboratory, we take the firearm, if there's a firearm in question, take it in the laboratory to examine it. So I would do test fires, take that firearm and we have a tank in the laboratory full of water and it's a stainless steel tank. Shoot that firearm into that tank and collect known uh bullets and cartridge cases that were fired in that gun. So those are my known. I know what those have. I look at those under comparison microscope to look at the individual characteristics or the mechanical fingerprint of that firearm that were left and impressed and scratched upon those cartridge cases and bullets by that particular firearm. If I have uh evidence pieces such as these bullets and cartridge cases, I take those and compare those under a comparison microscope to see if they have those same individual characteristics as the known um test fires from that particular firearm. I look at those under the comparison microscope to determine if they were fired from that particular firearm or not. >> And did you bring anything to demonstrate the test fires to the jury? >> Yes, I did. May I use it? in front of the jury. So, may I step down? >> Yes. >> So, this is an an aid to help you see what I'm talking about. This is a cartridge. Uh so, this is what the ammunition is loaded into that semi-automatic pistol. Um it's loaded into that firearm. Uh when it the firing pin strikes the rear of this, the bullet there's an immense pressure in the back. It pushes the bullet down the barrel of the firearm. So that bullet travels down the barrel of a firearm. Inside that barrel, there are raised areas, lands in grooves, and it looks like the stripes of a candy cane. So the point of that is to put a spiral like a football onto that bullet so it can go towards its intended target. So once that bullet is forced down that barrel, it's scratched by that metal, that hard steel inside that barrel, and the scratches are left upon that bullet. I examine those scratches on that bullet, compare them to my known test fires. I do the same thing with the cartridge case. The pressure of that firing of the bullet down the barrel presses it against the rear part of the firearm. And when it's ejected, there's also other scratches that are left on the cartridge case. So, I can look at a cartridge case and compare it to another cartridge case or a bullet compared to another bullet. That's how I can identify whether or not they have those same individual characteristics from that firearm that were placed there by the firing of that ammunition down the barrel. >> Thank you for that. Um, I do have a general question. So, is it unusual to have a shell casing but not have a bullet? >> Uh, no. It just depends on the situation. A a cartridge case is ejected from a firearm and usually lands a few feet from where that firearm was. A bullet is fired down the barrel of a gun and it can go until it comes into contact with something or until it runs out of speed or energy. So specific >> Okay, just to let y'all know, it doesn't look like he has that much more time um up here. Um and after him it says states state rest. So after that I believe the defense will start calling their witnesses up next. So he's the last state witness. >> Specifically for this firearms report, what were your results? So the results of of this testing was I examined the firearm and it was in normal operating condition and the safety features functioning. Um the there was a cartridge and a magaz there were cartridges and a magazine. And then once I test fired that firearm, the test fired cartridge cases and bullets from exhibit 1A, the firearm were microscopically examined in conjunction with the cartridge cases in exhibit 2 A. There were seven cartridge cases and the six bullets in exhibits 2 B, 3 A, 3B, 3 C, 3D, and 3E. And based upon the comparative examination, sufficient agreement of those individual characteristics, all of those ammunition components had been fired in that firearm. >> Okay. So all the casings or the bullets have been fired from that Ruger. >> Yes. Just ask. So, if you could take a look at your report one more time, how many bullets came from the medical examiner and were there any other bullets found in the scene? >> Um, I received six bullets. Uh, one of those was from the crime scene and then the rest of those were from the medical examiner. So, one of those says it was from crime scene. >> No further questions. >> Thank you. information. >> Uh yes, Sean. >> Good morning. Uh is it detective site? Not >> detective agency. >> Agent site. That's fine. Special agent site. >> Yes, sir. >> Um I just have a few questions for you. So, you were um asked to uh as you described, you were asked to examine these bullets in this uh that came from this luger. Correct. >> I was Yes. I was asked, I'm sorry, >> to examine the firearm and compare it to those pieces of evidence, cartridge cases, and bullets. Yes. >> And and that Ruger, that's a 9 millimeter, correct? >> That's correct. >> And it's rel relatively small. >> Yes, it is. >> Um you you examine a lot of different types of weapons. Correct. >> Yes. >> Uh and and a 9 millimeter is a a fairly common weapon. >> Yes. It's I would say one of the most common firearms that I examined. >> Most A lot of law enforcement carry a 9mm weapon. >> A lot a lot of law enforcement does. Yes. >> And this particular one is relatively small in size. Correct. >> Yes. >> And were the bullets that were fired from it small in size? >> They're the same as all 9 mm. >> Okay. Um, and you're not here today to offer um for this jury that you knew would happen uh between Bruce Perry and my client Latasha Davis. Sorry. >> No, I >> All right. All right. Real quick. I always try to wonder what angle is is the defense coming from. So, is he trying to say that 100% you're not going to be able to tell whose bullets were and he's going to say they had a shootout in the apartment or something? like she didn't shoot those bullets. Maybe it came from cuz I think they they pointed out the ex-lover pastor um owned the gun as well. So, they trying to say they had a shootout or something cuz I feel like they're trying to discredit these bullets that's in this apartment from her shooting at him. Let me know what y'all think about why he's asking those questions that way. >> Not your your main thing that you're here to testify about today is that you examine those bullets. You examine the gun. >> Correct. Correct. >> You tested the bullets. >> Correct. >> And just to tell us that you can say that those bullets came from that gun. >> That is correct. >> And that's the extent of your testimony and that's the extent of your involvement in this case. >> That is okay. Um, >> mind you, he's matching the bullets up to the gun with the same serial number that had the serial number of the gun she purchased from that sporting goods store back in Arkansas the same day she drove down there and started shooting shooting it up. >> No further questions. >> No further questions. You may step down, sir. My tires state restaurant. All right. Thank you. All right. Um, I'm going to excuse you at this time. The lawyer and I need to have some discussions. So, I'm going to show you excuse for a recess. Okay. And again, we're still not ready to discuss the case. Use your opponent. I'm trying to skip ahead all. >> She said, "Yes, you you shot me." And Miss Daniel said, "I didn't mean to shoot you." And Miss Perry even >> Okay, I'm going back. I skipped a little bit and I want to know what defense is trying to say. Hold on. Let me go back a little bit. So skinny. Hold on. Are there any motions at this time? >> Yes, your honor. At this time, we would like to make a motion for judgment [clears throat] of a quiddle. Um, as to count one, firstdegree murder, even in a light most favorable to the u prosecution at this point. Um, we have testimony that Miss Daniels, when she arrived in this location, was happy to see Miss Perry, um, Miss, sorry, Miss Archie. Um, they were in an enclosed apartment together with no threats. Um, Mr. Brous Perry came home together in an enclosed apartment, no threats. Um, and it wasn't until something happened outside of the hearing of Taba that uh the shots were fired. Um, >> the person that bought the gun and drove from Arkansas to Tennessee is the threat. Yeah, the threats didn't enter because she was already there. She is the threat in my opinion. Um, Le GMA said they're trying to put doubt in the juror's head. They are, but I want to know how they're rationalizing it. And I feel like since they're going for the aquid motion now, we'll hear it. I want to know how they are trying to play this. Like what are you about? But now they're getting to it. So now they going to answer my question. I want to know the how do you think what do you think went down this apartment? What's how are y'all trying to uh illustrate what happened in this apartment to defend your client? >> Half of the shots were fired. Officers have described Miss Daniels as being nonresponsive. Um when Miss Perry testified, she uh testified that um Miss Daniels was uh yelling, "He broke my heart." Um and so I would submit that as to the count one that only the threshold for voluntary manslaughter has been met. Um as to count two, criminal attempt first degree murder regarding Tabitha Perry Archie. Um, your honor, I would submit that the proof has shown that Miss Perry testified that when she and Miss Daniels were interacting with each other, she had to say, "You shot me." Miss Daniels said, "No, I didn't." She said, "Yes, you you shot me." And Miss Daniels said, "I didn't mean to shoot you." And Miss Perry even told detective um Roberts that she didn't think Miss Daniels was trying to shoot her when that happened. Um she suffered an injury to the far side of her shoulder um which would not be a lethal injury. Um there was never any threats between Miss Daniels and um and Miss Perry. There was never any animous um for Miss Perry, your honor. I would submit that reckless endangerment at best is what has been established as to Tabitha Perry Archie. Um, which would then eliminate count three, the employing author. >> Um, I won't spoil the ruling because or the jury the jury's decision. So, I won't say that. But I will say as we've been listening to this, I don't think had the pastor's wife, had she not um tried to block him from getting shot, I don't think she was going to get shot. I think it was all meant for him. That's one thing I can agree with the defense on. I really don't think she meant she was trying to shoot the wife. The wife was collateral damage. But you can't say there's nothing against her for shooting the wife because she still did. She has a deadly weapon and she shot the wife. So it's got to be some charge though. state is opposed to the motion for judgment of a quiddle. The testimony is a defendant bought a gun on the same date that she showed up unannounced at Mr. and Mr. Perry's house. She brought that gun inside the house and for whatever reason um nothing there's no testimony that anything unexpected or or that should have recaused an unreasonable response happened. They were walking out the door after talking for a while. She turned around and shot him. She discharged a gun at least seven times, hit him at least uh five times. Uh in the midst of that, she shot Tabitha Perry in the ch in the shoulder. Um, I assume the court is going to charge the jury that if your uh intent is to kill another person and you accidentally hit another person, it doesn't matter that it's what you were trying to do. And if you abs just unintentionally hit another person, it would still be um first-degree murder or criminal attempt first-degree murder and employing goes along with that. I think the evidence is is overwhelming uh and uh the case should go to the jury. U your honor as to uh council's argument regarding almost a transferred intent that may have been the case I believe if Mr. Brous Perry had not died. But then to say she killed Brous Perry and in trying to kill Brous Perry, she shot Tap the Perry. That becomes a reckless action that that the intent is here. It can't be on both. Um so your honor, I would submit that as to Tabitha Perry that that transferred intent should not apply. Secondly, nothing in the indictment indicates that the state was pursuing a theory of transferred intent. Here it says that in an attempt to premeditatively kill Tabitha Perry that this happened. It doesn't say anything about a transferred intent of in the attempt to um kill Brutus Perry. That would be an attempted felony murder. That's not a a crime in Tennessee according to state Kimbro. Um so your honor, I would submit reckless endangerment is where we fall as parent. I'm not aware of any law that requires us to indict the transferred intent any specific way. And I would be interested to see if there's uh any that have been provided to the court. Again, the juryy's going to be charged that if she were attempting to kill one person and and and hit another and to say the fact that she was actually successful on her first attempt um on on the attempt to kill Mr. Perry that somehow negates the fact that she um shot Miss Perry. Um I I do not believe that's the law. >> But your honor, I can provide the court law that says if you're trying to shoot someone in self-defense and you shoot another person, that is a reckless act. You can't trans. >> They are I told y'all that was going for self-defense. Not today. I didn't say it, but the other days I said I feel like they're going to say something about he stood over her aggressively or they the defense already has said um he beat on her and stuff like that and in other times that they would meet up and everything. So, I felt like self-defense was going to be why she brought the the gun and then why she had to use it. I I was wondering when the self-defense was coming in. >> Transfer of the acting in self-defense against this person to the person that you accidentally shot. That becomes a reckless act. not that intent. >> We're not a self-defense either. >> And that's just an analogous situation. Um there is case law regarding, you know, if you are trying to shoot one person and you don't succeed in shooting one person, but you shoot another person, then there there's case law to support that. But when this other person also gets shot, then you end up in I think some double jeopardy issues with having the same intent covering two different crimes. I think the intent here is the allegation of premeditated. If there was an attempt to commit a premeditated act and someone else was injured, then that then becomes a reckless act. All right. Well, I have heard the arguments and so the court's going to begin the analysis on the first degree murder. Um the standard on a motion for judgment of a quiddle is after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution any rational trial fact could find beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant is guilty of the offense. and the court looks um at the legal sufficiency of the evidence and not the weight of the evidence. So, first starting with firstdegree murder, there are three elements of firstdegree murder. One, that the defendant unlawfully killed the alleged victim, um Bro Perry, the wife, uh testified that she observed the defendant shoot, um Mr. Perry um multiple times. Dr. Erica Curry testified that um the defendant was killed um by a homicide. So that element um there's enough evidence for that to go to the jury. And second, that the defendant acted intentionally. A person acts intentionally when it's the person's conscious objective or desire to cause the death of the alleged victim. I think from um the evidence um that's been presented, the defendants alleged to pull the gun out, shot the victim several times, and last that the killing was premeditated. The evidence that has come out at this point is that the defendant purchased a gun in Sherwood, Arkansas on April the 4th of 20 2019, drove 3 hours to Memphis, went to the victim's residence, and shot multiple times. So looking at the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, the court finds that there's enough evidence for firstdegree murder um to go forward to the jury. Looking at the second um count criminal attempt firstdegree murder as to Tabitha um Perry Archie. Um, one that the defendant intended to commit the offense of first-degree murder against alleged victim Tabitha Perry and two be that the defendant did some act intending to cause an essential element of firstdegree murder to occur and at the time believe the act would cause the element to occur without further action on the defendant's part and three that the alleged victim tapped Perry suffered serious bodily injury. Um the evidence um Miss Perry testified that the uh defendant uh was shooting at the uh Mr. Perry, but she told Miss Perry to get out of the way and she shot although she may not have intended to shoot um Miss Perry. Um there's something that is called transfer intent. And so although she have she may not have had the intent to shoot Miss Perry, she had the intent to shoot um Mr. Perry. And in the process of that, Miss Perry was shot. And so also in terms of serious violent injury, Miss Perry Archery Archer testified that her shoulder was injury. She said that she had pain in her shoulder. There was a bullet that was lodged on her shoulder that had to be removed. Um so the court finds that there is enough evidence for the criminal attempt first-degree murder um to go forward to the jury looking at the light most favorable to the state. And last count three employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous offense. Um there's no doubt uh well not that that based off uh the testimony at this point um the defendant employed a firearm. Miss Perry testified that she saw the defendant shoot uh the victim. Um there were bullets that were found inside of Mr. Perry. So employment of the firearm that element has been met. defendant employed a firearm in the commission of the um shooting of Miss Perry, the criminal attempt murder. The court find that there was enough evidence for criminal attempt murder and there was a bullet that was found um in Miss Perry shot her as well. And so in the commission of her uh in the commission of the gun being employed, Miss Perry was shot. Um, and last that the defendant acted intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly. The defendant told Miss Perry to get out of the way and she shot the gun. So, the court finds that there's enough evidence for each count to proceed to the jury looking at the evidence and the light most favorable to the state. >> Thank you, and hopefully I'm not making this memory up, but I feel like that Miss Perry, the one that was on the stand, she was married to the pastor at the time. I feel like she said that the that the defendant said, "Move out of the way. Move." Like when um she was covering her husband up. I I don't think that woman was trying to kill her. I don't. But I still think she was uh single-minded and he had to die and therefore collateral damage through Miss Perry getting shot in the shoulder to still keep shooting at him. But I I feel like she said that um the defendant said, "Yeah, get out of my way. Get out of my way or move. All right. Um, are we ready on moment? >> No. I'd like to reserve moment until after we have our first two witnesses and Miss Daniels has been able to hurt hear all of the proof as it stands at that point for her to then make that decision. >> Okay. >> Um, so if we could after Dr. Bidding take up the moment hearing. >> Okay. >> Um, and if I may just step out and make one quick phone call to make sure that we are good on logistics, we'll be ready to go. >> All right. We'll take recess. Thank you. >> All right, I'm skipping ahead. Let's see here. Okay, so this is the the defense's first witness. Ready to start again? Does the defense wish to put on any proof? >> We do, your honor. All right, you may call your first witness. Your honor, the first witness will be Officer Dunlap. Stand your face. Raise your right hand, please. >> Do you swear to tell the whole truth? >> I do. All right. You may have a seat, sir. >> Would you please state and spell your name? >> Uh, Ryan Dunlap. R Y A N D U N L A P. >> Um, officer. >> Officer. Yes. >> Where are you currently employed? >> Carable Police Department. >> Were you also employed there on April the 4th of 2019? >> I was. >> How long have you been with Carible? since 2017. >> Okay. I want to take you back to April the 4th of 2019. Do you remember that day? >> I do. >> Okay. Um, did you go to an apartment complex in Cardinal? >> I did. >> And why did you go to that apartment complex? >> We received a shot fire call. >> Um, when you went to the apartment complex, you went up Did you go up some stairs? >> I did. >> And then towards an apartment? Yes. >> If I may, your honor, publish part of cumulative exhibit 12. >> Yes. >> Officer Dunlap, is this the apartment that you responded to? >> Yes, it looks like it. >> Okay. Um, now I want to ask you about where you were in relation to where this picture is taken. When you responded, where were you standing >> outside the doorway? Probably 5 to 10 feet from the actual doorway. >> Okay. So, you actually could have like taken that picture from where you were standing? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> When you responded on the scene, did you see anyone? I saw Officer Draper and Officer Mlan talking to an individual on the bottom floor. Okay. >> They went upstairs and I followed them >> and that was another tenant of the building. >> Yes. >> And after that conversation, y'all went upstairs. >> Yes. >> When you went to this the apartment, did you see anyone inside the apartment? >> Yes. I saw three individuals. Two were laying on the ground and one was standing behind them holding a gun. >> Okay. And that was a man and a woman on the ground. >> Yes. >> And a woman standing. >> Yes. >> And that was Latasha Daniels that was standing. Yes, ma'am. >> Um, when you saw Miss Daniels, um, she had a weapon in her hand. >> She did. >> Do you remember seeing that? >> I do. >> Did anyone give her any verbal commands about putting the gun down? >> Yes. >> Do you remember how long you were at that door? >> I do not recall. >> Um, as people were giving her these verbal commands, do you recall what you saw Miss Daniels doing? um just standing there staring at us. >> Did she seem responsive to you? >> No. >> Um did you see her at any point raised the gun to herself? >> Yes. After standing there for a minute, she knelt down and uh put the gun next to her head. >> Did you see her? And I'm not asking you for any any content of what anyone else said, but did you see her or hear her speaking softly to herself? >> I'd have to refer to the reports, but I don't recall anything. >> Would it help you to refer to your report? You >> could. >> Do y'all mind if I speed this up to like 1.1 or 1.15? Because I feel like we'll still be able to keep up at that pace. Um, okay. If you didn't watch the other days, the defense said that she uh Latasha Daniels was suicidal. She had thought about killing herself when she was in an abusive relationship with uh abusive cheating relationship with her former husband. So, they're circling back around to get back to that suicidal part. Again, I think that they're saying she bought the gun to use on herself and maybe self-defense against the her ex-lover, but that's where I'm at with that cuz they keep circling around the purpose of the gun and whose bullets came from the from what gun and all this other stuff. Um, but yeah, do you mind if I speed this up just a little bit? Your honor, may I approach the witness? >> Yes. That was just his use of force. >> In my report, it states that uh she stated that she had ruined her life. >> Well, and we're not I don't want you to say what what anybody said. Do you remember hearing her speaking to herself? >> I can't recall. Did you did you note that she was >> I did note that she was speaking >> that she was speaking softly um and that she was not really communicating with y'all. >> Correct. >> Um and during this interaction, y'all were yelling at her, right? >> Any Thank you. Court reporter's taken everything down that we said. >> And as you were yelling at her, she was not really registering what you were yelling. Is that a fair assessment of what you saw? I guess so. >> Now, at some point you said you saw her put the gun to her head. >> Yes. >> Do you remember seeing that? >> I do. >> When you saw that, could you see the gun? >> I could. >> Are you familiar with guns? >> I am. >> Do you know what it looks like when the slide is cocked back? >> I do. >> And the gun is cleared? >> Yes. Did Miss Daniel's gun have the slide back or did it look normal? >> It looked like the slide was not locked back. >> Okay. So, it looked like it was >> looked normal. Yeah. >> Um, and if she had put the gun to her head and that slide was back, is that something that you would have noticed? >> I would assume so. At some point during this interaction, um, there was a decision made to use a less legal round. Do you remember that? >> I do. >> Do you remember the first gun misfiring? >> I do. >> Do you remember another officer going down to get another weapon? >> I do not remember which officer it was. Or >> do you remember that that happened? >> I was focused on on her. I wasn't really focused on what they were doing. Um, but at some point, Officer Jenkins deployed that less lethal round. >> Yes. >> And then McDaniels [clears throat and snorts] was taken into custody. >> Yes. >> Prior to that point, uh, you indicated that you saw Miss Daniels put the gun to her own head. >> Yes. >> Did you ever see her point the gun again at the two people on the ground? >> No. >> At any point, did Miss Daniels point the gun at the officers? >> No. >> It don't Okay, I know. Okay, I'm going to say this as a lay person. It doesn't matter. She bought the gun the same day to use it on exactly who she used it on. She got five shots in on her ex-lover. I think her mission was accomplished at that point. It's great that she wasn't trying to shoot at the officers. That's great. I don't know for sure if she was actually trying to kill herself at the I don't know, but they said she was uh that her defense is going with the whole she's been suicidal before. But great, she was gentle with the police officers. Whoopde-doo. Like she already shot who she was trying to shoot. >> At any point did she threaten the officers? >> No. >> At that point in time, did y'all deem her to be a threat to herself? >> Yes. >> You see how long he took to answer that? And he's there. He remembers her pointing a gun in her head and he still had to kind of think about if he actually thought she was a threat to herself because I'm wondering if he's wondering is this, you know, are you really going to do it or is this just a delay tactic? Cuz that's interesting for him to be right there looking at her and the defense and he's the defense's witness and they ask him, "Do you think she was trying to harm herself?" And he's like, "That's crazy. If I may, your honor, in just a moment. >> That's all I have. Your crossation. You make that thing. >> Dang. They must not think he had anything that was really going to make a difference because they don't even want to cross and challenge what he said and what he was asked. Okay. Interesting. All right, let's see what else. Thank you. >> Your honor, the defense call is Dr. Amanda Fitting. Can you stop this way? Stand your face. >> Do you swear? I'm going to tell the whole truth. I do. All right. You may have a seat. >> What's your step? >> Would you please state and spell your name? My name is Dr. Amanda Bidding. A M A N D A. B as in boy. I T I N G. Okay. Just want to play the guessing game because we don't have a lot we can talk about right now. So, I just want to know, do y'all think she is the defense's witness because she did like she was um Latasha Daniels psychiatrist, psychologist for counseling or something? Or do you think that they're just going to she's going to be the witness? And what do you think a normal person would have done in these types of situations? What kind of mindset would they be in? I want to know if she was a patient of hers or not. >> How are you employed? I work full-time at Vanderbilt University Medical Center as an assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences. Your honor, Matt has forward a document. [clears throat] >> Do you recognize that? >> Yes. This is my curriculum vita. >> Your honor, I'd ask that that be made the next number exhibit. I believe that's 21. >> Any objection? >> All right. >> All right. will show curriculum by tar 21. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Dr. Bidding, can you tell me a little bit about your professional career starting with your education? >> Yes. I obtained an undergraduate degree um from Eastern Kentucky University in psychology. Then I went on to get my PhD in clinical psychology from Sam Houston State University which is in Texas. Um as as part of getting your PhD in clinical psychology, you have to do a year of clinical work under supervision. I did that year at Utah State Hospital in Pro Utah where I did forensic evaluations and also >> Dr. Excuse me. Can you speak up for >> Yes, of course. >> You're trying to reach the room. >> Okay. >> All right. Um after my time at Utah State Hospital, I had my PhD and then I did another year of specialized training in forensic psychology um for the state of Minnesota. After all of that, um I was a licensed psychologist and I worked for several years at Utah State Hospital doing um forensic evaluations and participating in training. I also did some treatment and then I came to Nashville and started working for Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Most of my work at Vanderbilt is doing forensic evaluations, but I also do treatment um and then training with psychology trainees and psychiatry trainees. >> Um do you have any special licenses or certifications? >> I am a licensed psychologist. I am certified by the state of Tennessee to do um like court-ordered evaluations for people that are charged with a crime. And then I am also board certified in forensic psychology, which means that I went through a rigorous process where people who are experts in the field of forensic psychology reviewed my work and I had to defend that work to them and then they said, "Yes, we think that you are um you do high quality work." And so then I was board certified by the American Board of Professional Psychology. >> Now you indicated that in your practice now you have both forensic and clinical practices, right? >> That's correct. >> Um and in the past you have also engaged in clinical evaluations. >> That's right. >> What is the difference between a clinical evaluation and a forensic evaluation? >> A clinical evaluation is typically where a psychologist see someone to figure out if they have some sort of mental health diagnosis. will give treatment recommendations whether that is for a school or um for them to go seek treatment somewhere else. A forensic evaluation is when a psychologist evaluates somebody specific to a legal question. So whether the person is having mental health symptoms that would be relevant to something in a legal case that would be able to speak to their ability to get through their case. uh maybe their mental state at the time of whatever they're accused of doing. Um there are other things but it would be related to something in the legal arena. >> Does that forensic examination require distinct training above the or aside from the clinical? >> It doesn't require distinct training. However, it is highly recommended um because it is different than the typical clinical work that most psychologists do. And you have that forensic training? >> I do. >> Um, have you taught any any um classes? Anything? >> Yes, I've taught um mostly through supervision. So, I supervised clinical work, but I've supervised trainees doing forensic evaluations. Um, and then have taught uh never a full course. Actually, that's not true. I did teach a full course in forensic psychology. Um but then also do like short you know hour to three hour long lectures sometimes on forensic psychology [clears throat] >> which kind of brings me to my next question. Have you published peerreview articles and have you been a presenter at uh continuing education seminars? >> Yes. >> Okay. Do you know approximately how many? >> Uh I've published I think around seven I've been an author on about seven peer-reviewed articles. um presented at a conference approximately 15 times over my career um and then been asked to present at other talks I think approximately five to 10 times. >> Have you received any specific honors or awards? >> Yes. Um the honors and awards that I've received are mostly from graduate school but the biggest honor in terms of since I've become a licensed psychologist is that board certification in forensic psychology. Um, are you a member of any professional associations? >> Yes, a member of the American Psychological Association and then kind of a subgroup of that, um, the American Psychology and Law Society. >> Have you previously testified as an expert in a court of law? >> Yes. >> Have you testified for the state? >> Yes. >> Have you testified for the defense? >> Yes. >> Your honor, at this time, I would like to tender Dr. Dr. Amanda Bidding as an expert in both clinical and forensic psychology. We'll show Dr. Amanda being as declared expert in clinical and forensic psychology. >> Okay, she must have a lot to share cuz her segment is long. We might have to split her up into two pieces. But hold on, I got to speed this up for sure if she going to be on the stand that long. Hold on. All right. Thank you, your honor. Now, Dr. Betting, whether you're testifying for the state or for the defense, does that matter as to what ultimate opinion you render? It should not. Um, one of the main principles of forensic psychology is to always try to do an objective assessment. Um, so to give opinions and come to conclusions based on the information that I review versus what side hires me. >> And why is that important? >> For multiple reasons. Um, I want to be helpful to the court and if I come in and just give an opinion the attorney wants me to give, that's probably not very helpful. Um, but also it makes people not look very credible if they come in and their conclusions aren't based on the actual information that they had and they seem biased. >> In this case, did you meet with Latasha Daniels for an evaluation? >> I did. >> U, now I want to be clear. You are not coming before this jury to say that this is not guilty by reason of insanity, right? >> That's right. Can you tell the jury what not guilty by reason of insanity means? >> Uh not guilty by reason of insanity is a plea someone can enter um when they are asserting some sort of mental health defense. Typically um a defendant if they plead not guilty by reason of insanity, they're trying to say, "I was so mentally ill at the time that this happened that I didn't really understand what I was doing or I didn't really appreciate that what I was doing was wrong." is the threshold how high is the threshold for that degree of mental illness? >> Uh it is very rare for someone to um be that severely mentally ill at the time of a crime to not really understand what they're doing or not be able to appreciate the wrongfulness of their actions. So it's a rare defense. >> Would that actually require almost a psychotic event? >> Most of the time it is because the person is having psychotic symptoms. Yes. Uh and psychosis is different than regular mental health issues. >> Psychosis is under the umbrella of mental health issues. Um but typically psychosis means that the person is out of touch with reality. They're not um they're not assessing the environment accurately anymore. >> Another um aspect of kind of the legal area of your field would be diminished capacity. Right. >> Right. Now, because of limited information, were you able to make a determination on diminished capacity here? >> I was not. >> And that's because Miss Daniels couldn't remember a part of what happened. >> That's correct. >> Uh, now I want to talk to you about the sources of information that you used in coming to the determinations that you did about Miss Daniels. Okay. >> Okay. >> Do you recall uh kind of generally what what types of sources you used? Yes, I was provided some information by um Miss Fuches that included like discovery information in the case. So, police reports, recordings of um the 911 calls. Um I was also provided uh some journal entries from Miss Daniels herself. I also interviewed Miss Daniels. I spoke to a collateral uh contact and I did some psychological testing with Miss Daniels. >> Did you also just watch Officer Dunlap testify? >> I did. Um, now I want to talk to you about the the evaluation part of that. Is it common in psychology to have the person that you are examining be your primary source of information? >> Uh, in forensic psychology, we certainly don't want the defendant to be the the primary source of information. Um, many times when I'm ask when I'm trying to assess someone's mental state, they're the person that's best able to tell me their mental state, but typically that um needs to be corroborated. There needs to be some other data that supports what the defendant is saying. And typically that comes from things like police reports, observations of the defendant at the time of the offense. Um, 911 recordings, body cam footage, things like that. >> Getting ahead here. Did you uh get self-reporting from Miss Daniels? Yes. Yes. >> And then compare it to uh corroborating information. >> Yes. >> Did you find corroborating information? >> Yes. >> Okay. Now, I want to kind of shift gears a little bit and talk to you about Miss Daniel's background. Okay. >> Okay. >> Um did you discuss her childhood with her? >> I did. >> U did you find any particular trauma history in her childhood? >> Yes. >> What trauma history did you find in her childhood? You don't have to give a a detail, but in general, >> uh, she detailed being physically abused um by her mother during her childhood and emotionally abused um by both her mother and um her stepfather in some ways. >> Do you recall her stepmother being abusive with her mother? >> She also witnessed domestic violence between her stepfather and her mother. Uh, do you recall if there was any um psychological impact from having to hide that from other people? >> I don't know that she described psychological impact at the time, but she described how when she was a child, it was expected that she present like everything was okay when they were in public. her stepfather was apparently a pastor and so it was kind of the expectation that all of those things that were happening inside the home be kept secret um and that no one knew those things and so she kind of had to like put on a happy face for lack of a better term. >> Do you still see the manifestation of that mentality currently? That's certainly how she described herself functioning throughout the rest of her life of kind of pushing down any sort of negative things that were happening in life and and presenting herself like she had it all together. >> Does Miss Daniels have a family history of mental health? And I I don't want you to get into details there, but just generally, does she have a family history? Yes. She said she has a family history of mental illness and substance use problems on both her mom and her dad's side of the family. >> I want to talk to you briefly about her educational history. Okay. >> Okay. >> Um she has a master's as a licensed clinical social worker. Right. >> That's my understanding. >> Um can someone who is that educated struggle with mental health? >> Absolutely. >> Can someone who is in the mental health field struggle with mental health? >> Absolutely. Would that be uncommon? >> I don't know. I don't think I can answer that question with any real data. Um, I certainly am aware of several people in the mental health field that have mental health problems themselves. >> Now, I want to talk to you um about Miss Daniels relationship u and mental health history. Okay. Based on your evaluation of her, did you find those two things kind of going hand in hand? >> Yes. >> U now Miss Daniels had been married at a young age. >> That's correct. >> Uh do you remember whether that resulted in a divorce? >> It did. >> Do you remember the psychological impact of that divorce on Miss Daniels? >> Yes. >> Okay. Then what was that? She described that divorce kind of breaking her in a sense. Um, divorce was seen as sinful in her family. Um, I think she kind of viewed it as a failure on her part and uh, she became so emotionally distraught at the ending of her marriage. Um, that that is when she described attempting suicide. >> Now, she did then get remarried based on your information, right? >> That's correct. And did she describe any um emotional trauma from that marriage? >> Yes, she described that marriage as just generally unfulfilling. Um she felt neglected, um ignored, unappreciated. She kind of described feeling like she um had kind of pulled him into the marriage and that he was never really wanting to be with her is kind of how she felt during that marriage. >> He was very emotionally distant with her. >> That's what she described. Yes. Um, and that was she suffered some pretty severe depression symptoms during that marriage, right? >> Toward the end of the marriage, they were married for about eight years. Toward the end of the marriage, she described starting to have depressive symptoms, not wanting to go home, frequent crying, um, kind of losing some motivation, feeling hopeless. >> Do you remember her describing sitting in the driveway and crying, the thought of having to go inside? >> Yes. So, I want to talk to you then about um her next step in counseling. Okay. Okay. >> Um she told you that she and her husband that she wanted her husband to go to counseling and he wouldn't. >> That's right. >> So, she sought out spiritual counseling. >> That's correct. >> Um did she tell you why she sought out spiritual counseling? The way that she described it to me is that she wanted someone, I think, to kind of give her assurance that her relationship with God would not be affected if she got divorced again, if like another marriage ended. And so, she wanted to to talk to somebody in her church about that. >> And at the time she reached out for that counseling, was she endorsing depressive symptoms at that point? >> She described to me having depressive symptoms. Yeah. At that time, yes. >> Now, that's kind of her background, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. So from there I want to shift to the psychological testing that you did. Okay. >> Okay. >> Um what is the P AI? >> Um the PI is a a common measure um that's given by psychologists. It's a self-report measure. You fill it out yourself and essentially it's questions um that get at any sort of mental health symptoms that you're having at the time that you take the test. Um a history of mental health symptoms and then it ask questions about someone's kind of general personality traits. Did you give Miss Daniels the P AI? >> I did. >> And what were your determinations after that test? >> Um, so kind of her results on the test. There are some um scales on the test called validity scales that give me information about whether the person was endorsing a lot of symptoms um to where you might be concerned that they're trying to like look more ill than they are, whether the person was being sort of defensive or they're like not endorsing anything. um or if maybe they were confused by items. So that's the first part of the measure. Um and Miss Daniel's results suggested that she was not endorsing things that most people do endorse. Um so not endorsing some negative aspects of herself that many people would be willing to endorse. So she was a little defensive. Um there was also some evidence that she might have been confused by some of the items, but not to the point where I couldn't like interpret the other scales on the measure. So the defensiveness that you were describing is that also known as under reporting. >> Yes. >> What is under reporting? >> Well, under reporting just in general is where somebody does not endorse having symptoms that they really are having. The scale on the PI can't tell me exactly why uh she kind of elevated that scale. It could be due to several things. It could be due to a person knowing their symptoms and choosing not to report them, but it can also be due to somebody not having insight into their symptoms or their problems. Um, so just not really like knowing that they have these issues. Did you make any specific findings about Miss Daniel's personality? >> Um, based on that measure, uh, she was endorsing things. So, even though she was a little defensive, she was endorsing a history of trauma, um, a history of some sort of traumatic event that was still bothering her. She also endorsed a history of um kind of chaotic or um stormy relationships. She endorsed kind of a lack a lack of sense of self kind of like problems with identity and knowing who she is and where she wants to go in life. Those are the things that I'm remembering right now. >> Did she um in in your assessment of her, did she test as being someone with anger issues? No, that did not come up at all on the on the measure, which that measure does assess for anger issues. >> Did she actually assess in the opposite direction? >> Thank you. Yes, she um her responses on that measure suggest that she's actually kind of the opposite. She's passive >> uh meek, doesn't like hostility, doesn't like conflict, and tries to probably avoid conflict. >> The validity scales that you were talking about, are those um what are also known as a mingering test built into the test? Yes, it's not it's not a test designed to assess specifically for malingering, but it's related. It's essentially like is this person's reporting of symptoms something that I think is reliable. >> And what is malering? >> Um malingering is when someone overindores symptoms where they um it's typically what happens. They endorse a lot of mental health symptoms for the purpose of some sort of secondary gain like getting disability benefits or um trying to get um out of like a prosecution in a case. Um mingering can also be like acting like you have um a lack of knowledge about something that you have like a lack of memory when your memor is really fine. So it's not just kind of an over endorsement. It can also be like a lack of knowledge or a lack of symptoms. >> Did you have concerns about her regarding malinger? No. >> Did you have any concerns with her regarding over reporting? >> No. >> Despite her under reporting, were you able to rely on the results that you found? >> Yes. >> Now, I want to talk to you about the next test. What is the trauma symptom inventory? >> Uh, it is it's a similar measure. You fill it out yourself. It's just specific to a history of trauma and assessment for trauma related disorders like PTSD. Um so similarly it has some validity scales and then some scales um to tell me what sort of trauma symptoms she's endorsing if she's endorsing any. >> Okay. And what were your results? >> There were no issues with the lady scales, no evidence that she was endorsing a lot of stuff or under endorsing things. Uh the only thing that she endorsed in terms of trauma related symptoms was an avoidance of memories related to her trauma and avoidance of things that would remind her of her trauma. >> What does that mean? That means that she doesn't like to think about the things that have happened to her in the past and she avoids thinking about them. >> Um, is that a a common personality type that does that kind of pushes things down? >> It it certainly can be. Um, it's certainly common among trauma related disorders and there are some personality traits um that are often common with a history of trauma that where you would see the same thing. Um, so what was your I mean is the result that defensive avoidance or is there a more specific result on that test? >> No, the defensive avoid that's the name of the scale that she elevated is defensive avoidance. Um, and what that means is that she's just avoiding those reminders and avoiding those memories. >> So what was her specific results on that trauma inventory? >> That was it. That was the only scale that she elevated. >> Okay. Um, did it indicate evidence of trauma? Yes. >> Does it indicate particular trauma? >> No, it doesn't give any information about the type of trauma the person has experienced. >> Um, and again, does did you have any concerns about malingering during that assessment? >> No. >> Did you have any concerns about over reporting during that assessment? >> No. >> Did you have any concerns about under reporting during that assessment? >> No. >> Okay. So, now I want to kind of shift gears to your evaluation regarding her mental state. Okay. >> Okay. Um you did review the discovery. >> I did. >> Um what stood out to you generally speaking um in the discovery >> particularly regarding immediately after the um offense. >> So a lot of the discovery were police accounts. Um, when police arrived to the scene, um, Miss Daniels is described as standing in the kitchen area holding a gun, um, kind of talking to herself, not following commands from police to drop the gun, and kind of intermittently pointing the gun at herself. >> Um, did you hear that consistent with Officer Dunlap's testimony? >> Yes, and I believe I read his report. Um, did you also uh review Tabith Perry's statement? >> Yes. >> Did anything in her statement stand out to you regarding Miss Daniels mental state? >> So, Miss Perry's statement um essentially talked about how, you know, this happened and uh and she remembers seeing Miss Daniels kind of go into the kitchen. Um, another thing that stood out is that at some point Miss Perry apparently kind of tells her to leave that the police are coming and Miss Daniels says no, it doesn't matter. Um, and doesn't leave even though Miss Perry is telling her to to get out of there and that she won't say anything to police essentially. >> Uh, did anything strike you about the fact that she wasn't responsive with the officers? It I mean it could mean um that she was so distressed she wasn't able to pay attention to what was happening at the time. Um you know there are I think different things that it can mean. What it means at the most basic level is that um she was not responding to the officers like most people would if officers have guns drawn at you and are telling you to put down a gun. Um during your evaluation were you also provided a suicide? >> Yes. >> Is something like that important to your evaluation? >> Yes. Um in this particular evaluation it was corroboration of kind of her account to me that she was feeling suicidal around the time. >> Uh and you had some medical reports indicating depressed mood and suicidal ideations around this time. >> Yes. Now, Miss Daniels did talk to you about her version of events, right? >> Yes. >> With your um evaluation, did you find objective evidence that corroborated what Miss Daniels was telling you? >> Yes. So, the things that I found that were corroborated were that she was feeling suicidal around the time, that she was depressed around the time, and some corroboration for the things that she talked about that were happening in the relationship with the victim. >> Okay. Um, and so did you find corroboration of you provided corroboration of the fact that she did purchase a gun that day? >> Yes. >> U, but that was after she had written the suicide note. >> I don't recall the exact time. I would have to look back in the documents. [clears throat] If the suicide note that you were provided was written on April 4th, 2019 at 3:14, that would be before April the 4th, 2019 at 4:37 p.m. at night. >> Okay, I hope they answer this question. How do you know the timestamp of when a suicide note was written? Unless the defendant said I wrote it at this time cuz I'm guessing it's a handwritten note. I just want to know how you know this time stamp of suicide note. There's a lot of things going on but the professional speaking I'm just letting her do her thing and reveal what she found. >> Yes. >> Did you find um that sequence of events to corroborate her timeline that she provided you? >> Yes. Um, did you see a Marco Polo video that corroborated her um saying that she had a discussion with Brous Perry earlier that night before going to the apartment? >> Yes. >> Did you see Tabitha Perry's statement that corroborated that Miss Daniels went to the apartment complex? >> Yes. Did you see uh reports from police officers and the statement of Miss Perry that kind of corroborated what Miss Daniels was telling you about her mental state at the time? >> Yes. >> Now, I want to talk to you about the conclusions that you made in a clinical aspect regarding Miss Daniels. Okay. >> Okay. >> U did you make any diagnoses of her? >> I did. >> What were those? Um, I diagnosed Miss Daniels with major depressive disorder, which means I believe she was having depressive symptoms around the time that were severe enough to impair her functioning. >> U, did you make any other diagnosis of her? >> I also diagnosed her with an unspecified trauma related disorder. There was evidence in what I had that she had some symptoms of a trauma-lated disorder like that avoidance of memories and that avoidance of triggers. Um there was some evidence in the PI of kind of distrust of people. Um but she was not meeting uh criteria for PTSD which is a specific type of trauma- related disorder. Um she was displaying some symptoms of a just general trauma related disorder around the time >> and again you can't tie that to a particular trauma right? >> That's correct. >> Um and did you have any other um assessments that you made regarding her? I also diagnosed her with um an unspecified personality disorder with borderline and dependent traits. So personality disorders are where someone has personality traits that cause them problems. Um in the case of Miss Daniels, those traits are things like difficulty um regulating negative emotions. So like difficulty kind of knowing what to do with negative emotions. um some of that history of suicide attempts that's common with somebody with borderline personality traits. This lack of sense of self or this difficulty with identity is common in both borderline personality disorder and dependent personality disorder where oftent times the person kind of relies on other people to give them a sense of self and a sense of fulfillment. Um, and I certainly saw that in her history of relationships where she often kind of sought reassurance and did things that maybe she wouldn't do otherwise to kind of please the people that she was with. And that's common among somebody with dependent personality disorder. >> And did she actually endorse that history with Bruce Perry with her doing things that she was not comfortable doing? >> Yes. >> Um, can trauma affect your memory? >> Yes, absolutely. Uh, and because of Miss Daniel's inability to remember during this traumatic event, you were unable to determine whether she would have met the criteria for diminished capacity. >> Can you repeat that for me? >> Absolutely. I'll try to do it more clearly. In order to make a determination about diminished capacity, she would have to be able to remember to give you specific details, right? >> She would, or there would need to be other information that would tell me more about her thinking at the time, and I didn't have either. I she didn't remember and I didn't have anything that would give me that information otherwise. >> And when we talk about specifically diminished capacity, that's at the moment of the act, right? Not later and not be right then. Yes. >> So because she could not remember well that immediate event you were not able to make that assessment. >> That's correct. >> But a traumatic event can affect your ability to recall. >> That's right. That's all I have. Your honor cross. Okay, that's actually not as long as I thought it was going to be for the defense. So, um, she's still on here for a while. We're going to watch it another time. You know, you going to watch it now. But the Oh, I see. It's a lot of cross coming. Okay. So, prosecution's about to cross examine. Then there's going to be recrosses because I'm like, dang, the state has her for a long time, but it's going to go back and forth. I see now. All right. So, we'll stop there where we got what the forensic psychologist said about her state of mind. We'll stop there and we'll come back when I can, you know, old 9 to5 and everything. But I got an appointment with my bed and a book. Her voice was so soothing. I was like, "Don't nod off on camera. Do not nod off on camera." I like this stuff, but I I had a full day of work. I've been up since 4:30 a.m. and I'm a little sleepy. [laughter] So, okay. So, what's out there? I'll see y'all again. Um, I don't know for sure when, but we'll either be watching trigger warning body cam uh in the afternoon sometime this week. And yeah, especially Saturday morning, Sunday morning, we'll be watching our normal, you know, the scammers, the DUIs type body cams. So, I will see y'all soon. I'll try to keep sending out the live alerts. If you join Patreon for free, you can get live alerts. You don't have to put money towards it. It's just more dependable than YouTube sending them out. YouTube kind of sucks with that. All right. So, I'll talk to y'all later. Hopefully, you enjoyed learning some of this and I'll see y'all soon. All right. Bye.