Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary

Two murder trials happening simultaneously—and both are asking jurors to define the boundaries of accountability.
Kouri Richins stands trial February 23rd for allegedly poisoning her husband Eric with fentanyl. The defense has scored pretrial victories: a recanting drug source, excluded expert witnesses, severed financial charges. But the prosecution's evidence remains formidable—an alleged prior Valentine's Day attempt, a housekeeper testifying about fentanyl requests and "the Michael Jackson stuff," Google searches about lethal doses, a jail letter allegedly scripting family testimony, and five times the lethal dose in Eric's system.
Colin Gray faces 29 felony counts in Georgia including second-degree murder for allegedly arming his son despite years of warnings. The prosecution's evidence: an alleged 2021 "how to kill your dad" search, an FBI visit over shooting threats, the Christmas gift of the AR-15, a text allegedly reading "the blood is on your hands," and what prosecutors describe as a bedroom shrine to the Parkland shooter. When officers arrived, Colin allegedly said, "I knew it."
Former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis breaks down both cases with the eye of someone who's stood at that table. For Richins: How does the defense exploit a recanting witness? How does the prosecution overcome pretrial losses with volume? For Gray: How does Georgia law support charging a parent for a child's actions? What proves someone "knew" versus "should have known"?
Different crimes. Different legal theories. Same fundamental question: When does knowing become culpable? When does failure to act become murder?
Eric Faddis gives his honest assessment of where both trials are headed.
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePod
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.
#KouriRichins #ColinGray #EricRichins #ColtGray #EricFaddis #FentanylMurder #SchoolShooting #ParentAccountability #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime

Rob Reiner told friends he was afraid his son could hurt him — then brought Nick to a Christmas party because he was afraid to leave him alone. That contradiction is the trap millions of people live inside every day. This episode is about the psychology of staying — the guilt weaponization, the sunk cost, the belief that walking away means you failed. The Reiners did everything right by every measure we're taught. They never gave up. And it cost them their lives. If you've ever stayed with someone dangerous because leaving felt like abandonment, this is the conversation no one has with you.
#RobReiner #NickReiner #MicheleSingerReiner #TrueCrime #Enabling #AddictionFamily #LovingSomeoneDangerous #Boundaries #SurvivorGuilt #HiddenKillers
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePod
Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.

She had a doorbell camera. A pacemaker app. Family nearby. Every layer of modern security we're told should keep us safe. And none of it mattered. Nancy Guthrie vanished from her own home and twelve days later, with more than a hundred investigators and eighteen thousand tips, there is no vehicle of interest, no named suspect, and no confirmed sighting.
Former FBI Special Agent Robin Dreeke spent twenty-one years inside the Bureau's Counterintelligence Behavioral Analysis Program, eventually serving as its chief. His career was built around understanding how people evade detection — and what it takes to find them. In this interview, Dreeke dismantles the assumption that our surveillance-saturated world makes disappearance impossible. He walks through what a successful extraction actually requires, where the gaps in residential security systems exist, why the absence of a vehicle of interest may be the most important detail in this case, and what Nancy Guthrie's disappearance reveals about the distance between perceived safety and actual safety.
Dreeke also addresses the question investigators are quietly asking: someone out there knows something. Eighteen thousand tips have come in, but the one that cracks this case probably hasn't arrived yet. Dreeke breaks down why people stay silent — the psychology of loyalty, denial, fear, and the moment when the weight of what you know becomes heavier than the cost of saying it. He explains the difference between a witness who doesn't realize they have relevant information and one who is actively protecting someone. And he speaks directly to that person — wherever they are — about what it would take to make that call today.
#NancyGuthrie #RobinDreeke #FBIExpert #SurveillanceGaps #CatalinaFoothills #MissingPerson #SavannahGuthrie #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers #WitnessSilence
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePod
Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.

The South Carolina Supreme Court heard Alex Murdaugh's double murder appeal today, and the state walked into a courtroom that wasn't friendly. The justices pressed prosecutor Creighton Waters on both tracks of the appeal — Becky Hill's jury tampering and the evidentiary errors at trial — and the exchanges revealed a bench that has serious doubts about what happened below. Justice James opened by asking about the egg juror affidavit that Justice Toal excluded from the evidentiary hearing. Chief Justice Kittredge went further, pointing out that Toal's order never addressed the allegation that Hill told jurors not to be fooled by Murdaugh's testimony. He described the corroboration between multiple juror accounts and independent witnesses as "striking." Becky Hill is now a convicted perjurer, and that conviction didn't exist when Toal issued her ruling. Justice Few asked Waters directly: how do you call someone "not completely credible" when her guilty plea proves she lied under oath? Dick Harpootlian framed the defense argument around the Sixth Amendment — not whether Hill changed the verdict, but whether she compromised the constitutional right to an impartial jury. That distinction in legal standard may be the most consequential issue the court decides. 
On evidence, Kittredge told Waters that Rule 404(b) is a rule of exclusion and that he couldn't find a single piece of financial evidence the trial court kept out. He questioned why emotionally charged testimony from victims of Murdaugh's financial crimes was presented in a murder trial. Waters attempted a Fargo analogy. Justice Few cut him off. Jim Griffin argued the core weakness: no eyewitnesses, no murder weapons, no biological transfer evidence from a close-range shotgun blast. If the financial testimony is ruled improperly admitted, what's left narrows considerably. Eric Faddis, criminal defense attorney and former felony prosecutor, analyzes every critical moment from the bench — what the questions reveal about each justice's thinking, where the state's arguments failed to land, and which of the three possible outcomes today's hearing most strongly favored. He also addresses whether a federal Sixth Amendment challenge remains an option regardless of the state court's ruling. Decision expected within sixty days.
#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughAppeal #BeckyHill #SupremeCourtSC #EricFaddis #CreightonWaters #JuryTampering #Rule404b #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePod
Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.

The FBI released surveillance footage. They're looking for multiple suspects. A man was detained in Rio Rico for eight hours and released. An imposter ransom demand led to a California arrest. And eighteen thousand tips are now competing with millions of amateur verdicts being rendered in comment sections across the internet. Two experts break down why both sides of this equation — the legal case and the public spectacle — are in trouble. Criminal defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis explains what prosecutors actually have. The forty-one-minute window between the Nest camera going offline at 1:47 a.m. and Nancy Guthrie's pacemaker losing Bluetooth at 2:28 a.m. is the strongest forensic anchor in the case. It proves something happened inside that house. But connecting that timeline to a specific defendant requires evidence that hasn't materialized publicly. Faddis walks through how a prosecutor builds around that gap — and what a defense attorney does to widen it. He addresses the decision by FBI Director Kash Patel to release surveillance footage through his personal X account instead of the Bureau's press office. Whether a defense team could credibly argue that compromised the identification process. The legal chaos created by at least three ransom notes containing details about the inside of Nancy's home — with no proof of life confirmed and one imposter demand already producing an arrest. And the prosecutorial vulnerability of the Rio Rico detention: a man questioned for hours, released, his family insisting the clothing doesn't match. If charges eventually land on someone else, that detention becomes a defense exhibit. Roadside evidence collected eleven days out faces its own problems — weather, contamination, chain of custody. 
Former FBI Special Agent Robin Dreeke, who led the Bureau's Counterintelligence Behavioral Analysis Program, addresses the damage being done from outside the investigation. The Guthrie family's statements have been dissected by millions of people interpreting body language with no training and total confidence. Dreeke explains why mass observation makes innocent people look guilty, how investigators manage an avalanche of amateur theories, and what the person responsible for Nancy's disappearance experiences while watching strangers analyze them. He confronts the uncomfortable truth most viewers don't want to hear: there is an enormous gap between watching a clip on your phone and the professional expertise required to actually read human behavior. This episode puts the legal fragility and the public pressure side by side — because both are threatening the same case.
#NancyGuthrie #EricFaddis #RobinDreeke #FBIFootage #RansomNotes #GuthriePacemaker #RioRico #InternetSleuths #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePod
Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.