Alien Ancestry Appeal & The Cockroach - Final Episode of the Thomas Steven Sanders Case

Could a belief in alien ancestry save a man from the death penalty? Join us as we explore the complex legal journey of Thomas Steven Sanders, a man convicted of the brutal 2010 murders of Suellen Roberts and her daughter, Lexis Kay Roberts. We unravel the 2020 appeal led by Sanders' attorney, Sarah Gannett, who argued Sanders was too mentally incompetent to stand trial due to his delusions. Despite these claims, prosecutors argued that Sanders' premeditated actions were unmistakably clear. This critical examination sheds light on the intricate dance of determining competency in capital cases, emphasizing the profound importance of assessing a defendant's mental state before imposing the ultimate punishment.

The episode further delves into key legal strategies crucial in criminal convictions, such as the necessity of clearly invoking the right to an attorney during police interrogations. We scrutinize claims of improper suggestions during Sanders' trial and dissect the political dimensions of presidential powers in commuting federal death sentences. Through the lens of President Biden's commutation of Sanders' death sentence in December 2024, we question the broader implications these unexpected political decisions have on justice and fairness within the criminal justice system.

Emotions run high as we confront the controversial commutation of Sanders' death sentence, empathizing deeply with the victim's family while questioning the fairness of granting Sanders another chance at life. We reflect on the emotional toll these decisions impose on the families involved and the broader justice system. As we revisit these past cases, the mixed emotions and gray areas are acknowledged, underscoring our commitment to respectful and accurate storytelling. Your continued support and feedback are the guiding lights in our mission to present narratives that honor those affected by these tragic events.

This has been an elfaudio production.

Chapters

• 0:00 Legal Arguments in Sanders Appeal
• 8:40 Legal Strategies in Criminal Convictions
• 21:47 Controversy Over Commuted Death Sentence
• 31:40 Uncertainty in Sentencing Decisions

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:12

Hello and welcome back to the Sin Law Podcast. This is Kelly and we are going to do a quick recap of the last two parts of this three part yes, just three parts of this crazy wild ride of a case about Thomas Stephen Sanders. About Thomas Stephen Sanders Last episode, I believe, we ended with him officially being sentenced to death after a jury took almost seven times longer to hear and then decide for the death penalty, which meant that he was shipped off to Terre Haute I think is how you pronounce that in Illinois and he had been there since his conviction and sentencing in 2014. Now, that was due, in fact, because he well, he was admitted. Admittedly, he was a double murderer. He had killed Sue Ellen Roberts by shooting her in the back of the head with a 22 rifle and left her in an asphalt pit, and then drove her daughter, lexus k roberts, all the way to catahoula, parish, harrisonburg, louisiana, and shot her four times, but only to realize that she had not actually passed away yet. So then he slit her throat and then left her there to decompose in the woods by herself until she was found over a month later. He admitted all of this freely, willingly and with eagerness, according to all of the reports about it and from that point on it was just kind of what are we going to do in the long run? Who has jurisdiction? It took a little while to figure that out.

Speaker 1: 2:00

Once they figured it out, they did try him in federal court in Alexandria, louisiana, and the trial part itself wasn't too detailed or drawn out simply because of the fact that he had admitted to it several times and so he was guilty. That was never really the crux of the case. It was more so. Was he going to be convicted to death or spend life in prison, which is why which, like I said, it took longer for them to go through the trial of sentencing, trial and hearing and then for the jurors to decide on the death penalty and the death sentence in that case. And that's where we kind of ended and I realized that I thought I had uploaded the questions to the jurors for the mitigating factors that they were asked to complete, like the paperwork that they were asked to complete. That is no longer available online, but apparently I didn't, so I will have that up for this episode. I apologize. There'll either be a link or you'll be able to look through each page page by page on the website simlawpodcastcom. So that's where we're at as of the last episode. So, picking up here, we're going to go straight to 2014, where, on Monday, the 2nd of March of 2020. I said 2014, but 2014 was when he was convicted. We're going to go March 2nd 2020.

Speaker 1: 3:22

And that was the day that he was heard in front of a three-paneled Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and those three judges listened to his attorney, whose name was Sarah Gannett, g-a-n-n-e-t-t. She told the panel of judges that Thomas Stephen Sanders obviously was not competent and that should have been raised and a competency evaluation should have been heard prior to him standing trial. However, the other side, the US prosecutor, said, you know, nobody brought up anything about his competency until the first day of trial and that if their concerns were so great and that they were really trying to say that he was not competent to stay in trial, it would have been brought up prior to. They heard nothing about his competency before that day. Nothing about his competency before that day, and there was also never any formal motion submitted by the attorney to declare him incompetent. So there was a couple things that she threw out there, and the biggest headline that you would ever find about this was.

Speaker 1: 4:29

He said he believed that he was descended from space aliens, that his family descended from space aliens, which is laughable indeed, but also maybe not Maybe we all did, who knows no issues and a complete and utter understanding of everything that was happening and, from what I understand, was able to assist in his own defense just based on the reports that we got from different sources. But everything points to him having obvious and clear thinking and motives, because he even in his statements to the FBI even though I've never heard them, but like the reporting that I got from the trial and the people who did hear it, it's clear that he knew what he'd done. He knew what he had done was wrong and that he had purchased the bullets, the ammunition that he used to kill both of them or to assist in the killing of Lexis and to absolutely kill her mom, sue Ellen. He purchased those the day before they ever left to go on their trip. So that's premeditation and obviously that's not something that an incompetent person who was in incapable of understanding the consequences of his actions which is kind of where that like that weight of that lies he wouldn't have been able to have that clear amount of thinking to say, oh, I'm gonna need bullets tomorrow because I'm going to murder these people. No, it wouldn't have happened like that.

Speaker 1: 6:01

So the main argument or the main point of contention with the attorney in front of the judges of the appeals was that she noted about his brain injuries, his mental illness and then the fact that he is deluded simply because nobody who is in the right state of mind would say they were descended from space aliens, unless you're on drugs. You know that's the whole other side of that and according to his arrest history, he was arrested for drug paraphernalia and other things in the time that he was declared dead. So I mean, take that for whatever it may be within yourself. So the first big argument was that he was not competent. The second one was that because of the lack of competency, hearing before trial he obviously no one knows if he was even able to receive the death penalty, because you know, even in cases where they find them guilty, you can't and we don't as a society put someone to death because they were unable to understand the consequences or what repercussions could come of their actions. So someone in the throes of a schizophrenic episode can't be put to death because their illness was not managed.

Speaker 1: 7:13

But that was the other argument. Was that because they failed to get that competency, hearing, we don't know if he was even eligible to be heard or to be sentenced to the death penalty, because maybe if he had been, he would have had reduced capacity and then maybe then he wouldn't have been able to be sentenced to the death penalty at all. So that's another reason they had to overturn it. Now, again, the defense, or the I'm sorry, the prosecution, you know they argued well, nobody brought it up, nobody said anything about it until the first day of trial. So you can't expect us to believe that there was any kind of weight or assault to that argument when nobody said anything about it before the day of trial. That another point for them to overturn the death sentence was that the questioning of Thomas Stephen Sanders in his initial interview was such that he had asked for an attorney and they continued to ask him questions even after he had requested an attorney. However, again, the prosecution came back and stated well, he was so eager and that was the word they used, was eager to admit to these killings that it was unclear about his request. And now this is one of those points that you know it's a hot topic crime community simply because a lot of people or a lot of interviews that happen.

Speaker 1: 8:41

You will hear people who are being questioned say do you think I should get an attorney? Do you think I should talk with an attorney? Asking that in a question format does not mean that you have invoked your right to an attorney. I know, I know, don't. Look, there are different Supreme Court rulings, there are different things.

Speaker 1: 8:58

All of this is it's very liquid because it's a very specific request that needs to be made. It is not a wishy-washy I don't know, maybe I should have an attorney in here, kind of like dropping the what is it? Passive-aggressive type statement, saying I don't know, maybe I should talk to an attorney first. But you say something like that. That does not mean at that point they can no longer question you. It has to be clear and concise and it has to be a request to quit the interview before speaking anymore without the advice of an attorney, so saying something like well, maybe I should, maybe I should have an attorney with me. Or maybe do you guys think, what should I do? Should I have? Shouldn't I talk to an attorney about this? All of those things do not meet that required standard as it is now. So that's one of those things that a lot of people try to argue.

Speaker 1: 9:47

Well, he said something about an attorney, then you should get him an attorney. That's not what that means. He questioned, he's wishy-washy, he's not clear, it's unclear, it's not concise. So that's what the prosecution in this case specifically said that he was unclear in his decision or request for an attorney. So therefore they proceeded with questioning and he was eager to continue admitting to his faults and what he had done. I believe in one of the articles I read he even said, quote I can't believe it took you guys this long to catch me Like the balls right. That's not the incompetent thinking of a mentally deranged person. That's not something someone would say if they didn't know what the hell was going on.

Speaker 1: 10:33

So, moving on, the next one said that there was a potential. This one wasn't too big a deal, but they did say that there was a potential juror who was asked about their ability to pass judgment based on their religious beliefs. They were saying that that juror should have been dismissed outright. But nothing really came of that one. And then there was another one which I found interesting was that they said that the defense argued that an appeal should be granted simply because of the fact that when they were in closing arguments that the federal prosecution had made an insinuation or kind of an improper suggestion that the defendant Sanders had committed some sort of sexual abuse on Lexis, because of the quote unknown horrors that she must have suffered prior to her death.

Speaker 1: 11:31

And just because you take it one way doesn't mean somebody else is going to take it one way. And the unknown horrors could have simply been the fact that he shot her mother directly in front of her while she sat on a blanket, thinking they were taking a stop off so that her mother could practice shooting with a, with a gun. Um, the unknown horrors could have been that she had to do that and then ride in a car with this man for how many hours across states and states and states before going down this dark, secluded road to meet her death and then to have still been alive after he shot her four times those horrors. There didn't have to be any improper suggestion of any others, those were bad enough. So that was kind of, you know, in my that would have been glossed over because that you can't be responsible or be held responsible for someone taking a quote of unknown horrors to mean something other than what the evidence has presented, because, as a juror, that's what you're instructed to do. You're not supposed to take in any of your assumptions or your guesses. You're supposed to take in what evidence has been presented. So to say that the prosecution and the attorney in his closing statement had made some kind of improper suggestion, there was nothing improper about that. The little girl did suffer unknown horrors and things that we people might not ever understand, and they're unknown to us because we've never had to go through it. Nothing improper about that, in my opinion.

Speaker 1: 13:03

So that was in 2020, on March 2nd in 2020, and from that point forward until just recently and up until I released this first episode, I had not planned on releasing anything about the Thomas Stephen Sanders case until December 23rd of 2024. Why that day? That sounds, you know, insignificant, other than it's two days before Christmas. But anybody who's watched anything in the news or, if you haven't been living under a rock, everybody knows that Trump won the election, which we're not going to get political here, don't even start. But what we are going to talk about is the fact that he was doing a lot of his. I don't know what they call it. Honestly, I'm not. Again, I don't do the politics thing. I try to stay out of that as much as possible but he was, you know, doing a lot of his welcome speeches and you're going to be the next president, speeches and things. So it's the end of the year, right, he's gonna take in, take over here pretty soon. So he's doing inauguration. There we go, that's the one.

Speaker 1: 14:12

So speeches, and as president, you have certain rights. When you're about to leave the office, you have a certain power to be able to do things such as commute federal death sentences which, like I said, unless you've been living around Iraq, you know exactly where this is going, because Biden did something even more insane than I could have ever guessed. Again, I'm not trying to be political, I'm just like on a human level, this is not something that I would have thought that any president would ever do, because it kind of is the biggest middle finger to our justice system that I can think of or that I can recall in past years that it just doesn't make any sense to me. But on December 23rd of 2024, biden commuted 20, or? I'm sorry, I'm going to back up. On the 23rd of December, he commuted 37 of the 40, so all but three federal death sentence cases. He commuted every single one of those 37, men and or women. I'm not sure if there were any women, I don't think so, but 37 federal death sentence cases were commuted to life sentences on the 23rd of December.

Speaker 1: 15:35

Now I do kind of live under a rock. I don't have cable, I don't have like local channels, I don't have an antenna or anything like that, so the news that I get usually comes from what I happen to see come across my desktop, either at work or the radio, or you know. I also, especially for this case, the Thomas Stephen Sanders case because I have been waiting on the appeal verdict, the appeal judgment, the appeal ruling, as it were, since I heard about this case, which would have been back in 2022-ish, but I have been waiting on news of his appeal. So I set up these cool things called Google Alerts, which some of you may know what they are, some of you may not, but you can set up on a Google account. If you have a Gmail or any kind of Google account, you can set up an alert, which basically just means anytime that the parameters of whatever you're wanting to input say it's a name like Thomas Stephen Sanders, you put in that as your hot word keyword and anytime something pops up within the Google universe, it sends you an alert or an email. Mine comes straight to my email and I think it comes I think it's up to twice a day. If something occurs or something pops up with that name in it, they send you a link to whatever has to do with that name.

Speaker 1: 17:04

Now, sometimes I've had a couple misfires, you know, over the last couple years that have come up and you know, for whatever reason, somebody ran another story or it was mentioned in something else. That's how I found a lot of the resources that I have, for this case is simply because I've had those Google alerts pop up. But since 2020, nothing has really come about other than the updates and the fact that they're still waiting on the appellate ruling. Right All the way up until Christmas. The day of Christmas, the 25th, I got a Google alert about Thomas Stephen Sanders and his the fact that his federal death sentence had been commuted by Biden. Enough, trump had actually name dropped specifically name dropped Thomas Stephen Sanders in his speech about trying to fix this egregious wrongdoing by Biden in commuting these sentences. So that's how I found out and I lost my ever loving mind, simply because and again this is not anything to do with political but I had been waiting for years to hear what an appellate court or the appellate judges would decide in this case.

Speaker 1: 18:14

And you're now you're telling me that it's, that, it's done, that it's over, that it's like just do they just get rid of it now? Like what the hell happens to the appeal? What happens? And then I go and I'm looking at this long list, this laundry list of crimes committed by these people that Biden has commuted, and it made me sick to my stomach. I have them saved and I can't even go through all of them.

Speaker 1: 18:39

There was the one that stands out in my mind, outside of Thomas Stephen Sanders, which I already knew everything about his case, which is bad enough. But there was another man, or two men, I think. Both of them were on the death row waiting to be put to death because they had murdered a family of five and left them on the side of the highway. And, like, these are the people that you have commuted to life sentences after a jury of their peers, like everybody has done all the work to get them to this point and now none of that is relevant. Basically, you're just saying that all of the money, time and energy that everyone has spent on every single one of these 37 cases no telling how much money, even though that has little to do with it but the victims families have been put through all of this, only to come back and say none of it mattered.

Speaker 1: 19:18

My god, I can't think of anything more, just disappointing. I don't even know the best word to use here. It's heartbreaking for those families, it's. It basically is like you, you you've done these, these people have made the decision and then nothing about our justice system has anything to do with it, because I'm this one man show that is now saying that they're all you know. Nope, you go ahead and go to life. We'll keep paying you for years and years, and years and years, and the decision that was made is no longer valid, and so on and so forth. So it's been a big deal in the news and in everything that Trump has been talking about, it's been one of his major sticking points talking about the injustice and the unfairness of the whole thing, of the commuting of these 37 criminals.

Speaker 1: 20:13

And before before this, on in December of last year, I hadn't been able to get any kind of updates and I was actually, you know, just kind of cruising on that and I had other episodes and things lined up. But when I saw that on Christmas I said, oh man, man, now I gotta do it. Now I gotta get back into this guy's head in this world of just disgusting awfulness, because now I don't have anything to wait for, I have no reason to put it off, because now he's been commuted and he's gonna spend the rest of his life in a really cozy and I say cozy, I don't know how those are, but like's going to spend the rest of his life in a really cozy. When I say cozy, I don't know how those are, but like a federal prison for the rest of his life. And sure enough, I logged into the inmate search and instead of death sentence as a release date, it now states life for Thomas Stephen Sanders, registered number 15967-043. That's his inmate number for the federal prison and he's located at the Terre Haute facility still, but instead of being a death sentence case, it has now been commuted to life and that's where it sits at this point. So I'm going to include a link to be able to see the full list of Biden's death row commutations so that you guys can look through that if you like, and to be able to see that. I think they also have a link inside of that site that'll be linked in the show notes down below, but you'll be able to go see exactly what that means and what that entails.

Speaker 1: 21:48

And the fact that this has happened has been, like I said, it's been a pretty hot topic at this point. I think that a lot of people have a lot of things to say about it, and there's a lot of argument for the right to do something like this, and how just it. To me, it seems unfair, it seems unjust, it seems like everything about that is wrong in my opinion, and the only reason I say that is because what, what do we have all of these practices and and in place for, if not to do the job that has now been undone? It just seems absolutely bananas to me. Now I'm going to read a little bit from the. I have a page that I saved and it's from Catahoula Parish, the Catahoula News Booster.

Speaker 1: 22:49

Actually, they wrote a piece on the Alexis K Roberts murder and Thomas Stephen Sanders and Biden commuting his death sentence, and this was released on January 8th of 2025. The title of the article is Biden commuted death sentence and Catahoula murder and at the bottom of the first page which it was on on the front page, but at the bottom there is a picture of Lexus K and I'll put this on my website as well so you can see and it says by the picture. Next to the picture it says thank you to the good people of Catahoula Parish from the family of Lexus K Roberts, and I just thought that was incredibly heart-wrenching because, with everything else that happened and with everything else that is happening, um, it just hurts to see you. You know, they still, you know, as much as it feels like the world must be crumbling around them hearing this news, they still wanted to show their appreciation for the work that was done by the people in Catahoula Parish and I'm sure they did the same thing with the FACES group down in Baton Rouge and LSU FACES Lab and it just it hurt my heart to see it, but at the same time it, you know, it reminds you that it's real, I guess. And in the article specifically it says it talks about. You know, does the recap of everything. He was a dead man walking for the second time now, because this guy and I have I, and from henceforth I will not ever say that his nickname is Spider, but this man is a fucking cockroach. So that's what his nickname is. It's not Spider, it's Cockroach, because we can't squish him. Nothing is being. He's unsquishable. And this article says basically the same thing. Thomas Sanders is a dead man walking for the second time, Convicted and sentenced to death for a 2010 Cattle of Paris murder.

Speaker 1: 24:51

His life was spared when President Biden decided to commute his sentence. He was arrested, convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of 12-year-old Alexis Roberts. He abandoned his family and was declared dead in 1994. He abandoned his family and was declared dead in 1994. And then in 2010, when they found the body, he then was, you know, arrested in 2014 or tried in 2014. He was arrested later that year, in 2010., and he was going to be put to death for the brutal kidnapping and murder. And the jury heard 18 total witnesses called by the US and by the defense, and they determined that this death sentence was appropriate after they deliberated for seven hours. The judge was United States District Judge DD Drell, which I thought was pretty like. I love alliteration, so DDD was pretty cool, but he presided over the trial and this case represented the first time the first time that the death penalty was imposed in a federal court in the Western District of Louisiana. The penalty phase began on the 16 district of louisiana. The penalty phase began on the 16th of september in 2014 and, after they found him guilty because he used the firearm during the crime resulting in death and the kidnapping charge, they ended up sentencing him to death. Even though it only took an hour for them to get to the guilty verdict, it took them over seven to get to the death penalty.

Speaker 1: 26:25

So the again the article goes over. It's a two page, like the entire second page is nothing but um, this, this talk of this case, and it goes on to you know, revisit every detail of the case. And they were coming back from Arizona. They pulled over to the side of the road. He shot at her mom, kept her captive in the car, drove to Catahoula Parish and then left her there until they they found her body and recovered her in October of 2010, and then they found out that the sequence of events that led up to the murder, how law enforcement established that it was Sanders, how they realized or came to realize that he had been legally declared dead. And then it even goes on to talk about the fact that they knew her throat was cut simply because of the fact that the base of her skull, at the spinal cord, at the base of her skull, had slice marks in the bone in which, if nothing else goes to show you the complete and utter brutality of this man, and then leaving her there to be found. Even he admitted in one of his interviews. He admitted that she didn't deserve that direct quote. She did not deserve that.

Speaker 1: 27:43

And the assistant attorney general at the trial, after after everything was said and done and after the defense had been opposed, said something along the lines of it was heartbreaking. The case was heartbreaking in that her life quote her life cut tragically short by a senseless, brutal murder, and we hope today's verdict will help Lex's family as they continue to struggle with the loss of their loved ones. Unquote. 14 years after they decided that he deserved the death sentence, biden has now given him another chance to live, something Lexis never got, which in and of itself is heartbreaking. He doesn't deserve that Quote. He doesn't deserve that. He never gave her a chance, didn't give sue ellen a chance. Nothing about this man says that he deserved to have his life sentence commuted.

Speaker 1: 28:52

And I usually, like I said, I usually try to stay out of anything political because I think it's just um a shit show of a conversation, because everybody's entitled to their opinion. You're allowed to believe in it, I'm allowed to not believe in it. If that's the case, I don't know where I stand. I think it, case by case, it differs and my opinion changes depending on the situation. So I think that that's why we have the country and the justice system and the beliefs that we do as a whole, and why it has to be held at a certain standard and have a certain amount of staying power. But then something like this happens. That just throws my whole brain into a whirlwind of what the actual fuck I mean. None of it screams to me. Oh yeah, that makes sense. None of it. So how can we stand by the decisions that we make as a country and as a whole and believe in our justice system if this is something that can come back after 14 years and come back again to haunt a family, to be dragged back through this whole thing again.

Speaker 1: 29:55

However, I'm going to wrap this up here pretty quick and this is going to be the shortest of the three episodes, I believe, but I'm sure you guys are grateful for that, even if you're not entirely grateful for the fact that I was late and had issues. But the good news is if you want to call it good news, just news that from what I understand and for I can't say with any kind of authority or certainty, but I don't think this is the end. I don't believe that I happen to know that conversations are being had in more places than one. I know that things are always being discussed and decisions being made. Just based on my knowledge of the case and what he was charged with and found guilty of and sentenced and convicted with, I believe that that jurisdiction thing we talked about so much about the federal or local or state case or a federal case I think that's going to come back into play to play and I think that there are people employed by our now President Trump that are intelligent enough to be able to maybe, if not fix, maybe correct a mistake or this slap in the face to the families of the victims and maybe, maybe this won't be the end of it and maybe Thomas Stephen Sanders will actually get what he rightfully deserves and what he deserved a long time ago.

Speaker 1: 31:41

And I don't know if that's the right thing, because this is where I get wishy-washy again. This is me being opinionated and not even having a sure-footed opinion. I can't put ten toes down in one way or the other, because I don't know if that's something that the family wants to go through again. I don't know if that would be something that they would be okay with or dedicated to. I fully, full, wholeheartedly believe that there's something that should be. You know, some things that shouldn't be changed. Or I think that the juries and prosecutors and everybody got it right the first time. It should have been left the fuck alone.

Speaker 1: 32:12

But I also believe that, you know, maybe it's, maybe it's more than needs to be dredged up again. And I don't know. And, like I said, that's one of those things that I can't be sure about it at all, because part of me wants to be like no, hang him. The other part wants to be like no, maybe not put the family through that. No, don't waste the money or the time or the energy on that. He doesn't deserve that either, but it goes back and forth. There's such a gray area in between for me that I can't be sure. So my opinion is I don't have one and that I'll wait to see, and if something else comes up and something else occurs in this case, for this case, around this case, I will absolutely give you guys an update, even if it's just a quick minute, and make sure that everybody stays updated. If something does happen or something does change, and that's going to be the end of our saga, uh, even though I don't know if saga's right because trilogy, because it's only three, but regardless, um, the end of the stahom and steven sanders case, for now question mark is right here. So before I leave, though, if you've made it this far, I I just want to throw out there.

Speaker 1: 33:24

There's a couple things that I think are pretty cool that have happened. I've had a couple of people reach out to me here recently. One of them is from one of the very first cases that I ever did. I think it was episode three or four, I don't know way back. A family member has reached out to me, and I look forward to speaking with her in regards to that case, and I might be able to bring you guys some interesting updates, tidbits from that, depending on her level of comfort and speaking, and she, but yeah, she reached out to me through the website, which I think is really awesome. And we had another family member from the another case, a big one that I did I think I did four parts on that one but they've also reached out and want to speak with me, and I think the one thing that I want to say in regards to any family member or anyone who reaches out to me in any way, I love, absolutely love, hearing feedback. I want people to tell me how my episodes have come across, how they've made you feel, if there's something that I can change, if there's something I can correct.

Speaker 1: 34:22

I've had others write and say that they didn't appreciate this or this or that, and I have edited and turned it right back around, thrown it back out without uh pieces and sections that they were uncomfortable with or they didn't appreciate, and I am okay. I still love that feedback as well. I don't ever want to have something being presented to the world even if the world never hears it. Oh, you know, understand what I'm saying, though, like I don't, and want to have something being presented to the world, even if the world never hears it. You know understand what I'm saying, though, like I don't and never have wanted anything that I do on this podcast to be taken by anyone, family or otherwise, in a way that is hurtful, degrading or disrespectful, and that's why feedback matters, and so it's important to me.

Speaker 1: 35:02

The the most recent contacts that I've had have been nothing but reassuring for me, because I do my absolute best and I do put in diligent amount of time, effort and energy into research and getting the information and presenting it in a way that is not going to be disrespectful, but it's also going to be as close to accurate. If I can't figure out or base my information that I'm talking about, in fact, in truth, I'm not going to say it and I feel like a lot of that work has really paid off, because the feedback that I've been, mostly that I have got, I would say like a 98 percentile range has been great, has been appreciative, has been. You know has been great, has been appreciative, has been. You know they have re, they have encouraged and you know reiterated how they appreciate the fact that it is as close to the truth as it could possibly be. I mean, some people they have their things, the little bits here and there that I didn't actually speculate on. I didn't make any kind of assumptions, I just kind of left it open and they wanted to give me more information on that side of things, but none of it was about you know, you got this wrong, you said this wrong. This is the wrong thing. That didn't happen and that makes me feel so reassured in that I'm doing the right thing, that I'm doing a good job, and I just want to say from the bottom of my heart and from every part of me, thank you so much for that feedback.

Speaker 1: 36:29

If nothing else, I just appreciate that I'm getting it right, not because that that's a sticking point for me, but because I don't want to present something that isn't right, that isn't correct, that isn't true, and that's a lot of issue that I had with some of the other podcasts that I've listened to is that they speculate a lot or they make a lot of assumptions and things, and I refuse. I refuse to do that. If I'm going to say that I don't know or like if it's something that I'm unsure about, you guys know it, it's not like I'm putting something out there that you guys are like oh, is that true or not true? I don't know if that was her opinion or it was a fact. You don't have to question that. I'll let you know so, and I hope that that's something that you guys can appreciate in me as well.

Speaker 1: 37:10

So, having said all that, make sure you guys check out the website sinlawpodcastcom. It's got all of the extras, tidbits, pictures, documents, everything, and I'll make sure, by the time this episode gets out I believe on Tuesday that everything is available and ready to be clicked on, as it should be, and I apologize for not having that other step up that I said I would prior to now. And then, if you have a minute to drop by and throw me an email or anything like that, just let me know how these are being received. That's great too, if not, just keep listening. I appreciate every single one of you. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you for your your like. I don't know why some of you still have stuck around, just because I I know I missed a lot of months there. I had to. It wasn't a choice I made, but it's. You know, it comes down to your job or hobby. Job comes first, family comes first, so I appreciate you guys sticking with me, though. Thank you so, so much. I appreciate you guys Take care out there. Thank you so much for listening to the Sin Law Podcast.

Speaker 1: 38:20

This episode was written, researched, edited and produced by your host, kelly. Any reference made in the episode can be found in the source material, in the episode show notes, and even more information, including photos, video links and other extras, can be found on our websites at cinlawpodcastcom that's C-E-N-L-A-W podcastcom, p-e-n-l-a-w podcastcom. Also on our podcast website. You can find any blog posts or past episode information on there, as well as sign up for email updates from us every time a new episode drops. You can also, and we invite you to, follow us on our social platforms on TikTok, youtube and Twitter. All of those are also linked in the show notes, as well as just a quick away on the website on sinlawpodcastcom. You can always reach us by email at sinlawpodcast at gmailcom. If you would like to be a supporter of the show, just search for us on Patreon. The lowest tier starts at five, the highest is $15 per month, and this includes lots of early episodes, unedited episodes, bloopers, other stuff just a lot of bonus content that is exclusive to Patreon members and, as always, take care out there.