Ep 100: Kouri Richins Greed Leads to Murder, Week 5: Nancy Guthrie Missing, Rex Heuermann’s Disturbing Web History and More!

The murder trial of a Utah mother turned grief author continued this week as prosecutors

zeroed in on her mounting debt as the motive behind her husband's alleged poisoning.

Plus, the search for Nancy Guthrie enters a new month, yet authorities maintain their

making progress with a dedicated homicide unit now working alongside the FBI and thousands

of leads still being pursued, and a Georgia jury delivers swift justice in the case

against a father accused of enabling his teenage son to carry out a deadly school shooting.

All this and more, this week, uncorning confidential.

Lots for us to dive into this week as always, we are honored you have chosen us to bring

you these updates.

I'm your host, Joshua Ritter, an award-winning Los Angeles prosecutor turned criminal defense

attorney with over 20 years experience navigating the criminal justice system, bringing you

my unique insights from both sides of the courtroom.

Today is Friday, March 6, 2026, and this is the 100th episode of courtroom confidential

weekly roundup.

Let's jump in.

This week, in Corey Richen's murder trial, prosecutors focused on finances as the motive

for why she poisoned her husband, Eric Richens, with a fatal dose of fentanyl in 2022.

The state went back to when Richens launched Kay Richens Realty, a house flipping business

in 2019.

Forensic accountant Brooke Carrington said startup funds came in part from a $250,000 home

equity line of credit secured by the couple's home, allegedly taken out using a power of

attorney without Eric's knowledge.

Carrington said the business grew exponentially between 2019 and 2022, but Richens was buying

more properties and taking on increasing debt leading up to 2022.

Taking the stand Wednesday, Robert Josh Grossman told jurors he moved from South Carolina

to Utah and began a relationship with Richens while she was still married.

He testified that she allowed him to live in homes she purchased as he worked on them.

On the stand Thursday, Corey's best friend, Chelsea Barney, testified that Corey told

her about Eric's reaction to the line of credit.

In text messages between the friends shown by prosecutors, Corey wrote, quote, if I die,

Eric did it.

Becky Lloyd, who worked at Eric's stone masonry business, later took the stand and testified

about it.

December 2021 conversation she had with Corey, she claimed to have felt, quote, trapped

in her marriage, adding it would be better if he was dead.

Court will resume Monday with the state hoping to close out its last witness next week.

What's happening here?

We've heard a lot of folks describe the motive in this case, including the prosecution

as being money or money struggles.

I think it's actually more than that though.

It's not just about money.

If it were simply about money, many people have money problems.

Many people get upside down on business pursuits and she had a husband who is incredibly successful

that she could have gone to and said, listen, my business is struggling.

I need help.

I need money.

But she didn't.

Why?

Why didn't she go to him for help?

Why wasn't she honest with him about her financial struggles?

Because this wasn't just about money.

It was about prestige for her, it was about her building something independent of him.

It was about her feeling like she was independently successful from her husband.

She wanted something of her own, but she couldn't get that without stealing or cheating

her way to get there.

Money is a very powerful motivator, but sometimes pride is even more powerful.

Friends and boyfriends also make powerful witnesses.

In this case, we've seen several take the stand showing how people in her orbit were

continually pulled into her web.

They were misled.

They were deceived.

They were made to play a role in her sick and murderous scheme unbeknownst to what

she was up to.

Now these folks helped move the ball forward for the prosecution.

They obviously added evidence.

They gave flavor to the entire story arc.

They filled in the gaps.

But I will say this, from the prosecution's perspective, it is never a bad thing if

along the way, improving someone's guilt, you happen to prove that they were also an

awful person.

I think that's why some of these witnesses are more impactful than just the testimony

that they are giving, because they're giving us an insight into who Cory Richens actually

was.

It's powerful when the reality of a person of the defendant is very different from the

person that they tried to portray both before, outside of the courtroom, and while inside

of the courtroom.

Both in her business, dealings, and in her conduct inside of the court, Cory wants

to present a certain image.

Even when the defendant is not taking the stand, they are still testifying.

They're still to star witness in their own trial, if you think about it.

We've heard from her.

We've seen her recorded on video.

We've seen her record, we've heard her recorded in audio.

We've heard from others things that she said, things that she did, text messages that she

wrote, all of this, including her own conduct in court is essentially her testimony.

And what we're finding out is that the person she wanted to portray, this sweet mother,

life, struggling with marital issues, trying to build this business, was not in fact who

she was.

She was lying, she was deceitful, she was conniving.

She was already breaking the law, already committing financial crimes.

All in this pursuit of, like I said before, not so much money, I think that's oversimplifying

it.

But this life that she imagined for herself, and that's why jurors, I think, are going

to have a less difficult time understanding how this person who may be sitting in court

in the sweaters, presenting this image of an innocent person while that person is in fact

someone willing to commit murder.

But what do you guys think?

Where can the defense go from here?

That's my question to you.

If you're putting on the defense attorney hat, what do you do next?

Please let us know in the comments.

As the search for Nancy Guthrie drags on to a new month, Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos

says investigators are making progress.

Speaking with NBC News on March 2, Nanos said a dedicated homicide unit team is now working

alongside the FBI and that authorities are operating under the belief that the 84-year-old

mother of today co-anchor Savannah Guthrie is still alive.

While they continue to pursue thousands of leads, Nanos said there is still information

authorities have not made public.

There's so much that everybody wants to know, right?

But I would be very neglectful, irresponsible, as a police law enforcement leader, to share

that with everybody.

We have information on this case that we think is going to hopefully lead us to solving

this case.

But it takes time.

In another interview with local station KVOA, if Sheriff's Nanos said the gloves recovered

near Guthrie's home belonged to a restaurant employee with no connection to her disappearance.

Other gloves sent to a Florida lab could be different and DNA testing may take a while.

The Monday, Savannah, her sister Annie and Annie's husband, Tomaso, placed flowers in a

card at a growing memorial outside their mother's Tucson area home.

The handwritten note read, though we are surrounded by so much darkness and uncertainty, our

love burns bright.

We love you, mommy.

We miss you so much.

The family has offered a $1 million reward for information leading to her return.

What's happening here?

Well, let's first be honest, they've had the cell tower information.

They've had time to look for surveillance cameras.

That would have yielded results by now.

A month in, that's time.

That's time to dig through all that data.

That's time to go and find those cameras.

That's time to look for all of that footage.

We don't have results, or at least positive results.

The initial DNA that they had that they were helpful about has yielded no-codeous hits.

Even initial detentions of people, we heard about one person detained a couple of weeks

ago.

That person's been let go.

Three other people detained about a week after that.

Those people have been let go.

Again, it seems like those detentions came up short.

This investigation may not be cold, but let's be honest, it's in dire straits.

Now let's be hopeful.

I've said this before, Brian Cobrager took 47 days before they had somebody in custody.

That's something to keep in mind.

What we have in this case that we didn't have in the Cobrager case is that videotape that

surveillance, that's tremendous information.

That is literally the person caught on video who committed this crime.

They had less to work on in Cobrager at the same time.

They have at last count over 40,000 tips in this case, and they have now one million

reasons for someone to come forward.

Those are all reasons to be hopeful.

But let's be honest, again, this sheriff is simply not up to the job.

He needs to step aside.

He needs to step aside and just be clear with everyone that the FBI is taking over this

investigation and that they're involved.

They can provide support, but that the FBI is the ones who are heading up this investigation.

With nothing more than from a PR perspective, because every time it seems like he opens

his mouth, we feel less confident about the status of this investigation.

Even his most recent words don't instill us with confidence that he has any direction in

this investigation, that this investigation is zeroing in on any suspects or any leads

in maintaining this now what is sounding like, unfortunately, false hope about whether

or not Nancy Guthrie can be returned alive.

It's not doing anyone any favors at this point, but what do you all think?

Does this sheriff need to go?

Please let us know in the comments.

On Tuesday, in a landmark case, a Georgia jury found a father criminally responsible for

a school shooting carried out by his son, Colin Gray, age 55, was convicted on all 27

charges, including second-degree murder in connection with the September 4, 2024 mass

shooting at Appalachia High School.

His son, Colt Gray, is charged with gunning down two students and two teachers using an

AR-15 style rifle kept in their home.

The jury deliberated for less than two hours.

Gray showed no visible emotion as the verdicts were read.

He faces up to 243 years in prison.

Prosecutors argued Gray ignored warning signs and allowed his son access to the high

capacity weapon.

Jurors were shown images of Colt's bedroom, which had photos of Parkland school shooter

Nicholas Cruz on the wall.

Gray's estranged wife and Colt's mother, Marcy Gray, testified that a week before the

2024 shooting, she read about the cases of James and Jennifer Crembley who were convicted

of manslaughter after their son carried out the 2021 Oxford High School shooting.

She then called Colin, asking him to put away his unsecured guns to prevent their son

from accessing them.

He declined to do so because he didn't want to deal with the, quote, S storm that would

ensue.

Colt Gray, who is 14 at the time, remains in custody and has not yet been given a trial

date.

The four victims were Mason Schumerhorn, age 14, Christian and Gulo, age 14, Richard Aspenwahl,

age 39, and Christina Erami, age 53.

What's happening here?

This is a resounding verdict, two hours less than, less than two hours in a case of this

complexity.

I mean, putting aside the incredibly complex and nuanced issues at play here, there were

27 different counts.

That is a jury who was completely convinced.

That was a jury that was convinced before they stepped foot in that deliberation room.

And it was a jury that took a look around at each other and quickly decided we don't

need to waste much time going through the motions here.

We all know how we feel about this case guilty on every single count, including murder.

And that's what makes this case so groundbreaking murder for the first time.

Think about this for the first time a parent has been found guilty, not of child neglect,

not of improperly stowing a weapon, not even of involuntary manslaughter.

For the first time, a parent has been found guilty of murder for the independent actions

of their child.

How did they get there?

How were they so convinced?

It's this idea of what we call implied malice murder.

Murder requires malice of fourth thought.

That can be expressed through someone's actions, through someone's words, or it can be implied.

And in this case, they found that it was implied by Colin Gray's conscious disregard.

His knowing and conscious ignoring, disregarding of things that a reasonable person would

take action on, his son's mental health issues, his son's access to weapons.

And what put them over the edge that they were so convinced in this case?

Well, you have a severely troubled young man, person who needed help, person who's already

exhibited violence, person that you've already been warned about both from the authorities

and others that he's a problem.

And you add to that mix in this sick formula that he has access to weapons.

We've seen this before in the crumbly case that's been referenced many times in comparison

to this case.

But this one was worse.

Here the weapon that he had access to was what's being described as an AR-15-style rifle.

It's very deadly, and it can carry a high capacity amount of ammunition.

And it was stored, if you even want to call it that, with unfettered access for his son,

not locked away, not put it even in his own room, just in a closet where anybody could

have grabbed it.

And he was warned about the dangers.

He was told by not only his wife, a week or so ahead of this, the mother of cold, that

this is a problem you need to remove those weapons.

But even the FBI had been out there earlier, concerned about perhaps him making threats in

Colin ignored all of that.

He conscientiously disregarded all of that.

But I'll tell you what I think really did it, what really put them over the edge, what

really made these jurors not take a whole bunch of time to think about this case.

It was those pictures on the wall.

How much more of a red flag can you even imagine than a young person who's already troubled

has access to weapons and has a picture of a school shooter on his wall?

So where do we go from here?

What are the lessons to be learned from this?

The criminal law is all about lines, lines being drawn, clear demarcations between what

is not criminal and what is criminal conduct.

We have to have it that way.

We have to have people all notice as to what they're doing and if that is criminal.

What is the lesson then to be taken away from this?

If you have weapons in the home, is it you must secure them?

Perhaps that's part of it.

Or is it if you have a troubled young person in your home that you must take it seriously?

Perhaps that's part of it as well.

Why are we struggling to figure out what exactly is the line though?

Because end of the day, this is a person being held responsible for the independent

actions of another person.

No one is saying that Colin Gray handed his son a rifle that day.

No one is saying that Colin Gray drove his son to the school and said, go do what you

need to do.

No one is saying that he was aware of what was going to take place.

This is not a conspiracy to commit murder case.

This is not an aider and a better theory in this case.

He had no knowledge of what was going on.

This is not like other cases that it's being compared to.

This is not like cases where we've seen gross violations of building in safety codes

in a fire takes place and somebody's held responsible for those deaths.

This is not even like cases that we've seen before where a person owns a vicious dog

that's attacked people in the past and now it attacks and kills someone and that person's

held responsible.

This is not even like the crumbly case where they were found guilty of an involuntary

manslaughter.

This is an independent person making their own decisions, 14 years old or not.

This is a young man who without telling his father, without his father's knowledge,

hiding it from his father, went out, got that weapon, disguised it, hit it, brought it

to school and committed an incredible act of murder.

And we're saying that someone else could be held responsible for that murder in addition

to him, but someone else should be held responsible for that murder.

What do you guys think?

Do you think that we're headed in the right direction with these series of cases or not?

Please let us know in the comments.

Before we dive into the other cases making headlines this week, I have one small favor

to ask you and that is if you haven't already, please take a moment to subscribe to this

channel now.

It's completely free and it's a great way to support the channel.

We want to continue to bring you the highest quality content that we possibly can and the

best way that we can do that is through your support.

Also making headlines, new court filings this week revealed chilling details in the case

against the alleged Long Island serial killer, prosecutors say Rex Huerman contacted at

least 60 sex workers, more than 500 times in the four years before his 2023 arrest.

According to Tuesday's filing, investigators also found he searched for images of victims'

family members, quote, mourning the deceased along with pornographic snuff films depicting

murder and bruised and impaled women.

A Suffolk police detective concluded that more than 1,000 searches reviewed by investigators

showed clear evidence Huerman was a sexual satis who derived pleasure from the pain of

others.

Prosecutors say Huerman also used a burner phone to contact sex workers and made recurring

payments to a Tinder account under aliases including Andrew Roberts and Thomas Hawk.

A filing comes as prosecutors ask a judge to deny defense motion seeking to suppress key

evidence, including cell phone and email data, to dismiss a second degree murder charge

in the 1993 killing of Sandra Castilla.

Huerman, aged 62, has pled not guilty to 10 charges tied to the killings of Melissa Bartholomey,

Amberlin Castello, Megan Waterman, Marine Brainerd Barnes, Jessica Taylor, Valerie Mack

and Sandra Castilla.

His next hearing is on March 17th.

Thank God this monster was captured because it think it's becoming abundantly clear he was

never going to stop.

The fate of a Michigan man charged with murdering his wife is now in the hands of the jury.

Dale Warner is accused of killing his wife D Warner in 2021.

Her family reported her missing in April of 2021, but it wasn't until 2024 that investigators

found her body sealed in a fertilizer tank on the Warner family property during closing

arguments on Thursday defense attorneys said there isn't enough evidence to prove

that Dale actually committed the crime.

If you consider premeditation, it does not exist here because if he had premeditated

this killing, he would have had the items that he needed already.

He would have had the welding.

He would have had the tank.

He would have had the wheels.

He wouldn't be gathering those on April 25th.

In their rebuttal, the prosecution told jurors this, you've heard about her injuries.

One, two, three, four, how many chances did he get to think about it?

Then she was strangled to death, five, how many chances did he get to think about what

he was doing?

Let's assume three or four knocks her out, five, she's unconscious, what do you do?

Help her help, right?

Please defend it, duct taped her mouth and her nose so that she could not breathe again.

Those were all conscious decisions.

As of the time of this recording, a verdict has not been reached.

It's an incredibly brutal way for someone to meet their end and even more nightmarish

when you think that it was at the hands of someone they once loved.

An Amish mother accused of drowning her four-year-old son in attempting to harm her other children

was found not guilty by reason of insanity.

Ruth Miller faced seven charges, seming from the August 23rd, 2025 incident at Atwood Lake

in Ohio.

Police body camera footage showed her telling officers her young son and husband were

at the bottom of the lake and had, quote, been swallowed by a fish.

Authorities said that after drowning her son, she attempted to harm her three teenage children

by driving a golf cart into the water with them inside.

Miller entered an insanity plea and chose a bench trial leaving the decision to the

judge.

There were no opening statements, witnesses or closing arguments.

The judge relied on forensic psychological and psychiatric reports, witness statements

and body camera footage.

This is described Miller as experiencing an acute mental health crisis in the weeks

before August 23rd, including grandiose and delusional thinking and a belief that God

had asked her to be swallowed by a fish.

Three mental health professionals concluded she suffered from a severe mental disease at

the time.

Miller remains in custody and will stay in County jail for 10 days pending a March 13th

hearing to determine her next placement.

I am very bothered by this case and it seems very quick and hasty to arrive at this decision

and this verdict this fast.

A Massachusetts mother accused of killing her three children has asked the judge to split

her upcoming murder trial into two phases.

Lindsay Clancy is accused of strangling her three children ages 5, 3 and 8 months old

with exercise bands before cutting herself and jumping from a second story window.

She has never disputed her role in the killings but argues she was insane at the time.

An emotions hearing Monday, defense attorney Kevin Reddington, asked the court to split

the trial into two parts arguing the Massachusetts Constitution supports separating criminal

liability from criminal responsibility.

The first phase, he said, would determine whether Clancy committed the murders while the

second would address whether she was mentally responsible for the crimes.

He said that combining the two would violate her 5th amendment protections against self-incrimination.

Prosecutors opposed the request arguing Clancy waived her 5th amendment rights for interviews

she's done with psychiatrists and other mental health professionals.

They also noted that both phases would involve the same witnesses and evidence.

Judge William Sullivan said he would take the issue under advisement.

Clancy is scheduled for a psychiatric evaluation in April with the parties returning to court

and may ahead of a trial set to begin in July.

This is actually not that very extreme of a request.

Many states handle not guilty by insanity cases this way by separating them into a bifurcated

trial.

Before we get to what's coming up next week, I just want to say thank you.

Thank you so much for being a part of this growing community.

I want to give a very special shout out to Erica D. R. N. for your review on Apple Podcasts

into our CC crew members, Jude the Tiger and L. Lemon for your comments on YouTube.

We can't thank you enough for your continued support.

Please leave us a review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify and leave us a comment on YouTube.

We appreciate your help in spreading the word about courtroom confidential.

On the docket, Colorado man, Barry Morpheu, charged with the 2020 murder of his wife,

Suzanne Morpheu, will appear for a status conference on Monday, March 9th.

Christina Formella, a former Illinois high school special education teacher who is accused

of sexually assaulting a teenage student multiple times has a hearing on Thursday, March 12th.

Connecticut woman, Kimberly Sullivan, who is charging connection with the alleged 20-year

confinement and abuse of her stepson is scheduled to appear in court on Thursday, March 12th

for a hearing.

Tyler Robinson, the Utah man accused in the shooting death of conservative activist Charlie

Kirk has a hearing on Friday, March 13th.

Finally please join us for our special question and answer series Sunday, Sunday, all are

invited to leave us a voice message with a true crime question at thecourtroomconfidential.com

which I will answer live during Sunday show at 9 a.m. Pacific Noon Eastern.

You can find the live stream on YouTube, X, and Facebook.

And that is it for us this week folks.

I am your host Josh Ritter.

You can find us on social media at C or confidential on X at thecourtroomconfidential

on Instagram or at thecourtroomconfidential.com.

Thank you again for joining me.

Have a great weekend and I will see you again next week for another episode of courtroom

confidential.