A Conversation About Ballistics from a Forensic Analyst's Perspective

[00:00:00] [SPEAKER_01] The Murder Sheet keeps us super busy, and so sometimes between writing and podcasting and trying to sell these t-shirts, we don't do a great job of taking care of ourselves. That's probably something a lot of people can relate to. We're all busy people with jobs and families and obligations. It can be hard putting yourself and your own health first.

[00:00:17] [SPEAKER_00] Our brand new sponsor Prolon can help. Prolon's fasting-mimicking diet is a plant-based nutrition program that is backed by science. It takes all the fuss out of fasting. Instead of giving up food, you undergo a five-day program where you enjoy snacks, soups, and beverages designed to make your body's cells believe they are fasting.

[00:00:41] [SPEAKER_01] It's designed to give a serious boost to your metabolic and cardiovascular health. Plus, it's a no-brainer. Your food comes in prepackaged and labeled so you know what to eat and when. They've found that three consecutive Prolon cycles can reduce your biological age score by 2.5 years and cut your waist circumference down by 1.5 inches. Plus, it gets you down to a healthier blood sugar level.

[00:01:04] [SPEAKER_00] Fast with food. Take charge of your health. Try Prolon.

[00:01:07] [SPEAKER_01] To help you kickstart a health plan that truly works, Prolon is offering Murder Sheet listeners 15% off site-wide plus a $40 bonus gift when you subscribe to their five-day nutrition program. Just visit prolonlife.com slash msheet. That's P-R-O-L-O-N-L-I-F-E dot com slash msheet to claim your 15% discount and your bonus gift. Prolonlife slash msheet. Add some luxury into your life without breaking the bank.

[00:01:36] [SPEAKER_01] Check out our wonderful sponsor, Quince.

[00:01:39] [SPEAKER_00] This is a brand that's unlocking luxury products for all of us ordinary people. All the things that sound pricey and out of reach like washable silk shirts and dresses, 14-karat gold jewelry, European linens, Italian leather handbags, sweaters of Mongolian cashmere and organic cotton. That's what Quince offers, but at an unbeatable price.

[00:02:01] [SPEAKER_01] All Quince items are 50-80% less costly than those of their competitors. It's an amazing deal. They cut down the middleman and pass the savings on to you. And remember, by supporting our sponsors, you're supporting our show.

[00:02:14] [SPEAKER_00] We recently gifted ourselves some pieces from Quince. I got their suede bomber jacket. This one is very stylish and it keeps me really warm, which is helpful because it's been a cold winter. I also like the way I look in it, which is big for me.

[00:02:28] [SPEAKER_01] Give yourself the luxury you deserve with Quince. Go to quince.com slash msheet for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's quince.com slash msheet to get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash msheet. Content warning. This episode contains discussion of murder.

[00:02:52] [SPEAKER_00] One thing we try to do on the murder sheet is offer different perspectives. The absolute truth of a matter, after all, seldom comes from hearing just one side. It seems important to us, then, to offer experts a place to essentially have back-and-forth conversations about various areas of dispute between them.

[00:03:12] [SPEAKER_01] A conversation we've all been interested in lately is about the validity of ballistics evidence. This sort of evidence is based on the premise that a gun will leave its own, highly individual, and unique marks on any bullets or cartridge cases, and that those marks can then be used to identify a particular bullet or shell as having come from a particular gun.

[00:03:38] [SPEAKER_00] And, of course, that sort of evidence is at the heart of the case prosecutors make against Richard Allen. As we all know, the prosecution in the case maintains that an unspent round found between the bodies of Liberty German and Abby Williams can be conclusively linked to a gun belonging to Richard Allen. If that evidence holds up, it would seem to be compelling evidence against him.

[00:04:06] [SPEAKER_00] But, if it falls apart, then, of course, there is suddenly a great deal less to directly link Allen to the crimes with which he has been charged.

[00:04:15] [SPEAKER_01] Those more oriented to the defense side of the ledger tend to be extraordinarily skeptical of this sort of evidence, and they seem to be having a run of successes lately. In a recent case in Chicago, a judge issued a strong ruling, writing,

[00:04:38] [SPEAKER_01] And in the recent case of Abruquois v. Maryland, the Maryland Supreme Court reached a similar conclusion, writing, The reports, studies, and testimony presented to the circuit court demonstrates that the firearms identification methodology employed by the examiner in this case can support reliable conclusions that patterns and markings on bullets are consistent or inconsistent with those on bullets fired from a particular known firearm.

[00:05:07] [SPEAKER_01] Those reports, studies, and testimony do not, however, demonstrate that the methodology used can reliably support an unqualified conclusion that such bullets were fired from a particular firearm.

[00:05:20] [SPEAKER_00] But, despite all this criticism, proponents of ballistics evidence still wholeheartedly believe in it and in its potential to identify perpetrators of crimes. For instance, the January 2023 issue of the Journal of Forensic Sciences includes a paper by Keith L. Monson, Eric D. Smith, and Eugene M. Peters, which concludes in part,

[00:05:47] [SPEAKER_01] This black box study demonstrated a high level of performance by 173 qualified firearms examiners who performed 8,640 challenging comparisons. No false positive or false negative errors were made by the majority of examiners when examining bullets or cartridge cases. The results of this study add to the ever-increasing body of empirical data that firearms examiners conduct comparisons with a high level of accuracy.

[00:06:18] [SPEAKER_00] To get even more of the view from the other side, we talked recently with someone who works as an analyst for a state-based law enforcement agency somewhere in the United States. We will call her Diane, even though that is not her real name. We verify Diane's credentials. Though she does not handle ballistics evidence as part of her work, Diane does work with people who do. And she is also familiar with the procedures and rigorous controls

[00:06:48] [SPEAKER_00] that are employed as part of the process. Diane originally reached out to us because of an interview we recently did with journalist Radley Bauco. We will link to that episode in our notes.

[00:07:00] [SPEAKER_01] Diane felt Radley did not give ballistics evidence a fair shake and that what he said about it might cause people unnecessary concern that faulty evidence is being admitted in court. She believes that that is very much not the case. We decided to give her the opportunity to come on the show and share her views.

[00:07:18] [SPEAKER_00] Because she still works in the field, she asked that we not use her voice. So, we recorded our interview with her and transcribed it. Diane reviewed the transcript for accuracy. Anya and I will now read the transcript with Anya reading Diane's answers.

[00:07:36] [SPEAKER_01] We hope that our ongoing series of episodes dealing with ballistics will help us all come to a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of this type of evidence. My name is Anya Kane. I'm a journalist.

[00:07:49] [SPEAKER_00] And I'm Kevin Greenlee. I'm an attorney. And this is The Murder Sheet. We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews, and deep dives into murder cases.

[00:08:00] [SPEAKER_01] We're The Murder Sheet.

[00:08:02] [SPEAKER_00] And this is a conversation about ballistics from a forensic analyst's perspective.

[00:08:08] [SPEAKER_01] We like to automate things here at The Murder Sheet. We get all kinds of alerts about our episodes. We schedule emails in advance. We set reminders for ourselves to do interviews, lest we accidentally ghost a detective or a defense attorney. Automation makes life easier because it's one less thing to have to think about. That's why we love Acorns. This is an automatic investment service that's built to help everyone invest, no matter how much money you have.

[00:08:33] [SPEAKER_00] You've heard us speak about our sponsor, Acorns, before. Today's episode is sponsored by them. Acorns is a financial wellness app that makes it easy to start saving and investing for your future. You don't need to be an expert. Acorns were a recommended diversified portfolio that matches you and your money goals. You don't need to be rich. Acorns lets you get started with the spare money you've got right now, even if all you've got is spare change.

[00:08:58] [SPEAKER_01] I just wish we had had an app like Acorns back when we were just starting out. It would have saved us so much money-related time and stress because it's really a no-brainer. All it takes is $5 or even just your spare change. Sign up now and join the over 13 million all-time customers who have already saved and invested over $22 billion with Acorns. Head to acorns.com slash msheet or download the Acorns app to get started. Paid non-client endorsement. Compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns.

[00:09:28] [SPEAKER_01] Tier 1 compensation provided. Investing involves risk. Acorns Advisors LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor. View important disclosures at acorns.com slash msheet.

[00:10:21] [SPEAKER_00] So to start out with, what non-identifying details can you give us about your expertise?

[00:10:27] [SPEAKER_01] I have a Bachelor of Science in Biology with a minor in Forensic Science as well as a Master of Science in Forensic and Investigative Science from a forensic program that is one of only 28 programs in the United States that's accredited by the Forensic Science Education Accredation Commission, which is also called FEPAC. I'm employed by a state police crime lab in which extensive training is required of all analysts, including the firearms analysts.

[00:10:54] [SPEAKER_01] As for that training that's specific for the firearms analyst, it includes competency testing in which 100% must be obtained. There's external training at specialized schools, factory visits, written testing where 80% or better must be obtained. Mock trials, unit training, technical paper and casework, and evidence handling observations.

[00:11:14] [SPEAKER_00] So still in a non-identifying way, can you describe what a typical day might look for you in terms of the work you do?

[00:11:22] [SPEAKER_01] I'm not sure how applicable this will be since I work in a different unit, but I can for sure speak to the evidence handling reporting limitations and testifying in court as an expert witness, as those areas of my typical day all overlap with that of a firearm forensic analyst. At the state crime lab, for an analyst to receive evidence for examination, an appointment is made by the officer for the evidence to be taken into the state's custody first.

[00:11:48] [SPEAKER_01] Once that has occurred, a unique barcode is generated for that item of evidence. Once the analyst is ready to analyze the evidence, he'll make an appointment with the evidence specialist and receive the evidence into his care. The officer and the analyst never actually come into contact with each other. The analyst will then do any testing of the evidence indicated by the requesting officer, following the testing methods and standard operating procedures outlined by the state police.

[00:12:17] [SPEAKER_01] Those procedures have been validated and are publicly available online for anyone to see. After testing is concluded, reports are written and evidence is repackaged and sealed and returned to the evidence specialist. If subpoenaed, the analyst will serve as an expert witness in court to testify to his results. On this subject, I want to bring up that Radley Balko said that the expert witness should be persuasive and convincing,

[00:12:44] [SPEAKER_01] which is something that scientists are not, according to him. First, I'm not sure what experience Balko has to have reached that conclusion since he's neither a scientist nor an attorney. His background is in political science and journalism. What is true is that an expert witness's job is to educate the jury on their area of expertise and testify to the results of their analysis. This means that the analyst testifies to the science and not for the prosecution or defense.

[00:13:13] [SPEAKER_01] The main job is to be able to educate the jury so that they understand what the science means in layman's terms.

[00:13:20] [SPEAKER_00] I'm curious, what is the experience actually like of testifying as an expert witness at a trial? Does it just depend on the trial or is that something that kind of tends to take a certain shape almost?

[00:13:32] [SPEAKER_01] It definitely depends on the trial. Working for a state police lab, you can be called anywhere in the state to testify. So it can be literally anywhere. And depending on what county you're in, the judges can be very different and things like that. So it can vary that way. But then also, because the types of cases we get can range anywhere from a crime against property all the way to homicide and everything in between, the amount of evidence within that case and things like that can all be very different.

[00:14:02] [SPEAKER_01] And so being able to testify to all of those different things takes a lot of practice. So that's why it's part of our training to do mock trials. They say that's supposed to be the most difficult and in-depth trial you'll ever have because it's other expert witnesses that are serving as your prosecuting and defense, right? So they know what you're supposed to say.

[00:14:23] [SPEAKER_01] Other than that, being able to answer the questions the prosecutor asks you, but then also being able to remain level-headed and answer to what the defense is asking you and make sure you're still sticking to that science and not mixing up your words. And sticking to what your report says rather than giving any kind of opinion, because that's not what we're there to do. It can be a little bit difficult.

[00:14:46] [SPEAKER_00] Can you describe the process of matching up ballistics evidence from a bullet to a specific gun?

[00:14:54] [SPEAKER_01] So although this is not in my particular area of expertise, we do learn about this process in general. And I can tell you that eyeballing, as Radley Balco put, it's not part of that process. I do know that a firearm and bullet would be examined separately first. They're never opened at the same time. They're separated in time and or space according to standard operating procedures.

[00:15:19] [SPEAKER_01] Additionally, there is an extensive library of firearms that can be referenced by the analyst, which is important to note, because if there's a concern as to whether a bullet came from a specific firearm or a similar firearm, that can also be investigated. So if someone was concerned that this bullet could have come from a firearm that they recovered from John Smith's house, versus any of the same make and model of that firearm, they can compare those two things based on the library.

[00:15:48] [SPEAKER_01] At the crime lab, other than for previously fired ammunition, there is a water recovery tank, a cotton waste recovery box, a bullet trap, and a remote firing stand that can all be used for test firing methods. Afterwards, or if we're comparing to something that has not been fired yet, then you would use a comparison microscope.

[00:16:11] [SPEAKER_01] And the comparison microscopes are then used by the firearm examiner to attempt to associate or disassociate an item of fired evidence back to the firearm that produced it, with the evidence on one side and the known standard on the other. So if someone hasn't used a comparison microscope before, this is similar to what you think of with a regular microscope,

[00:16:33] [SPEAKER_01] except that they're side by side, and you, there's a little toggle switch so you can slide it back and forth to line up those two images next to each other. So you can really compare things. You're not switching from one microscope to another. It is both of the images on one ocular, like one view. This can also be used to compare two known standards.

[00:16:55] [SPEAKER_01] So if you fired two bullets from the same gun and wanted to compare them to C to make sure that gun was consistently making the same striation on a bullet, you would be able to do that. Then the analyst will document the findings contemporaneously, meaning that they're done as the analyst is doing the examination, and take photographs as possible, which will then be followed by a conclusion. And the conclusion can either be identification, inconclusive, elimination,

[00:17:24] [SPEAKER_01] or unsuitable for examination.

[00:17:26] [SPEAKER_00] Is it unusual to match extraction marks from an unfired round to a gun? Or is that something that's done sometimes?

[00:17:35] [SPEAKER_01] So during cartridge case characterization, the standard operating procedure includes that the description of the extractor and ejector marks must be made along with several other markings and characteristics of the cartridge case. If the cartridge being examined was not fired, but was loaded into the firearm, then there would be some of the unique features from that firearm. But not all the features that would be present if it had been fired,

[00:18:04] [SPEAKER_01] such as the firing pin impression on the back. I would say it's less usual, and that most ballistic evidence is received after being fired or before being loaded into a firearm. But it's not necessarily unusual.

[00:18:18] [SPEAKER_00] That makes sense. Like, it's not unheard of to do it.

[00:18:22] [SPEAKER_01] We have a standard operating procedure for it, because it's not unheard of, but it's not what is done on a day-to-day basis, necessarily.

[00:18:31] [SPEAKER_00] That makes a lot of sense. And I'm curious, just speaking generally, you know, what can Ballistik's evidence tell us? And what are some of the limitations of that evidence?

[00:18:43] [SPEAKER_01] Something called LeCard's Principle is something that we all follow in forensic science, no matter what unit you're in. So LeCard's Principle states that when any two things come into contact with each other, there's a transfer between the two items, and that right there by itself is the basis for all of forensic science. That's going to be true with ballistics as well. So the two items that we're talking about here could be a gun and a cartridge casing,

[00:19:11] [SPEAKER_01] a gun and the hand of the person that was holding it, a bullet and the factory that it was manufactured in, anything like that. So basically, ballistic evidence can tell us what two things potentially came into contact with each other. So that's the goal here. The limitations, just like test methods being listed out publicly, the limits and scope of practice for the test methods are also publicly available online. For example, in the caliber determination method section,

[00:19:40] [SPEAKER_01] the limitations portion states the firearm examiner shall recognize that the measurements taken are estimates and shall use the best available method to obtain these measurements. If the base is mutilated, the examiner may only be able to determine that the evidence is consistent within a range of calibers, or that the caliber cannot be determined. Lastly, when utilizing available general rifling characteristics files,

[00:20:07] [SPEAKER_01] the firearm examiner shall recognize that the data available is not all inclusive. So for each individual test method, there are limitations listed depending on what that method may be.

[00:20:19] [SPEAKER_00] So what are some common misconceptions about tool mark evidence, like ballistics?

[00:20:26] [SPEAKER_01] Yeah, so I know you asked Radley Balco about eyeballing the evidence after he repeatedly said so in the past for results and things like that. But I just wanted to reiterate the fact that as analysts, there is never any amount of just eyeballing done. So we have extensive procedures that we follow to ensure we are analyzing evidence in a scientific manner. Additionally, there is no such thing as a match in forensics. The differences in terminology may seem insignificant to some people,

[00:20:55] [SPEAKER_01] but there's a huge difference in saying that a bullet matches a gun versus a bullet is consistent with being fired from a gun. So we never make statements excluding all of their possibilities as indicated. For example, the correct wording for what Balco called a match as outlined in the SOP is that the bullet identified as item 001, these are just imaginary items, but the bullet item 001 was identified as having been fired in the same firearm

[00:21:24] [SPEAKER_01] identified as item 003 as the bullet identified as item 002. This provides significant support for the inclusion of the firearm in the case. This does not exclude all other firearms.

[00:21:39] [SPEAKER_00] I know this is sort of a dumb follow-up question, but like, why is it impossible to exclude all other firearms? Is it because you can't test every gun in the world?

[00:21:50] [SPEAKER_01] Yeah, so there's that portion of it. There's just, you can't be 100% certain. Even with DNA, for example, we will never say we have 100% certainty. Not even if we're saying that the chance of someone other than the suspect contributing to a DNA profile is over a trillion. So sometimes we say things like that. However, then the defense attorney will say, so how many people are in the world? And we say a number that's less than a trillion.

[00:22:20] [SPEAKER_01] That does not mean that we are saying it can only be the suspect. There could be another person. Because we have not had the opportunity to examine the DNA profile of every single person in the world. It's an estimate, and it's more of a ratio type situation.

[00:22:36] [SPEAKER_00] Of course, one thing Radley talked about was this case in Illinois where ballistics evidence was actually thrown out. And I believe we've recently seen a case in Maryland where ballistics evidence was also thrown out. So what are your thoughts on this movement among defense attorneys to ask to throw out ballistics evidence?

[00:22:56] [SPEAKER_01] So I personally don't see a reason to throw out ballistics evidence as long as it's been correctly obtained. So if there was an issue with the chain of custody or something along those lines, I can understand where the question about the validity of the evidence would come up. However, throwing out evidence that has been extensively peer-reviewed, such as ballistics evidence, does not seem logical or rational to me. I don't understand how you could read so many scientific papers on something

[00:23:23] [SPEAKER_01] and be able to see all of these different validations and things like that and then say, no, this can't be true. I'm throwing it out. That seems kind of similar to some healthcare things to me that have happened in the past where one person decides, no, I'm not going to trust this source even though these people are educated on it properly and I don't like it. So I'm going to make sure that my voice is loud and I'm going to have it thrown out.

[00:23:46] [SPEAKER_00] Is this tendency of defense attorneys to want to throw out ballistics evidence, is this something you've encountered in your own career?

[00:23:53] [SPEAKER_01] I work in a different area of forensic science, so I don't necessarily know about ballistics evidence being thrown out. I haven't heard about it a ton, at least not in the state that I work in. But in the area that I work, the area I work within forensics, it hasn't been an issue for me.

[00:24:09] [SPEAKER_00] We've heard some talking points and just statements from people who are more skeptical of ballistics. Do you have any response to any of those?

[00:24:18] [SPEAKER_01] There's nothing I necessarily want to debunk or anything like that, but I wanted to note that the firearms section of the state police is regularly audited to meet the minimum required operating standards for the National Integrated Ballistics Information Network, that's commonly known as NIBIN, of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Additionally, the entire state laboratory is accredited by the American National Standards Institute National Accreditation Board

[00:24:47] [SPEAKER_01] with reaccreditation occurring every four years and other regular monitoring throughout the year. The Organization of Scientific Areas Committees for Forensic Science is broken up into several smaller subcommittees that set standards for the entire nation to follow, and those standards are followed within the state laboratory. If someone was unaware of the validity of an analyst before, I hope that knowing the number of outside organizations that check the work of the analyst

[00:25:16] [SPEAKER_01] on top of the amount of internal validation studies, technical reviews, administrative reviews, and extensive training that go into the examination of an item of evidence before a report is even released to the police agency for the case helps them rest a little bit easier at night.

[00:25:36] [SPEAKER_00] We would like to again thank Diane for taking the time to share her expertise with us today. And we also appreciate the other experts in this area who have spoken with us on the show. We are always interested in getting more voices in on this discussion. If you're an expert in ballistics and you have a perspective on this topic, pro or con, that you feel is not getting heard, then please reach out to us. The easiest way to contact us is by sending an email to murdersheet at gmail.com.

[00:26:07] [SPEAKER_01] We'd like to highlight that we are also interested in other conversations and discussions. The criminal justice system can be incredibly complex and can lead to a variety of areas that many of us find confusing. If there is an area that you would like more clarification on, please send us an email and let us know. We will do our best to find an expert to come on and talk about it. Alternatively, if you are an expert in an area that you feel is not being covered fairly,

[00:26:36] [SPEAKER_01] please let us know about that too. We are very interested in being fair and hearing out all sides of these very complicated issues.

[00:26:45] [SPEAKER_00] Thanks so much for listening to The Murder Sheet. If you have a tip concerning one of the cases we cover, please email us at murdersheet at gmail.com. If you have actionable information about an unsolved crime, please report it to the appropriate authorities.

[00:27:05] [SPEAKER_01] If you're interested in joining our Patreon, that's available at www.patreon.com slash murdersheet. If you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests, you can do so at www.buymeacoffee.com slash murdersheet. We very much appreciate any support.

[00:27:29] [SPEAKER_00] Special thanks to Kevin Tyler Greenlee, who composed the music for The Murder Sheet, and who you can find on the web at kevintg.com.

[00:27:39] [SPEAKER_01] If you're looking to talk with other listeners about a case we've covered, you can join The Murder Sheet discussion group on Facebook. We mostly focus our time on research and reporting, so we're not on social media much. We do try to check our email account, but we ask for patience as we often receive a lot of messages. Thanks again for listening.

[00:28:11] [SPEAKER_00] Before we wrap up this episode, can we take just a moment to say a few more words about our great new sponsor, Acorns?

[00:28:18] [SPEAKER_01] Yeah, thanks so much to Acorns. Remember, when you support our sponsors, you're supporting us, and our sponsors make it possible for us to do this job, so we really appreciate them.

[00:28:27] [SPEAKER_00] We love our sponsors.

[00:28:28] [SPEAKER_01] Absolutely. Acorns is a terrific investing app. It's the perfect thing for somebody who wants to get started with their personal finance journey. That can seem daunting. It is daunting. I'm so not financially minded. For me, it's always really hard to get started with something like this, where you're like, what am I doing? But Acorns sort of takes the guesswork out of that. It gets you started, and it will essentially help you take control of your financial future. You can get set up pretty quickly,

[00:28:58] [SPEAKER_01] and it allows you to start automatically saving and investing. That money can help you, your kids, if you have a family, your retirement, and you don't need to be rich. You don't need to be an expert to do this. It's very simple, and you can start with only $5 or whatever change you have. It's not like you need to put in some massive payment. So it's a great fit for people who are starting out, but they want to take the next step and improve themselves financially and make their money work for them more.

[00:29:27] [SPEAKER_01] So if you're interested, head to acorns.com slash msheet or download the Acorns app to start saving and investing for your future today. Paid non-client endorsement. Compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns. Tier 1 compensation provided. Investing involved risk. Acorns Advisors LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor. You important disclosures at acorns.com slash msheet.

[00:29:47] [SPEAKER_00] Can we talk a little bit before we go about Quince, a great new sponsor for us? I think in one of the ads that we've already done for them, we talked about the compliments I'm getting on my jacket. I know you're a very modest woman, but can we talk about the compliments you're getting on the Quince products you wear?

[00:30:06] [SPEAKER_01] Yeah, I've got two of their Mongolian cashmere sweaters. They're a brand that just does this sort of luxurious products, but without the crazy costs really well. They give you Italian leather handbags. They do like European linen sheets. You have a really cool suede jacket. And I really like the way I look in my sweaters. I like the way you look in your bomber jacket. It looks super cool.

[00:30:32] [SPEAKER_00] You've gotten a lot of compliments when you go out wearing these sweaters.

[00:30:35] [SPEAKER_01] I think I have, yeah.

[00:30:36] [SPEAKER_00] And deservedly so.

[00:30:37] [SPEAKER_01] Also, like, I'm one of those people, my skin is very, like, you know, kind of sensitive. So when it comes to wearing sweaters, like, you know, sometimes something's too scratchy. Like, it really bothers me. These are so soft. They're just, like, very delicate and soft. And make, wearing them is lovely because they're super comfortable. You're not, it's not one of those things where you're like, you buy it and it looks great, but it doesn't feel that great. They look great. They feel great. But yeah, I really love them. And you got, you know, your cool jacket. I mean, that's a little bit of a,

[00:31:07] [SPEAKER_01] you're the guy who, like, wears the same thing all the time. So this was a bit of a, a gamble for you, a bit of a risk. You got something a bit different.

[00:31:13] [SPEAKER_00] I do wash my clothes.

[00:31:14] [SPEAKER_01] I know you wash your clothes, but I mean,

[00:31:17] [SPEAKER_00] you're filthy. You just made me sound awful. So no, I wash my clothes.

[00:31:22] [SPEAKER_01] But you don't really, I longer them. You don't really experiment with fashion that much is what I'm saying. So this is a little bit out of the norm for you, but I think you really like it and it looks good.

[00:31:30] [SPEAKER_00] Thank you. Great products, incredible prices. Absolutely. Quince.com.

[00:31:35] [SPEAKER_01] There you go. So you can go to quince.com slash msheet. And right now they're offering 365 day returns plus free shipping on your order. So it's quince.com slash msheet. That's Q-U-I-N-C-E dot com slash M-S-H-E-E-T.

[00:31:52] [SPEAKER_00] Before we go, we just wanted to say another few words about VIA. This is really a wonderful product. I think it's really helped both of us get a lot better rest.

[00:32:01] [SPEAKER_01] VIA is pretty much, I guess you'd say, the only lifestyle hemp brand out there. So what does that mean? It means that they're all about crafting different products to elicit different moods. Kevin and I really like their non-THC CBD products. Specifically, Zen really helps me fall asleep. Some Zen can really just kind of help me get more into that state where I can relax and fall asleep pretty easily. And they've been such a wonderful support to us. They're a long-time sponsor. We really love working with them and they really make

[00:32:31] [SPEAKER_01] this show possible. I'm going to say this, you may not realize this, but when you support our sponsors, you're supporting us and it kind of makes it possible for us to do this show. So if you or one of your loved ones is interested in trying some of this stuff, you're going to get a great deal. It's very high quality, high value.

[00:32:47] [SPEAKER_00] Anya, if I wanted to get this discount you speak of, what do I do?

[00:32:52] [SPEAKER_01] Okay, if you're 21 and older, head to viahemp.com and use the code MSHEET to receive 15% off. And if you're new to Viya, get a free gift of your choice. That's V-I-I-A hemp.com and use code MSHEET at checkout.

[00:33:06] [SPEAKER_00] Spell the code.

[00:33:07] [SPEAKER_01] M-S-H-E-E-T And after you purchase, they're going to ask you, hey, where did you hear about us? Say the murder sheet because then it lets them know that our ads are effective and it really helps us out.