This episode of Serialously with Annie Elise, hosted by Annie Elise with guest Amy Collette, rounds up several true crime stories from the week. The hosts discuss the Lindsay Clancy hearing, where the defense's motion to dismiss and the timing of a possible retrial were debated, and the attorney's remarks about a juror that prompted a sharp exchange with the judge.
They also cover an Anaheim case in which a husband allegedly stabbed a man found in his wife's bed, the Arizona attack on Bella Torres and the charges her fiancé now faces, and a Florida undercover operation that led to 281 arrests, including Disney and Universal employees. Listeners will hear the hosts' reactions and what remains unresolved in each case.
In this episode Annie Elise, Amy Collette
This episode's transcript, covering the Lindsay Clancy hearing and the Polk County arrests, was made with the technology behind HappyScribe's AI note taking.
Ads in this audio differ from the text. Tap the sentence you're hearing to follow along.
Synced: the text now follows the audio.
I'm going to stop you right there.
No, you're not going to stop me.
Well, no, you are—
No, you're not.
Because—
All right, then this hearing's—
No.
Because there's no need—
Gory knew details in Slaying of Californiamen after Husband caught him in bed with his wife and kids.
We've obtained some new records tonight showing how a Buckeye man is accused of orchestrating a violent sexual assault inside his own home, against his own fiancée.
Thundercover crackdown on human trafficking and child exploitation in Central Florida leads to nearly 300 arrests.
Hey, true crime besties, welcome back to an all-new episode of Serialously. Hello, hello, hello, and welcome back to an all-new episode of Serialously with me, your host, Annie Elise.
Happy Thursday, hope you are having a fantastic week. I am definitely about to ruin it. But wherever you are, whether you are at work listening with your work bestie—I know a lot of you like to do that—maybe you're at home cleaning, maybe you are rotting on your couch, which I love that for you if that's what you're doing today. I hope you're having a good week. And it's been an active week in true crime. There has been a lot happening. There was a hearing earlier this week regarding the Lindsay Clancy case. There's that huge bust that happened in Florida where 281 people were arrested, a lot of Disney workers and Universal workers as well, which my favorite guy, Sheriff Grady—if you know, you know—I love him.
He did a presser on it. There's been updates with the case we talked about last week, the CCTV footage that caught that guy basically breaking into the woman's house, attempting to sexually assault her. She was fighting him on the driveway. The husband pulled up. Well, come to find out, apparently this weirdo freak was telling the truth, it looks like, and the husband did solicitate him. So—or solicitate, solicit, solicit—I don't even—I can't even speak today. That is how much is happening and how much my mind cannot keep up with it.
So there's a lot more we need to talk about too. Also, a case that is breaking very local to us that is beyond disturbing. So you know I needed to enlist some help in today's episode. I actually went back to, like, the Declaration of Independence to source today's guest because I have none other than Teddy Roosevelt with me, who just told me she wears bifocals.
Okay.
Is Teddy Roosevelt the one who invented bifocals?
There are so many things that were offensive with that.
Why?
Intro—well, it aged me.
Okay.
Tremendously. And it's not bifocals. Basically, my prescription's better, but they're different kinds of lenses that I'm getting used to.
Tell the people. They'll give you a hack.
Well, I know people don't want to hear all those details.
They do.
But please do not ever welcome me with a historical figure so old ever again.
First of all, I—
I like to be coming from the curbs, okay?
I think Roosevelt—I could be mixing all of them up right now. Isn't he the one that had beautiful, long, luscious locks?
I don't know. I don't—for some reason, I don't think you knew any presidential trivia at all.
I've seen the movie National Treasure with Nicolas Cage, okay?
I haven't.
No, but okay, who is it that invented bifocals?
I truly—
That's the only reason—
I truly do not know that.
That's the only reason I brought Roosevelt into it.
I know that is also offensive.
Hold on.
Who invented bifocals?
You go brunette and all of a sudden—
Okay.
In fairness, I was kind of close. Benjamin Franklin.
Was Ben—okay, I'm going to ask a really stupid question. Was Benjamin Franklin a president? I don't think so.
Isn't he? He's on the—he's on—
Wow. Okay, this is not looking good for us.
I know. This is a really bad intro. Yeah, he's on the $100 bill and only presidents are on, right? He wasn't?
Yeah.
Jess's—Jess's was—
I don't know.
Who was he then?
Benjamin Franklin. He was an inventor.
A founding father.
What the hell's the difference between a founding father and a president?
Same—same fucking difference. No, look—and look at his hair.
Please put this on screen. And this is who Annie wants to compare me to and said it's not offensive. Okay, can we move on? Because at this point, I would rather hear about the updates.
The sixth president of the Supreme Executive Council of Pennsylvania, but never the president of the United States.
President to me.
Okay. I need—
Nonetheless.
I need to go back to my history books. Whatever. Welcome.
Thank you. I'm glad to be here, I guess. I'm glad I made it here today and woke up another day. Thanks.
Wow.
I'm crying.
Oh my God. Whew. All right. I'll work on my intros, but I'm running out of them.
Just call me Amy.
Okay. That's just not nearly as exciting. And I think the—you know what you guys tell me? I think the people have spoken. They anticipate what kind of wild and crazy intro they're going to get.
They just like a warm hello.
Hello.
Hello.
Okay. Let's run it back.
Okay.
Okay. And today joining me, Amy Collette. Hello.
Hello.
Oh, look at you. You just are glowing now. You're so much happier. Okay, so we have a lot to talk about today.
Great.
No. No, I know. I know.
No, I know. We have some horrific shit to talk about.
I know. Let's start with the Lindsay Clancy hearing because I know a lot of people are not only, of course, following that and looking for updates with that, but also it caught a lot of people off guard with what Reddington said, how he acted in this hearing, what does that mean for next steps. So we're just going to kind of break it all down. So earlier this week, there was a hearing where the defense's motion to dismiss the charges against Lindsay were basically being heard. Also, the opportunity to discuss the possible retrial date.
However, the hearing itself didn't really get us any closer to knowing what the next steps are going to be in this process. So let's talk about what we do know after this hearing. One of the biggest things that was discussed, like I said, was the defense's motion to dismiss, which ultimately goes back to everything that happened during the jury deliberations in Lindsay's first trial. And Martin Weinberg actually argued this one, which he recently joined Lindsay's defense team to help them with all of the post-trial stuff and the retrial process.
He previously worked with Karen Reid's team doing the exact same thing, working through post-trial, trying to prevent a retrial from happening on the grounds of double jeopardy and things like that. So Weinberg argued that the notes that the jury foreperson sent to Judge Sullivan about that lone holdout juror were basically, quote, "crying for help," and that it raised some serious concerns about whether Lindsay was actually getting the fair jury trial that she was entitled to. And I think a lot of people really, as they were watching the trial unfold and as deliberations were happening, had that same concern.
Like, they're coming back time and time again. The judge keeps sending them back saying, "Keep deliberating." But they're like, "It's just one person." And we know they said that they're not applying the law and all of these things. And so it made a lot of people, I think, feel or at least think that maybe she wasn't getting a fair trial. So they argued that those notes that were sent should have prompted a more thorough voir dire, which is basically when the judge questions jurors, usually one by one, usually anonymously too. It's not really necessarily always on public record or even after the fact, where they basically question what's going on.
So Judge Sullivan pointed out that he did do a voir dire, which if you follow the trial, you remember that. However, Weinberg said that he only asked one question and that one question wasn't nearly enough to figure out what really was going on in that jury room and to get down to the root of why there was this one lone holdout juror and how they weren't applying the law and all of these other things. And so prosecutors disagreed to this, arguing that questioning the jurors any more than he did would have crossed a line into the deliberation process.
However, then things took a little bit of a turn when Reddington took to the podium and started talking about the holdout juror. And he more specifically used the juror's name in the courtroom, which this juror is not anonymous. This juror has been named, has also spoken out publicly himself. However, it's something that I don't want to say, like, etiquette-wise you're not supposed to do, but it is something where you kind of question it. And I want to play this clip for you because Judge Sullivan had a pretty big reaction to this.
You don't bring your background into a jury room and suppress it as was done in this case. This gentleman, Mr. D'Ronsville.
I'm going to stop you right there.
No, you're not going to stop me.
Well, no, you—I am.
No, you're not.
Because—all right, then this hearing's—no, because there's no need to bring out that juror's name.
He's all over the internet.
That's through the internet. That's through other people. There's no need here in this courtroom to use that if everyone else is referred to him either as juror dull and if you want to refer to him, that's the way he's to be referred. That's all.
He's got more face time than I do.
Well, that's—you know, that's—but that's not through this any of the rulings I've made.
And his attorney from Houston is sitting in the back room.
Well, that's quite possible. But, you know, just let's—we don't need this. Just—
Okay, fine. Then let me continue with what was not given to you at the time the jury form was submitted.
Now, after that, Reddington wasn't finished because he also brought up allegations that this same juror had been on his phone during deliberations. And according to Reddington, the juror admitted during different podcast interviews that he was on his phone using it to look up terms that he didn't fully understand, including the term "filicide," which many of you, I'm sure, are familiar with that term. Just in case you're not, it is basically another term for family annihilation and killing your entire family. But here's where it gets a bit murky because really, jurors aren't supposed to be doing their own research during deliberations, especially not on their phones or their computers where on those devices they have access to social media, news reports, TikTok.
We know that this case was booming and you couldn't even open an app without seeing something about the Clancy trial. And the reason why is because they are supposed to make their decisions based on the evidence presented in court, not other opinions, not any sort of theories, not independent research, none of that. So you can understand why that's kind of a problem. Now, Judge Sullivan didn't make any rulings. He said that he would take the arguments under advisement and then they moved on to scheduling. So at the time of this recording and possibly when it's published, there hasn't been any ruling on it, but maybe there will be soon to come.
However, that brings us to what happened next because prosecutors said that they still haven't decided exactly what charges they're going to pursue if Lindsay goes back to trial. So Judge Sullivan asked the Commonwealth point blank whether they had made a decision. And the prosecutor confirmed that they were planning on a retrial as of right now, but they said that the specifics would depend on how the judge rules on the pending motions. And that, I think, is interesting because for a while, we've all kind of tossed around the idea that maybe there will be a plea deal because of what the jurors did come back with in terms of being in favor of not guilty by reason of insanity so that a straight guilty verdict on the heavier murder charges might not be likely, or maybe they would only pursue things and downgrade it to manslaughter or something like that.
So the fact that they are saying that they plan to retry her, again, pending the decision, so maybe that there is a room where they won't retry her and they will offer the plea deal. I do wonder what those charges would look like. I'm inclined to believe it's going to be on lesser charges because I think that's what they would feel confident with that they could prove and get a guilty conviction of. But what do I know? So Reddington was clearly frustrated, wondering why they're allowed to wait so long to decide on the charges and saying that he needs to know and he needs to know now so that he can figure out what to prepare for.
He also brought up what he called the elephant in the room, which is Judge Sullivan's upcoming retirement. Now, like we talked about a little while back in the last hearing, Judge Sullivan's mandatory retirement is coming up in June of 2027, which really is not that far away. That's what? Seven, eight months away. And at the last hearing, Reddington said that he wouldn't be available for another trial until then. So a lot of people were thinking, including myself, that he was doing that as a way to be like, "I'm not even going to be ready for a new trial until after June of 2027.
So find a new judge because clearly Sullivan won't be able to be a participant in that trial." However, in this hearing this week, that whole idea and thought was proven completely wrong. I mean, either that or Reddington changed his mind completely because he said that he actually does want Judge Sullivan to oversee Lindsay's next trial and that he would like the trial to happen in the spring of 2027, which is an even shorter window. Call it four months from now to when it would kick off maybe with jury selection.
So he would need to know what those charges are in order to prepare adequately. And so Judge Sullivan said that he thought that a March trial date was realistic, but he gave both sides two weeks to check their schedules before making anything official. So as of right now, Lindsay's next status hearing is scheduled for November 16th. There's a chance that we could get a ruling on that motion to dismiss by then at the time of this recording. We have not yet. But for now, we're still kind of just playing the waiting game, and we'll have to see what happens over the next couple of weeks.
Maybe there will be a plea deal. Maybe it'll just be manslaughter charges. Maybe I don't even know anymore. I really don't know.
I was going to ask you, so how involved are judges in a plea deal?
Not very involved.
So would it—like, what—I guess what would the effect be if it was going to be a new judge? Like, what would be the reason you would either want or not want a new judge?
I think the reason that Reddington potentially wanted a new judge was because he wasn't liking Sullivan's rulings on a lot of things. And so he would want a new judge and hopefully, like, better luck.
But now all of a sudden, change of heart?
Saying that, "Oh, well, Sullivan knows the case better than anyone," this and that. And there's obviously some sort of strategy happening here. Every time I think I know what Reddington's about to do, he goes left. And so I don't even—I can't even guess anymore.
Yeah. I was curious, like, what the strategy might be. And now all of a sudden he's available. Is it because something changed in his other cases? Or no, now he really wants Sullivan to be the judge?
Yeah. You know what? It might be worth having Sierra join us again and talk to her because she's been—she's been going to a lot of these hearings. She was there the whole trial too. And I know she has a lot of insight into the legal side of things. So maybe I'll tap her and just kind of get her weigh-in, especially if the next hearing is scheduled for November 16th.
In two weeks?
Yeah. What day of the week is that? Let's see. That is.
Like a Tuesday?
Yeah. It's a Monday.
Monday.
So maybe—yeah. And then so maybe we'll do that. I'll tap into her so that that episode of Headline Highlights, we can give the full breakdown of everything, whatever it all means.
Yeah. Because I feel like between this trial and then the Krista Pike, those two were just—everyone was talking about it. And then I haven't really heard much about either of those since.
Krista Pike's trial.
Or the—I'm sorry, the execution.
Execution.
Yeah. Both of those. I think then it was, like, kind of at a standstill.
Yeah. Of course.
Both of those things. Yeah.
I know.
Okay. Well, this next case is actually coming right out of our backyard in Anaheim, California.
Literally, where we went to high school.
I know.
Backyard, backyard.
Literally our backyard.
Literally our backyard.
I know. So close. Well, now there's a man facing murder charges after he allegedly came home from work early and caught his wife cheating on him. But it wasn't just a situation where he walked in, caught her cheating, and then there was some crazy, like, screaming match or something like you would expect because prosecutors actually said that he pulled out a knife and killed the other man while his two other young children were in the same room. So on Saturday, October 24th, 34-year-old Ismael Pineda-Lopez came home early from his overnight shift and walked into the bedroom that he shared with his wife, Wendy.
And when he opened the door, he allegedly found Wendy in bed with another man, 28-year-old Nicholas Garcia, who was wearing nothing but his underwear. And apparently, Ismael just completely freaked out because according to prosecutors, he pulled out a pocket knife and stabbed Nicholas multiple times, killing him just right there in the bedroom. Police were called to the home around 4:15 that morning. And when they arrived, they found Ismael covered in blood with Nicholas's body still inside the bedroom. Now, Wendy and the kids were fortunately not physically hurt.
But here's the part that makes this actually just so much worse. The kids were reportedly in bed with their mom and Nicholas when Ismael walked in. And according to the district attorney, they witnessed their father allegedly stab the man to death. So I mean, we're talking two toddlers, ages 2 and 4. So I can't even imagine what they saw or even how—I mean, it's like the middle of the night they're in bed with their mom.
Yeah.
Awful. And what's interesting is that when reporters started talking to neighbors, they said Ismael was actually a really good guy. One neighbor specifically described him as a really nice guy, easygoing, and a very involved father. She said he worked nights while Wendy worked during the day, and he would take care of the kids and was always seen walking around the neighborhood with them. And that same neighbor actually said she had never seen Nicholas at the house before. And as of right now, it's unclear whether Ismael actually knew this man or if this was the first time that he had ever met, which I was curious to know that too, if this was like an ongoing thing or if they had known each other.
So fast forward a few days after the stabbing, and Wendy was stopped out shopping with her two kids. And a reporter approached them and asked them, of course, what happened. And she wasn't interested in talking about any of it. In fact, her brother was also approached and basically said that he didn't want to say anything about it and neither did his sister. Meanwhile, Ismael has been charged with one felony count of murder along with a felony weapon enhancement, and he's now facing a possible sentence of 26 years to life in prison. He waived an earlier opportunity to be arraigned.
So now his next court appearance, which will include his arraignment and a bail review, is scheduled for December 1st. So I mean, I get it. Walking into your bedroom, I can't even imagine that feeling of seeing your significant other in bed with somebody with your two kids. So I could imagine seeing red and just the ultimate betrayal. But now it's like you're killing this man over this. Your two young kids.
Had to witness it.
Had to witness it. So I don't know about you, but I had a few thoughts.
I have a lot of thoughts.
I mean, my first thought was like, okay, you're walking in in the middle of the night. Of course, you're not expecting to see that. So at first thought, are you thinking it's an intruder or something? And then obviously, you process the scene. He's in his underwear, and obviously, it's a calm scene. So you're reaching for your pocket knife, which I was like, was that something, again, firstly in defense or out of rage?
Right.
And yeah, you just see red. I mean, that I fear was like probably some sort of a break because it didn't seem planned, obviously.
Yeah. Which you mentioned this. I'd be curious to know how long was the affair going on? Did he know about it or have any suspicions? Like, did he come home early from his shift to catch them? Or was this completely just by chance? And yeah, he.
Were you just in shock?
It was the middle of the night. He thought it was an intruder or something. Or maybe not even thought it was an intruder and knew that it was somebody that his wife was having an affair with, saw red. Not that that, of course, excuses it. My question, my bigger question in all of that is who in their right mind, first of all, don't ever have an affair and cheat. Like, just get a divorce. Like I always say, don't murder, don't cheat. But I get it. It's going to happen. What mother in their right mind would cheat and allow your children, toddler-aged children, to be in the bed with you while this strange man is in the bed?
I don't care if he's in his underwear and they're clothed and they're on the opposite side of you. This is a strange man.
Well, that's—was it a strange man?
Well, but like, to the children, this is a strange man in your home sharing a bed with your toddler children, 2 and 4 years old.
100%.
Hard no.
Absolutely.
Hard no. Like, and like, again, I advise everybody, don't cheat. Just leave. Just like, figure out a different option. But it's going to happen. Obviously, it's going to happen. Handle it. How you react to it and all. A lot of poor decision-making happening.
I know.
Which doesn't justify murder. And it's not saying that, like, you know, but I don't like any of it.
No. I mean, when I first came across this, I, of course, thought the same thing as you. As who on earth would ever have children in bed with you and the person you're cheating? I mean, that's just.
And like, comfortable enough that this man is just in his underwear in bed with you and your kids.
It's 4:00 AM.
Yeah.
Yeah. Or whatever time it was. It's like crazy. But then even then it just got me thinking of the bigger picture of just how could you ever just expose your children to an affair in general?
Right.
Like, and just the—it's just such a selfish—get a divorce. Just get a divorce.
Well, and look, 4 years old, it's young, yes, but it's not extremely young. Think about Emmy, okay?
That's who I thought about.
Emmy just turned five, my daughter. And if I ever had a man over, first of all.
She would tell everyone.
No, I know. But like, that's what I mean. Like, of course, she would like, be like, "Daddy," like, when he's like, "Oh, how'd you sleep?" She's like, "Good. Mommy's friend was here." Like, kids don't know to keep secrets like that. Or they shouldn't know to keep secrets like that. And so it's like 4 is young, yes, but not to where the truth isn't going to come out. I don't know. There are so many questions.
When this man is comfortable sleeping in this woman's bed, the whole—yeah, I'm sure there's going to be more information, but yeah, I.
I have so many questions. So yeah, let's follow this one because I want to know, like, how long was it going on? Did the husband know? Was he a family friend? What, like, what is happening here?
I know. And I mean, yeah, you don't know the story. And you just hear this guy was—sounds like he was a good, dedicated father and a nice guy. And now these poor kids don't have a father who's going to be around.
His whole life is gone.
And I mean, it was his decision to do that.
Yeah.
Her decision to do something awful also.
Yeah.
And both people need to be more responsible.
Agreed. Just be responsible, guys. Well, speaking of marriages or fiancés and people doing, you know, having very poor decision-making skills, we do have a huge update in the case of Bella Torres. Now, we talked about this case a couple of weeks ago. Actually, it might have even just been last week. I can't remember. But just to refresh your memory, Bella is the Arizona mom who was attacked by a complete stranger inside her home while her two young children were also there. She fought the man all the way out of her house, back through the front door, onto the driveway.
The huge altercation then was caught on a Nest camera. He was, like, fighting her, but kind of like slow motion almost in a weird way. And I have all the CCTV footage. We will put it up in this episode too, but then it's been on social media. You can watch the video version, whatever. So they're, like, fighting in the driveway. Her partner pulls up kind of slow, parks the truck, and chases the man off. Right away, a lot of people were saying it looked suspicious, that her partner drove up way too slow, that it seemed very convenient timing-wise, that the chase after this perpetrator was very slow motion as well.
And by the way, this guy, as he was fighting this woman off in the driveway, was saying, like, "No, your husband told me to. Your husband told me to. I thought this was part of the plan." Like, and I'm paraphrasing here. Which just to give you a little bit more detailed of a recap, this happened on October 16th. And like I said, Bella was home with her kids. Her fiancé was actually out grocery shopping at the time. And that's when this guy walked through the front door. He initially had asked to use her bathroom, but then he suddenly attacked her. He allegedly grabbed her by the neck, wrestled her to the ground, kicked her one-year-old, and then demanded that she take off her clothes.
So that's when she fought him outside, when she started screaming for help. And that's when he allegedly told her that her fiancé, or "boyfriend," according to him, had sent him there after they connected through social media. And again, this was all caught on camera. And I'm actually going to play a clip for you now for all of my video viewers and for all of my audio listeners. Just bear with me. You can hear a little bit of it, but you'll probably want to tap over to YouTube to watch the video if you haven't seen it yet. So let me just play that here. It's a quick 30 seconds.
What the is wrong with you? What the is wrong with you?
His wife was in.
Yeah, right.
He told me he was in this.
Right. Right. And what's his name?
He told me he was in this.
And what's his name?
I don't know. He's in the picture.
What's his name? You know him?
Hold on. Right.
So police identified the suspect as 20-year-old Adrian Ayala. This is after one of his relatives actually recognized him in the footage that Bella had posted on social media. So he was arrested within 24 hours. However, when he appeared in court, his attorney had claimed that the whole thing was a "giant misunderstanding," saying that Adrian believed that he was participating in a consensual role-play scenario that was arranged by Bella's fiancé. Now, of course, the judge pointed out that even if her fiancé had arranged it, that didn't mean that Bella had consented.
This is something we talked a lot about too on the last episode, that this is a very real thing where people do actually role-play this. They will post on social media and say, "I want you to come into my house, sexually assault me no matter how much I say stop or don't or I scream or cry, keep going." It's a fetish that people have. And that's why it's so important to create a safe word so that that doesn't happen. But on the opposite side of that, there are people who now weaponize these fetishes to set up their spouses or their partners and say that it is all for a consensual role-playing act, although it's unbeknownst to their partner.
And then somebody comes in and actually attacks them. So that's what Adrian was saying. He's like, "No, I thought this was consensual." She clearly didn't know that it was going on. Like, what's really happening here? So Adrian was eventually released on a $25,000 bond. However, investigators seized all of his electronics. And this is where we said last time, we're like, the proof will be in the devices. We will find out one way or another. Is his story true? Was he just on drugs or a mental health crisis? Like, what is really happening? They also took Bella's fiancé's phone to look into his potential alleged involvement because remember, Adrian had implicated him in this attack.
And look, when we talked about it last time, there were a lot of questions. Some people weren't sure if the fiancé had anything to do with it. However, a lot of others 100% believe that he did. And now here we are, a couple of weeks later, and we finally have some answers because Bella's fiancé has now been arrested for allegedly orchestrating this entire thing. And it gets even worse. I don't know if you know the detail. I'm about to get to it. Worse than just orchestrating it. So back on October 29th, police arrested Bella's fiancé, who is a 23-year-old man named Zarian.
And he was at work when they arrested him. This came after investigators found Reddit messages on the electronics that they had seized, which the messages they believe show that Zarian planned for another man to sexually assault Bella without her knowledge or consent. In one of the messages, he allegedly told Adrian, the attacker, that he wanted someone to "force themselves" on his fiancé before then asking, "Are you down?" And when Adrian asked whether Bella was in on the plan or not, Zarian's alleged response was, "Nope."
Which this is then where Adrian's behavior comes in. So, oh, you're colluding with this man to sexually assault his fiancé, and you don't think it's role-playing. You like, so even though his excuse is, "He told me I should," that doesn't matter. You point-blank asked him if she was consenting adult in this, and he said no. So it's an assault. Like, what are you even talking about? Then the fiancé also apparently told Adrian, "You can't tell her I told you or sent you. You just got to do it. But I understand if it's too much."
So when Adrian asked whether or not they could get into trouble, Zarian told him that he could just run back to his car afterward and they could pretend that the whole thing never happened. I mean, like, this is why I hate men. Like, this is why I hate men. And here's where the conversation took an even darker turn, as if it's not like depths of hell darkness already. But at one point, Adrian actually did try to back out of this whole thing, telling Zarian that he wasn't comfortable going through with it if Bella wasn't into it.
And instead of calling the entire thing off, Bella's fiancé told him that the more he "threatened Bella," the more that she would get into it. So then all of a sudden, Adrian was suddenly okay with it again. Like, oh, okay. Well, she'll get into it eventually. Great. Let's do it. Like, why are men so fucking stupid, first of all? Like, and so sinister? And here's where it gets even worse, okay?
I know.
Prosecutors say that the fiancé even told Adrian to FaceTime him while he attacked Bella. Now, we know he went to the grocery store, or that was the story he told. So can you imagine? He's like in the produce aisle.
No.
And he's opening his phone, watching a FaceTime attack, a sexual assault of his fiancé, watching it all go down. Like, and I get it. Maybe this is his fetish, his perversion and like voyeurism and things like that. You need another consulting third party in this, like a consenting third party.
Well, children are there also.
Right. Exactly. You're right. Totally forgot about that. The children were present as well. And this creep kicked their one-year-old. What kind of man.
No.
Thinks any of this is okay, that you set this up, that you do it while the kids are home, that you try to intimidate her and scare her into it. And maybe he look, I'm not going to give him the benefit of the doubt because this guy does not deserve a speck of benefit of the doubt. But even in the off chance that he thought because maybe they've had rough sex in the past or they've role-played in the past, that she would, as he put it, get into it the more he threatened her. You've got to think this through in a more sensible way.
Well, what I was thinking is the ages are 20 and 23.
Yeah.
Which to me, initially, I'm like, they're so young. Like, how do you have these fetishes and these things that you think are okay to do at such a young age? But it could be, you know, there's the whole topic of like desensitizing.
Right.
From all the porn and stuff that's out there. So it's like, were they just so.
Well, and so.
Exposed this? And so that's why it's like, I want to watch it too while it's happening. It's just like.
Yeah. But to kind of push back on that, and look, I'm not a doctor, obviously, but don't guys go through puberty so young? So even though they are young with these fetishes, they've had, what, 10 years.
Yeah.
Of like probably looking at porn, seeing weird-ass shit on the internet.
10 years of watching porn?
Yeah.
And they're 20 years old?
I think, well, 23. I think guys start at like 13.
But I'm freaking out.
No. Isn't it like at adolescents?
Probably.
It's when they start like.
To stay ignorant to that.
Secretly like.
Or naive. I don't know what the right word is.
Jerking in their bedrooms.
Okay.
No, I'm just saying.
I know. But that just feels.
That's when they have their like, this is going to sound so old school to me, but like sexual awakening.
I guess I just figured a fantasy like this would belong to an older creepy man.
In a basement.
Not a 20-year-old who might be in college still.
Fair. Fair. And there were so many points throughout this entire plan that was orchestrated that he could have gathered some sense and stopped it or realized this is missing the mark. Either one of them could have. And like, yet they continued to move forward with it and like wanted to FaceTime while he attacked her. It's disgusting. Now, as disturbing as all of those messages are, that's not all that the investigators found. Because remember, like I said, Zarian had told the police that he left the house to go get the groceries.
However, when investigators pulled surveillance footage from the store, they saw him walk inside around 5:30 p.m., spend about 10 minutes just wandering around. Then he left without buying a single thing. In fact, he didn't even look at anything at the store as if he was there to buy it. He literally just walked around the store for 10 minutes, obviously just trying to create an alibi, right? Which that becomes especially interesting when you look at the timing of the Reddit messages because just after 5:00 p.m., Zarian allegedly asked Adrian if he could get to the house faster, saying that he was going to "fake kill time" at the grocery store.
Then at 5:45 p.m., surveillance footage showed Zarian paying for gas outside the store. And four minutes after that, he messaged Adrian saying, "I'm getting gas. Not far, but trying to take my time." Like giving this guy time, free range to attack his fiancé. And also to the whole point of the children being there, you don't know this guy. He's a stranger you got off of Reddit. Who's to say he wasn't also going to attack the children? We know he kicked the one-year-old.
So who's to say this wasn't some sicko freak that you're inviting into your home that also does this to the kids? Like, I don't even, like, I can't even compute in my brain how many things are wrong with this. It is diabolical. So by 5:57 p.m., just over 10 minutes later, Zarian allegedly messaged Adrian again, saying, "Time's up, bro." And told him to run away when Bella started getting upset. Then at 6:04 p.m., after he had run away from the house, Adrian reportedly sent Zarian a message saying, "I'm so sorry."
And Zarian replied, "I'm deleting this account and you should too." Which, I'm sorry, digital trail, it will get you every single time. I don't care if you delete your account. It's recoverable. You're a fucking idiot. I'm thankful for that because here you are caught now in one of the worst schemes that you can possibly even think of.
I mean, you're not only a moron to think you're going to delete these and they're going to go at your alibis, you're going to the grocery store, but you don't even buy anything.
Right. You don't buy groceries. I just went to go look at the celery aisle.
Like, why go through the trouble?
No. Just an idiot. Such an idiot. Now, when police gathered all of this and then confronted Zarian with all of this information, his response was saying that the messages were disgusting. And he continuously denied having anything to do with planning this attack. But investigators ultimately arrested him, and he's now facing charges of aggravated assault, sexual abuse, attempted sexual assault, kidnapping, and conspiracy. His bond was set at $500,000, which is not enough in my opinion because, as we know, you only need to post 10%, which although 50 grand is a lot of money, it's not unthinkable that he could potentially come up with that.
And one more part, because it also does get a little bit crazy here, despite everything that the investigators say that they've uncovered, Bella is standing by her man.
I honestly can't believe that.
Standing by her fiancé. Just hours after his arrest was announced, she spoke with a local news station and said that she didn't believe that the detectives had enough evidence to connect him to the attack. So at least for now, she's continuing to support him, even though the mountain of evidence is pretty clear about what he did, allegedly, of course. I don't know if it's that she's just super in denial because she loved this man, thought she was going to marry him. I don't know if he's the father of her children. I've seen mixed reports on that, so I don't want to like confirm anything.
But if he is, I could see where maybe that also is like, you can't wrap your mind around it. Or.
Are you going to say what I was going to say?
I might be. There are people who do believe maybe she did know about this and that he's protecting her.
So I wasn't thinking she knew about it because I feel like I can't imagine. I mean, I guess.
I don't think she would have fought him off into the streets if that were the case.
No, but maybe they do have this like kinky relationship.
Right.
And this is they role-play and do crazy things. And maybe part of her not knowing was like maybe he thought that would have turned her on and like after a while, she would be into it. So maybe she was like, this was a stupid idea, idiot. Like, why'd you do this? But I also get it because we've done weird stuff like this in the past, but this went too far.
I don't know.
But then also, so did Adrian not get in trouble?
He is out, where was it? He's out on bond right now, I believe.
Well, I know the fiancé is out, but is the.
No, the fiancé is not. His bond was set at $500,000. And Adrian, where was it? Sorry. Yeah, he was released on a $25,000 bond.
Oh, well, yeah. I guess the messages where he said, does she know about it? And he said no, is obviously why he's in trouble.
Right.
So I was like, could he get in trouble if that part didn't exist?
I feel like.
But also, other people can't give consent for.
No, you can't consent for somebody else.
Yeah. Like.
And why is she standing by him?
The only reason I could think of is.
Is if she's trying to justify it in her mind.
If she not was in on the actual plan itself, but like something similar to where it's not shocking to her that he would plan this because.
Like she sees how he got there.
Yes. Because I mean, I think anyone else would be like, is that how your brain's operating? I'm glad that I didn't marry you.
Yeah.
I'm getting as far away from you as possible. And I don't want you around my children, our children, whatever the situation is.
Especially this creep-ass kicked her one-year-old, even if she thought, even if she was trying to justify it in her mind, it's like, your child got injured in all of this. Like, you got to get away from this guy. He is dangerous.
Or you guys both need to keep your fantasies.
I know. I'm reluctant to say that she has any kind of kink like that. It would make this make more sense, but I don't know.
I mean, she seemed, from those videos.
Terrified.
Terrified.
Yeah.
And genuinely fighting for her life.
And why is she standing by him?
I don't know.
Maybe just denial and blind love and loyalty. I don't know.
I mean, she's young too, so let's just hope that maybe.
Sense will come to her.
Before.
If you're listening or watching this, please get away from this guy. He is very, very dangerous. So definitely we'll be following this case as it moves through the courts because there are obviously still a lot of questions about the messages, whose device all of everything was found on, how these two guys even met. But hopefully Bella and her children are getting the support they need after everything they've been through because that's also so terrifying for the children to witness.
I know.
The whole thing is just bad. It's so bad and so scary.
I know. Oh. Well, we have this next one's actually coming out of Florida. We're back in Florida. We haven't been there in a while, but we're back.
Shockingly. But we're back with Sheriff Grady.
We are.
I love him. Love him.
Your guy.
My guy.
So this next one comes out of Florida where the Polk County Sheriff's Office just finished a massive undercover operation targeting human trafficking and child predators, like Annie said earlier. And first of all, I got to give the name of this operation credit because it's pretty funny. Poke around and find out, which is pretty clever. But as funny as that name is, what they uncovered during this seven-day operation is just absolutely disgusting. So by the end of this seven-day operation, 281 suspects were arrested, including 17 employees from Disney World and Universal Studios.
And we're not just talking about the people who happened to work at these parks. A lot of these people actually had roles where they were around children every single day. According to Sheriff Grady Judd, 13 of those arrested were Disney employees and four worked for Universal Studios. Other people who were arrested included the head coach of a youth football team called the Davenport Titans, who coached children between the ages of 11 and 14, and also an active duty member of the Navy. But let's just go back to those Disney workers because one of them was someone Sheriff Judd talked a lot about during his press conference.
And I genuinely don't even know what to say about this one. I'm sure you know.
Yep.
24-year-old Colin Clacko, a former Disney employee who reportedly used to work as a Mickey Mouse character, was arrested after communicating with an undercover detective posing as the guardian of a 13-year-old boy. And according to investigators, Colin wanted to "engage in sexual activity involving diapers, diaper changes, potty training," and even said that he wanted to do some of these things inside of a family public restroom.
Oh my God.
And when he showed up to meet who he believed was this child's guardian, detectives actually found two backpacks that were full of diapers in his car, some of which were actually Disney branded with pictures of characters like Mickey Mouse on them. Here's the sheriff talking about Colin and saying he may be the sickest, nastiest person that he's ever arrested. Take a listen.
And then there's Colin Clacko. Okay, I want you to get a view of this Colin Clacko. He was a former Disney Mickey Mouse character, okay? He had the high squiggy voice too, by the way. He did. And he's about this big. And he may be the sickest, nastiest person we've ever arrested. Yep, that's correct. He was into diapers, you know, diapers.
And he had two backpacks full of diapers. He wanted to wear diapers. He wanted to put diapers on the children. And he wanted to do all kinds of nasty stuff, none of which we can talk about. Two backpacks full. But he planned to have a great time, you see? He said, "I'm a little kinky and I'm a little naughty, and we can be kinky and naughty together."
Now, of course, we can't talk about all the stuff he did, but he was very explicit with his perverted talk of what he wanted to do. Some of them were even Disney diapers. You know, I guess he was riding for the brand. But I want to point out that he was no longer employed at Disney when this happened. But he was very proud to tell us that he at one time was a Mickey Mouse character.
And like you just heard, the sheriff specifically said he wanted to do all kinds of nasty stuff and even made a point of mentioning that Colin had a high, squeaky voice, which considering he was at Disneyland and he was Mickey Mouse at a Disney park, I wonder, like, was this his actual voice? Was this his character that he put on? Was he trying to act as Mickey Mouse? Or I don't even know. But it just makes the whole thing even more disgusting. It actually reminded me of those like Mickey Mouse impersonators that you.
No, I was going to just do the voice, but like.
You realize how creepy it was?
It's so creepy. It's like, I like can't even bring myself to do it because of what we're talking about. Like, hey, guys.
Yeah.
Hey, Minnie. Like, it's so, that was pretty good. Maybe I have a second career ahead of me. No, it's so freaking creepy. And the fact that he has this voice, he has the Disney branded diapers.
I know.
Like, it is sick, which I have a comment on that when you're done, but please continue before I vomit.
Okay.
Okay.
So Colin was ultimately charged with traveling to meet a minor, using a computer to solicit a guardian, using a two-way communication device to commit a felony, and attempted lewd and lascivious battery on a minor. And like I said, there were 17 Disney and Universal employees arrested during this operation, which is wild to think about because I also, which I'm curious to hear your thoughts, like on background checks and things like that, or if there's any, like how did that many employees.
Well, think of, remember it was what, like six months ago? The Disney cruises?
Okay, yes. So that's funny because when I first saw this, I was like, didn't we already cover this?
No.
And then I'm like, this is another one.
Yeah.
Which is.
Yep.
Crazy.
Think about it. Disney is like a playground for predators.
I mean, yeah, now that you say that, it completely makes sense.
Yeah.
Well, some of those other employees who were arrested reportedly worked in human resources, food services, different positions throughout the parks and at Disney resorts. And the sheriff did say that Disney is fully cooperating with investigators and told them that all the employees involved has since been fired.
Oh, great. Bare minimum, but cool.
Yeah, exactly. But yeah, just, I mean, think about that for a second. 17 people employed by two of the biggest destinations in the country. I mean, those are like hubs for people all over that travel there were arrested during the same operation all within a week, and to your point, in addition to this other massive investigation that was going on.
Yep.
And thankfully, in these undercover cases, the children these suspects thought they were meeting weren't real. So there weren't any real victims here. But the detectives are working to catch these individuals before they could potentially harm an actual child. Thank God. And it sounds like they caught a lot of predators.
I wonder what the stats are, though, because it's like for this many predators that are caught, there still are so many who have not been caught. And the thing I wanted to go back to is regarding the diapers. I remember, gosh, when was it? A couple of years ago, I saw a lot of comments on some of my videos involving child assaults and people being like, isn't it more like toddler-focused or like pre-pubescent kids and things like that that these predators are after? And I remember from independent research before I even got involved with CRC that I learned that there is a whole sect of predators who exchange CSAM material, who have fetishes not only for children who are still in diapers, but for children who still have their umbilical cords attached.
And it is so, I know. It is so incredibly disturbing when you hear about that and like the fact that this just once again illustrates how real that is and that monsters have such a sick fetish with the most innocent form of a life that there is. I don't even know where you go from that and how you reckon that's true.
And that's another 24-year-old.
I know.
And I'm just thinking like most 24-year-old boys I know run from diapers. You know, they're not, like I can't imagine, and I don't mean to make light of that. I mean, truly, like the thought that that is a plan and they're employed somewhere. And I mean, this is all a lot of premeditated planning. It not only is disturbing, but it makes you sad because more and more things that we did as kids and that you didn't really think about as being scary are now like as an aunt, as a parent, you're like, do I take my kids these places?
And how paranoid do I need to be?
And look, not to fear monger, but I posted this on my Instagram account last week. For those of you who follow me, I try to post a lot of stats and different things like that. It's not just the physical threat, right? It's not that you could take them to Disneyland and maybe there's a pervert who walks up or takes a photo or this and that. The threat now is also AI. And it's, how long have everybody always says don't put your kids on the internet, especially in compromising positions, whether they're in a swimsuit, a dance recital, like lifting their leg up, whatever it is.
But also now there is this thing where in the Seventh Circuit, there was a case where someone had artificial intelligence, CSAM material, and the possession charge was thrown out because it did not depict a real victim and it was in the possession of his own home. And this is just for the Seventh Circuit. And like it's not like it's this worldwide thing yet, but this is kind of the fight everybody is fighting against, especially CRC, is that once you start normalizing CSAM material or underage relationships, grooming predators to where people start to become desensitized to it, to where then it doesn't matter what age they are, they want the real thing.
They want something more. So it's like, I don't know, I'm kind of going off on a tangent here. It just serves, I think, as a reminder that to your point, the innocent things we used to do as kids, you can't really do anymore because now you have to be worried about is somebody going to take a photo, use their likeness to generate a different child via AI and create CSAM material and exchange it? Like you can't go to sleepovers anymore because you have these creeps who are putting sedatives in the milkshakes that they're feeding to the girls, or you have the siblings who are preying on the underage people at the sleepover.
You have sibling on sibling, friend on sibling, all of these different statistics. And there's just so much darkness in the world right now and so much perversion. But then it's like it becomes desensitized and normalized. And we saw it kind of 10 years ago when everybody wanted all the 11-year-olds and 12-year-olds were trying to dress like Kylie Jenner and look older and do the big lips and all of these things. And it just, to where high schoolers don't even look like high schoolers anymore.
It's crazy.
And it's just continuing to escalate more and more to where you don't even realize that people are becoming desensitized to it. And like they almost excuse the behavior. She didn't look like she was in high school. That doesn't matter. You know what I mean? Like it's just getting worse and worse and worse. And like it terrifies me to think about where we are going to be in 10 years from now. And I think when I did that statistic on the AI CSAM material, it was like in 2023, I think there were like 4,700 reports of that material being out there.
And now hundreds of thousands. And it just shows you how quickly this is escalating.
Well, social media has just like escalated things and made it so easy to get things and like make people able to hide behind the screens.
Yeah.
But thank God for CRC. Thank God for these operations. I mean, your point is valid that if this many people were caught, can you imagine how many other people have gone? But it is a blessing that this many were caught. And like hopefully the software and tools and investigations only become more advanced so these people, because that's another thing too, is how are you not afraid of getting caught? Like even if you have these fantasies, how is that more powerful than the punishment you're going to have for that?
I don't know. I think it's probably like any other addiction. Imagine somebody who's addicted to drinking cigarettes, weed, whatever it is. It's like if somebody who smoked cigarettes for 20 years, if you told them you're going to get arrested tomorrow if you smoke, could they overcome that and resist it? I don't know.
I know, but this is just way higher stakes. I just.
But to them, maybe it's not because maybe the risk-reward for them, they can't even see it.
I don't know. Someone to physically attack your fiance in front of children.
Right.
You're proposing as a character at a themed park with children and wanting to go into a bathroom with diapers. Like at what point, how does that even happen?
I know, I know.
I don't.
That's what I mean. I'm scared for the future. And I know that's a little fear mongering, but it's true.
I know.
And maybe it's just because we're exposed to so much darkness on such a regular basis.
Oh, you should have seen me on Halloween when I was with Jay. I said to him so many times, well, I keep seeing costumes that Seo will never be wearing when she's older because I'm thinking these girls, I mean, they're cute and no shame. Wear what you want to wear. But also there's a lot of dads out there taking their kids out and I don't know.
And it's free rein for photos on Halloween because it's so packed on the streets that like anybody could be taking photos of anyone. And it reminds me kind of that trend. I don't know if you've seen it. It's been going around for years where it's like me in high school and it's like full braces, the ugliest stuff, whatever. And it's like making up a dance with your friends. And it's like so awkward. But then it's like high schoolers these days. And it's like get ready with me.
I know.
And going to the mall. And it's like it's such a stark difference. And I thought of that example because of what you just said about Halloween because I immediately went to like an outfit I wore in high school and it was like this ugly alien looking outfit. It was like a space cadet. And it was like so ugly, but like covered my whole body. And me and all my friends were that. And it's like the times have changed.
Perfect. I'd love to see Emmy in that.
Same. Same. She was Taylor Swift, but enchanted version with a ball gown, of course, obviously. And Theo was a big inflatable Pokémon, so nobody saw him.
Perfect. We don't even know who he is.
I know. All right, well, that's it for this week, guys. Thank you so much for tuning in and sticking with us. We, as a reminder, you can help us fight the good fight with CRC. Merch is on sale for, what, another few days, right? Ends on Monday. And then, but a portion of merch goes to CRC and other charitable organizations we're a part of and different things. We, you know, have a lot of things that are really important to us. Higher Hope, which is Kendall Ray's that we donate to every year as well.
She's doing great work. Chalk Hospital, lots of things. So you can feel good about the ads that you're listening to, the merch that you're buying because it's going to a good place.
And, oh, we didn't even talk about it. Your husband ran.
Oh, yeah.
On behalf of CRC.
That's right.
The New York Marathon over the weekend.
That's right. He went to New York. I wanted to go with him, but had the obligations to trick or treat with the kiddos. But yeah, he ran for CRC Child Rescue Coalition. I know I keep using the abbreviation, but it's the Child Rescue Coalition who helps save children from predators and online predators. And they have all sorts of advanced tech. I know I've talked about them with you before, but yeah, he ran in honor of CRC and on behalf of them and raised a lot of money for them, which is fantastic.
Yeah.
So, and he crushed it.
Shout out to Jared.
Yeah, three hours and 30 minutes. Crushed it. So shout out to you, Jeremiah. So thank you guys so much for tuning in to another episode. We will be back with you very, very soon. As a reminder, two brand new case deep dives went out this week, one on this feed, on the Serialistly feed, and another on my second true crime podcast feed, Ten to Life. Go follow if you're not already, and you can go listen to those. So until the next one, be nice. Don't kill people. Just get a divorce.
Yes.
And stay away from kids.
Yes.
All right.
Absolutely.
Bye.
Join Annie as she breaks down what’s happening in true crime this week..If you’re new here, don’t forget to follow the show for weekly deep dives into the darkest true crime cases! To watch the video version of this episode, head over to youtube.com/@annieelise. .🔎Join Our True Crime Club & Get Exclusive Content & Perks..🎧 Need More to Binge? Listen to both of my weekly true crime series 10 to Life & Serialously with Annie Elise wherever you get your podcasts on the Annie Elise Channel!🍎 Apple Podcasts | Where you can also unlock access to 100+ and growing extra exclusive deep dives.💚 Spotify🔴 YouTube🎙️ All Other Platforms.🚩 Announcements Fall Merch is on SALE NOW! 🍂👉 Shop HERE: https://annieelise.com/collections/shop-all.📸 Follow Annie on Socials Instagram: @_annieeliseTikTok: @_annieeliseSubstack: @annieeliseFacebook: @10toLife.👗 Shop Annie’s Must-Haves! ShopMY: bit.ly/AnnieElise_ShopMy Amazon: bit.ly/AnnieElise_Amazon.🫵🏻 Get Involved or Recommend a CaseAbout Annie: www.annieelise.comFor Business Inquiries: 10toLife@WMEAgency.com.📚 Episode Sources 9News | ABC News | AZ Family | CBS Boston | CBS News | ClickOrlando | KATU | Law & Crime | New York Post | Polk County Sheriff's Office •••••••••••••••••• 🚨Disclaimers1️⃣ Some links may be affiliate links, they do not cost you anything, but I make a small percentage from the sale. Thank you so much for watching and supporting me. 2️⃣ Sources used to collect this information include various public news sites, interviews, court documents, FB groups dedicated to the case, and various news channel segments. When quoting statements made by others, they are strictly alleged until confirmed otherwise. Please remember my videos are my independent opinion and to always do your own research. 3️⃣ The views and opinions expressed in this video are personal and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any other agency, organization, employer, or company. Assumptions made in the analysis are not reflective of the position of any entity other than the creator(s). These views are subject to change, revision, and rethinking at any time and are not to be held in perpetuity. We make no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, correctness, suitability, or validity of any information on this video and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis. It is the reader’s responsibility to verify their own facts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.