Say It Ain't So, Skye!?

Kouri Richins wants a new trial. But do her attorneys raise legitimate legal issues, or are these the standard arguments made after a high-profile murder conviction?

Subscribe 👉🏻

🏆 Become a Proffer! Join My Channel Membership 👉🏻

☕️ Buy Me a Coffee

In this special live episode, Prof Jo is joined by experienced criminal defense attorney Skye Lazaro to break down Kouri Richins' newly filed motion for a new trial following her convictions for the murder of her husband, Eric Richins.

Together, we'll examine the defense's claims that Richins did not receive a fair trial, including allegations that the court made legal errors, admitted unfairly prejudicial evidence, and deprived her of a fair and impartial proceeding. We'll explain what these arguments mean, why they're being raised now, and whether they have any realistic chance of resulting in a new trial.

Skye will provide insight into how courts evaluate post-conviction motions, the legal standards judges apply when deciding whether to grant a new trial, and how these issues differ from the separate appeals process already underway. We'll also discuss how appellate courts review alleged trial errors and what hurdles defendants face when challenging a jury verdict.

Throughout the program, Prof Jo will translate the legal issues into plain English while Skye shares her perspective as a veteran criminal defense attorney. We'll separate fact from speculation, answer your questions live, and discuss what viewers should be watching as this case moves into its next legal phase.

If you've been following the Kouri Richins case, this is a conversation you won't want to miss.

Learn more about Skye Lazaro here

Stay tuned as we continue bringing thoughtful legal analysis that goes beyond the headlines.

#KouriRichins #EricRichins #TrueCrime #LegalAnalysis #Appeal #NewTrial #CriminalLaw #Courtroom #ProfJoExplains #LiveStream

Disclaimer: The legal analysis and commentary provided in this program are for information and educational purposes only. The opinions expressed by the host and participants are not legal advice, nor are they intended to guide or influence any viewer's legal decisions, strategies, or actions. Laws vary by jurisdiction, and the facts of every case are unique; past legal outcomes do not guarantee similar results in future cases.

Before acting on any legal topic discussed on Prof Jo Explains, evaluate its relevance to your own circumstances and consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction for legal advice.

This discussion is based on publicly available court records, filings, law enforcement statements, and media reporting available at the time of the broadcast. Commentary regarding legal strategy, pending motions, or possible outcomes is opinion and educational analysis—not a statement of fact or prediction of future court rulings.

This program discusses allegations of homicide and other potentially sensitive subject matter. Viewer discretion is advised.