Inside a Mock Homicide Case: What Michelle Khare Learned About How Crimes Are Actually Solved
Michelle Khare
In this episode of Challenge Accepted, Michelle Khare works through a staged homicide investigation alongside working forensic and investigative staff in San Diego. The question behind the challenge is how closely the crime shows audiences have "seen a million times on TV" match the real process. Khare follows the case from the crime scene through forensic analysis, ballistic comparison, fingerprint identification and a suspect interview. Along the way the experts keep pointing out where television gets it wrong: the work is slower, more methodical, and depends on many small steps that rarely make it to the screen.
The guides are Lisa Merzwski, a supervisor in the Firearms unit; Heidi Hebert, a crime scene specialist; and Ricky Escalante, a homicide detective responsible for the first-line investigation. The case is a recreation, and the suspect is played by an actor.
Reading the Scene: Looking for What Doesn't Belong
The investigators explain that they arrive already knowing what the call was and where the victim is. The job at the scene is to look for "things that don't belong" and anything that isn't natural. Khare's first observation is blood on a car. The investigators read the staining as consistent with a gunshot wound, with the body hitting the car and sliding down.
Bullet casings are found in the car, and one item turns out to be an actual projectile. When asked where the shooter might have stood, Khare suggests a spot behind the car, and the investigators accept that as a possibility. Then a significant find: a gun hidden in a tire, potentially the murder weapon. Khare admits it is hard to stay professional. As a child she wanted to be a detective after reading The Boxcar Children and Nancy Drew. Khare also describes an uneasy balance between the thrill of finding a clue and the shock of imagining the scene as real.
The investigators then ask Khare to put herself in the shooter's position and work out where shell casings would land under different theories. They don't yet know where the shooter stood, and the number of casings shows that multiple shots were fired.
The reporting party (RP), the victim's girlfriend, lives on the first floor of the building. From this evidence Khare forms a first working theory: the perpetrator fired five shots from the front stoop, stashed the gun in the tire and fled. Because the girlfriend's 911 call seemed suspicious to Khare, the girlfriend becomes her number one suspect.
Documenting Everything for the Jury
Next, each item of evidence gets a numbered placard and is photographed. The specialists describe shooting at 90 degrees one way and 90 degrees the other, and capturing the spatial relationships between items. They stress this because these images are what will be projected in court, and the jury has to be shown what investigators saw. One of the investigators mentions taking 797 photos during a couple of search warrants earlier that week. Khare jokes that Instagram influencers take that many for a single picture.
Between tasks the conversation turns to the emotional side of the job. Khare asks whether it is scary or sad. The answer is that parts of it can be sad, but it helps to think about how much good the work does. Escalante says he is glad to have a partner because he usually does this work alone. The investigators say partnerships matter: partners play off each other and learn to anticipate what the other is doing and thinking. Khare decides the real objective of the challenge is a "best friends level" relationship with her partner. She starts working out a secret handshake with Escalante, which becomes a running joke for the rest of the episode. Its catchphrase, "assess the scene," survives several revisions, and a spin is dropped for safety.
Handling the Weapon and the Real Pace of Scene Work
Khare retrieves the gun from the tire herself and says it feels "really bizarre" to touch a weapon knowing that an hour earlier someone used it to end a life. The investigators have her check the headstamps on the cartridges, which read "R-P Luger," and confirm that they are all consistent.
The episode then addresses one of TV's biggest distortions, which is time. Scenes like this can take upwards of 10 hours to process, and more complex cases can reach 35 hours of on-site processing. Escalante describes the workload: six homicide teams of five detectives each that he rolls with, and at times six homicides at once in San Diego. One team member says they sometimes see Ricky more than their own husband.
The Lasers Change the Theory
To reconstruct the shots, the team attaches lasers to trajectory rods inserted through the bullet holes in the car and uses fog to make the beams visible. The lasers trace the bullets' paths back to the second-floor balcony, not the stoop.
This overturns Khare's theory. The cartridge cases on the ground made it seem like the shooter was on the first floor. The trajectory instead points to the second story, and the girlfriend lives on the first floor. When Khare suggests it might not be the girlfriend after all, the firearms expert declines to speculate on who the suspect is. Their opinion and interpretation cover only one point: the shots came from the balcony. With no strong suspect left, the investigation turns to the forensic evidence collected at the scene.
Processing the Gun for Prints: Contamination and Superglue
The narrative then jumps ahead two days. The handgun, one bullet and six cartridge cases have been collected, and the autopsy was done the day before. Khare's job is to process the gun for DNA and fingerprints. She says she is nervous, because what is found could decide whether someone goes to prison and whether the right person is caught.
She makes beginner's mistakes immediately. She is told she can hold the grip because no prints will be there. Then she lays the gun on a dirty surface right after being told not to. She admits she would have ruined a real case, and says she is glad this is a mock scene.
A visual inspection under light shows nothing that looks like a classic fingerprint. The gun then goes into a cyanoacrylate ester (superglue fuming) chamber. As the specialist explains it, the chamber raises the humidity and a hot plate heats a small amount of glue until it evaporates into a fume. The fume fills the chamber and fixes prints to the gun, so prints that couldn't be seen become visible. Afterward far more prints appear. Khare observes that the glue adds contrast, and the specialist agrees.
Only then does the familiar TV step happen: brushing powder over the prints and lifting them with tape. Under the light again, the prints have come up. The lifts are impounded in property and sent to the latent prints unit to see whether they identify anyone.
A Case That Took Four Years
While the gun is fuming, Khare asks about the most meaningful case the specialist has worked. In 2009, a young girl was found murdered in an abandoned house, and the team spent probably over a month processing that scene. An arrest came four years later, and the man was convicted. After testifying, the specialist walked into the hallway and a man approached and said he was her father. He hugged the specialist and said he had no idea how much work investigators put in. The story shows the slowness and persistence that, according to the episode, television tends to compress.
The Firearms Unit and Ballistic Fingerprints
While the latent prints are processed, the next step is confirming that the gun from the scene actually fired the shots. Merzwski shows Khare the Firearms unit's reference collection. It runs from revolvers and tiny semi-automatic pistols to very heavy weapons, a belt-buckle gun and a grenade launcher. The collection exists for training, and so examiners can recognize and testify about any type of weapon, from black-powder muskets to fully automatic firearms.
The episode explains that a fired gun leaves microscopic marks on the bullet and cartridge case, which work like ballistic fingerprints. Because a bullet was recovered at the scene, the suspect gun can be test-fired and the marks compared. Khare fires the gun into a water tank, which catches the bullet in pristine condition without altering its markings, while a separate device captures the cartridge case. Khare compares the tank to the ice bath she uses for boxing. The test bullet shows the lands and grooves left by the barrel.
Under the Comparison Microscope
A comparison microscope lets an examiner view two items at once, almost like an overlay. The scene evidence sits on the left and the test fire on the right. Khare's first impression is that they look like a match but seem slightly off, and she isn't sure whether that matters. Merzwski says that is what you would expect. She points out the firing pin impression and the breech face markings, including marks from the drag of the firing pin. These marks support the conclusion that both cartridge cases were fired by the same weapon. The cartridge cases from the homicide scene came from the recovered gun.
Fingerprint Matching Is Not One Button Press
The episode makes another correction to TV here. A fingerprint match is only possible if the person's print is already in a database. The search itself can take upwards of several hours, depending on how narrow or wide the parameters are.
A latent print examiner shows Khare what examiners look for. A bifurcation is where one ridge splits into two, and an ending ridge is where a ridge abruptly stops. Examiners look for these features next to each other. The comparison print came from a DMV record. Khare asks whether the result is conclusive. The examiner's phrasing is careful: the impression from the magazine "has been identified to this DMV record." That identifies who handled the gun, and the next question is how the print got on the magazine.
The Interview: Rapport First
Khare asks whether this is the good cop/bad cop part and whether she gets to slam the table. Escalante says no to the table. He says the first goal is to build a comfortable rapport and draw out information critical to the investigation. They plan to stay "good cop" the whole way, with the truth as the only aim.
The suspect, Norman, says he spent March 15 at a movie at a Century Cinema on the west side with a woman named Brooke. He knows the victim, Chris, as his neighbor. He doesn't know Chris's girlfriend personally but says the couple fight a lot and loudly. He says he last saw Chris about three days earlier. When told Chris was shot in front of his apartment, and reminded that surveillance cameras are everywhere, he denies knowing anything. He also remarks that Chris doesn't sound like he was a great guy.
The Break, and Pressing on the Alibi
The investigators step out to confer. Khare says it was intense and that she is no longer sure he's the right person. Escalante notes that the suspect seemed a little shifty when Chris came up. Their plan is to challenge the movie story: there's no record of a debit card purchase for a ticket. Back in the room, Norman suggests he paid cash or got mixed up. When told Brooke said she wasn't with him that Wednesday, he changes his account. He was home and heard the couple fighting.
The investigators then offer an opening. If he was defending the girlfriend in a legitimate self-defense situation, they could look into it and corroborate it. They ask who seemed to be the aggressor and tell him this is a pivotal moment. He says he saw Chris chase his girlfriend into the street and attack her, but insists he didn't kill him. That slip becomes the turning point. Escalante points out that they never told him Chris had died. Norman says he can't claim to be upset that it happened.
Confronting With Confidence
During a second break, Escalante coaches Khare. If she is confident he did it, she should look him in the eye and say so. Khare goes back in and lays out the facts. His fingerprints, and only his, were on the gun, and the trajectory leads to his balcony. She says she isn't asking whether he did it but why. She needs to know whether she's facing a killer with no regard for anyone or a decent person who walked into a situation and tried to do the right thing.
Norman confesses. He says he saw Chris chase the girlfriend into the street and hit her, and he believed Chris was going to kill her. He says he grabbed his gun meaning only to scare him, then couldn't stop and kept shooting until Chris was on the ground. Khare thanks him for telling the truth, and the scenario ends.
What TV Leaves Out
Khare says the interview was "so hard." Her takeaway is that Hollywood shows complex cases solved with a single touch of a button. What it doesn't capture is how hard these investigators work: the hours of scene processing, the documentation for court, the slow print searches and the careful limits on what an expert will claim. The episode ends with one last loose end. Khare and Escalante finally perform the finished secret handshake, ending on "assess the scene" and "partners in crime."
Tonight we will recreate a homicide that Michelle will be responsible for investigating. There are bullet casings in the car.
Seven on the side. Okay. From investigating a crime scene— a new clue has emerged— to forensic analysis— I don't see anything that looks like a fingerprint— to even a high-stakes interrogation. I know you did this. Am I going to slam the table? Unfortunately, no.
We've seen it a million times on TV, and I want to find out how accurate your favorite shows are to the real thing. I want to find this person. Whodunit? Find out on this episode of Challenge Accepted.
Tonight Michelle is out with Lisa Merzwski. She's a supervisor for a firearms unit. Heidi Hebert, a crime scene specialist, and then Ricky Escalante. He is a homicide detective, and he's tasked with conducting the first-line investigation.
So we know what the call was. We know where the victim is. So you're looking for things that don't belong, right? What's not natural in the scene?
Is there anything remarkable about what you see here? Well, there's blood on the car. Yep, we have signs that there's blood staining on the vehicle, right? So it's a gunshot wound, and it looks like the body hit the car and then slid down.
There are bullet casings in the car. So that's actually a bullet, an actual projectile. Just by looking at this, where do you think the perpetrator would have shot him from? Maybe from behind here. Yeah, that's a possibility as well, right?
I found a clue. Okay, what did we find? Potentially the murder weapon. Oh, wow. Okay. Oh my God, that was very thrilling. Is it exciting every time you find a clue? It really is. Oh my God. Okay, I'm trying to be professional, but this is really good. To be a superstar at the scene right now. Absolutely.
The first job I wanted to have as a kid was to be a detective after reading The Boxcar Children and Nancy Drew. It's a really interesting balance because it is very exciting to find a clue, but then at the same time it's very shocking to imagine this being real.
So let's try to put ourselves in the shooter's position, right? Say your first theory was, hey, maybe we have a shooter shooting from here. Then where would our shell casings be? Because we don't know where the person, the perpetrator, shot from.
Oh, so multiple shots. That's huge. Yep. Just by looking at this, is there anything that you can glean as to the identity? It's like it's our RP because she's on the first floor and she lives here.
So based on the evidence discovered so far, my current working theory is that the perpetrator took five shots from the front stoop, stashed the gun in the tire, and then fled the scene. And based on the suspicious nature of the 911 call, the victim's girlfriend, who made the call, is my number one suspect.
The next thing in the process is we're going to start assigning placards to each item of evidence, and you're going to take photos. We're going to take them 90 degrees one way, 90 degrees another way. Spatial relationship between our items of evidence, that's going to be really important because these are going to be the images that are going to be projected in court. You have to show the jury what you saw.
We did a couple search warrants on Monday, and I took 797 photos. That's how many photos some Instagram girls take for one picture.
Okay, I just have to say something. It felt really cool to walk under the police tape. Isn't that cool? Best job ever. I love my job. Is it not scary or sad? It's sad. Parts of it can be sad, right? But think of how much good you're doing, right?
I see everything. I'm a detective. Yeah. I'm excited to have a partner because usually I do this stuff alone. The partnership is important. They do play off one another. Sometimes it could be knowing what the other is doing, what the other one is thinking.
You ever wear a double-billed hat? Can't say I have. I was going to bring one, but then they said— You should have. Embarrassing. No, I should have. I wish we should have brought the double-billed hats. Excuse me, Garrett.
You know, when I was thinking about this challenge, I realized there's one objective, and that's to build a strong, best-friends-level relationship with my partner, and it starts with a secret handshake. How are you? Are you?
All right, take one. First part, there will be 12. All right. This is your gun box. Gun box. You're going to reach in and take the murder weapon. With mine own hands. Okay. Feels really bizarre touching a murder weapon, knowing that an hour before someone ended someone's life. Yeah.
Now, what kind of headstamp was it? R-P Luger. So are all the headstamps consistent, right? Do they all match?
And what you don't see on TV is that typically these crime scenes can take upwards of 10 hours to process, with more complex cases reaching 35 hours of on-site processing.
I have five detectives on six homicide teams that I roll with. So that'd be too many. Six homicide teams? We have six homicide teams. That's how many homicides are happening in San Diego? Sometimes I see Ricky more than I see my husband.
But do you guys have a secret handshake? No, we don't. You do? Did you get one? Nice. Working on it. Oh, he'll give you one.
So if we start here— Oh, are we doing the handshake again? All right. Professional handshake. I don't know if I can do that one. The spin? It's dangerous, I guess. Okay, you're right. You're right. We're safe. Let's do the top, and we'll do the professional. There you go. I like it. I think that could work. I think that one could work. You don't want to add in an assess the scene? Okay, you're the cool one. I'm not. No, no, no, you're the cool one. I definitely am not. Okay, okay.
I think it's fog time. Let's do the fog thing. Okay, so now we attach the lasers to the end of the trajectory rods, and this is going to tell us the path of the bullet that made these holes in the car and the location of the shooter. And you can see the shots originated from the balcony. So, okay, from up there.
A new clue has emerged. What? Just because the cartridge cases are located down here— Yeah. It seemed like maybe the shooter was on the first floor, but from the second floor, it might not be the girlfriend. I don't speculate on who the suspect is. All I can say in my opinions and interpretations is that the shots came from the balcony. Dramatic. I want to find this person. Whodunit?
With the new information gathered from the trajectory lasers, our new working theory is that the perpetrator actually took their shots from the second-story balcony. And because the victim's girlfriend's apartment is on the first floor, it's leading me to believe it might not be the girlfriend after all. So without any strong suspect leads, we now have to turn to forensic evidence recovered at the crime scene in order to pinpoint a new suspect.
Two nights ago you were called out, and you responded to a homicide scene. You collected a handgun, a bullet, and six cartridge cases. Yesterday we did our autopsy. And now what we get off the gun, do you remember what I said it was good for? DNA and fingerprints. Uh-huh. Your job is to process that firearm so they can get that information.
I'm very nervous handling it because obviously what we find here can impact whether or not somebody goes to prison. It could impact whether or not we find the person who did this. A hundred percent. So pick it up. You're good with the grip part, right? Because there's no prints there. You're going to look at it under the light.
What did you just do? You laid it on a dirty surface. We literally just talked about this. I keep contaminating everything. It's a really good thing that this is a mock crime scene because if this was real, I would have ruined the whole thing.
So I don't see anything that looks like a classic fingerprint. You visually examined it. We saw nothing. So what we're going to do now is you're going to put it in the chamber to be superglued. That is a cyanoacrylate ester chamber that will fix any prints that you couldn't visualize and make them visible. Oh my gosh, this is so cool.
So hit start, and there you go. Wait, so what's happening right now? It's bringing the humidity up. The hot plate is heating up to evaporate that little glue you put in there, and it's going to make it a fume, and it's going to fill that chamber with that fume to affix those prints to that gun. Wow.
You were talking earlier about how you feel that you are making a difference in the community. What's the biggest impact case you've been a part of? In 2009, I had a young girl that was found in an abandoned house. She had been murdered, and we spent probably over a month processing the scene. Four years later, we've made an arrest in that case. Four years? It took four years. He was convicted. I walked out into the hallway after I got off the stand, and a gentleman came up, and he goes, "I'm her father." He actually gave me a hug. He goes, "I had no idea the work you guys put in." That made a difference.
Did any prints develop on it? So many more. Oh my gosh. Right? So the superglue, it almost provides more contrast so that you can see everything. A hundred percent. This is what you see in TV shows, the brushing for the prints. Yes. You're going to lay that tape. That tape's going to pick up all that powder. Now you want to look under the light again and see if you can see prints. Did they come up? Yes. Awesome. Yay, we got the print.
You're going to impound this down in property, and it's going to go to latent prints, and you're going to see if they ID somebody. Let's do it. So while we wait for the latent prints to process, the next step is to confirm that the firearm found at the crime scene was actually the firearm used in the crime.
Welcome to the firearms unit. Oh my gosh, wow. So you've got everything from revolvers to small semiautomatic pistols, all different calibers. This looks like it's from a comedy sketch. Belt buckle gun. What? Oh my gosh. So you can wear it. There you go. From those little tiny ones to giant— Oh my gosh, this is heavy. Yep. There's also a grenade launcher up there. So casual.
Why do we need all of these guns here? Not only for training, but also to recognize and be able to testify about all different types of weapons, from anything that's going to fire black powder, like an old musket, to modern— Muskets in here? Yes. Full automatic firearms.
When a bullet is fired from a gun, the gun leaves microscopic marks on the bullet and the cartridge case. These marks are like ballistic fingerprints. And because we recovered a bullet from the scene, we can actually test-fire the suspect's gun to see if the marks on the crime scene bullet match the marks on the test-fire bullet.
You collected a bullet and cartridge cases, so we're going to use the water tank. What is this device? It's going to actually collect the bullet once it's fired into the tank, and it's going to keep it in a pristine form. And it won't affect the markings.
I'm assuming I look in this hole. Whoa. So this is going to— generally, you're going to put the muzzle here. It's going to fire into the tank, and then this is going to capture your cartridge case. This is like the ice bath that I use for boxing. There you go. We should not go inside. No, don't go inside there. No.
All right. And fired. Wow. And so you can see the lands and grooves from the barrel. Oh, so the next step is to look at this under a microscope. Yep. All right.
Welcome to the scope world. Okay, I've been waiting for cool lighting, and we finally have it. I'm so excited. Yes. This is a comparison microscope. What's unique about these is that you can look at two items at the same time. Almost like an overlay image. An overlay. And you're trying to determine whether or not they have similar markings. On the left is your evidence that you collected from the scene, and on the right is the test fire.
I don't know how detailed we need to be here, but at first glance they kind of look like they match. Yeah. But however, they're slightly off, and I don't know if that is impactful. So that's what you would expect. This is your firing pin impression, and these are your breech face markings. So this is all from the drag of the firing pin, and these marks are all giving you a match that these two were fired by the same weapon. And so we can say the cartridge cases you found at that homicide scene are from that gun.
So we've confirmed that the cartridges we found do match the weapon that was found on scene. Yep. We've sent the fingerprints and DNA for an analysis. So now what's the fingerprint result? Oh, we got to find out. That's next.
Contrary to what we often see on TV, finding a fingerprint match is not as simple as it's portrayed. Not only does an individual's print need to already be in the database to even find a match, but the search itself can take upwards of several hours depending on how narrow or wide your search parameters are. And so with the help of a latent print examiner, we are finally able to ID a suspect based on the fingerprints found on the gun.
So the main things we're looking for are when one ridge splits into two, refer to that as a bifurcation, or when one ridge abruptly ends, and call that an ending ridge. So looking for those two things right next to each other.
So where was the print on the left found? This was from a DMV record. So if we have the DMV record, that means we know who was holding this gun. That's correct. Would we say this is conclusive? We'd say that the impression from this magazine has been identified to this DMV record. It's time for some questioning. It's time for some questioning to find out how this person's print got on that magazine.
Come on. Oh, whoa. Business time. Sorry. Assess the scene. You've got to say, "Assess the scene." This is the stuff of movies. Yes, yes.
So a lot has happened since we last met, right? We went out to the scene, and obviously we now have somebody in custody on this case, right? Is this the part where one of us is a good cop and the other is a bad cop? Close, in some way. We got to figure out how to elicit information that they have that would be critical to our investigation. Am I going to slam the table? Unfortunately, no.
The first thing that we want to try to do in an interview is try to build a comfortable rapport. Okay. It's just like— Sure. Yes. Good cop. During the interview, let's just try to be good cop the entire way. The entire way. Okay, okay. You better watch out, though. Okay. Ultimately, at the end of the day, we want the truth. That's all we care about, right? So see what they tell us. Where were you on the night of the 15th? Exactly. Not there.
So first we'd just like to have an understanding of where you were on March 15th. I went and saw a movie with a girl. Her name's Brooke. Yeah, we went and saw a movie at— it was a Century Cinema in the west side. Century Cinema. Okay.
Do you know Chris March by chance? There's my neighbor Chris. Do you know his girlfriend? Not personally, no. Okay. We're not friends, if that's what you mean. So you guys have never had an extensive conversation? They fight a lot. I don't know if you guys know this. They're pretty loud. Is everything okay with them? Oh yeah, yeah. We're just trying to get a better understanding of what was going on and everything.
When's the last time that you saw Chris? Probably just a few days ago, probably three days ago. I want to be as transparent as possible here, okay? And I'm sure you have some questions. Yeah, yeah. Unfortunately, something happened to your neighbor Chris. He was shot in front of your apartment. You do understand nowadays there's surveillance cameras everywhere. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Do you know anything about what happened to Chris? No, no, no.
How do you feel about him being shot? Tough question. It sounds like he wasn't a great guy. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know. I didn't really know him. My partner and I are going to step out real quick because there's some things that we have to review that we want to share with you. So just stand by for a second. Yeah.
Hot. Partner, it was really intense. Yeah, really intense. I'm stressed because I don't even know if this is the person anymore. What kinds of questions can we be asking? Did you notice how he was acting when we mentioned Chris? Yeah. He's a little shifty. Yeah, right? That was a little odd. I think what we could do in this situation is recap the fact that he told us he went to go watch a movie. There's no evidence that he purchased a movie ticket. It's like, so hey, we need you to be honest about where you were.
Debit card being swiped? That's weird. Maybe I paid with cash. Maybe I just got it mixed up. We called Brooke too, and she said she wasn't with you on Wednesday.
Is there anything else you want to tell us about what happened on Wednesday?
Yeah, I was home. I was home. Yeah, I heard them fighting. I heard them fight.
All we need to know is the truth about what happened on the 15th.
I didn't do anything.
Insane. You have him right there, like he wants to tell you. You can ask, listen, if you were defending her and it's legitimately self-defense, then we could look into that and we can corroborate that.
It was. Yeah, I know you mentioned some domestic violence stuff.
Sure. Did it sound like he was the aggressor or was she the aggressor?
The aggressor, it sounded like.
Opportunity for you to tell us the truth. We're in a very pivotal point for you. There is no question about where we're at in this investigation, okay? You just need to be honest.
I saw this guy chase his girlfriend out into the street and attack her.
Were you trying to help her?
I don't really know what to tell you. I didn't kill this guy. I'm glad she's okay.
Norman, you said you didn't kill him. We never told you that he had died, so you are aware that something did happen, because at the beginning of this conversation, "Did something happen to this guy?"
He got shot, and you're telling me that I shot him. I did not. But I can't say that I'm upset that it happened.
Take a break.
If you did this, we're past that. Did he do it?
I know, yeah. If you're confident that he did it, right, then you look at him in the eye and you tell him, "We're confident you did this." Now, we're confident is, "I know you did this. I know you did this. Now it's a matter of why. I want to know if I'm looking at a serial killer that has absolutely no sense, doesn't care about anybody, or if you're just a decent guy that ran up on a situation and wanted to do the right thing."
Norman, here are the facts. Your fingerprints, and only your fingerprints, were found on the gun. The bullet trajectory leads right to your apartment balcony. I'm not asking if you did this. I know you did this, and I just need to know why.
I need to know if I'm looking at a serial killer who is on the loose killing people, or if I'm looking at someone who is doing this innocently out of self-defense. And if you say you're a good guy, I believe that you are a good person, and this is your opportunity to prove that to us.
I was trying to protect her. All right, I saw the guy chase her out onto the street. He was hitting her. He's gonna kill her. He's gonna kill her, so I grabbed this gun I got. At first I was just gonna scare him. I thought maybe I could. I just couldn't stop. I kept shooting until he was on the ground.
Thank you for telling the truth.
All right, you got the confession. End scenario.
[Laughter] [Applause]
That was so hard. It's easy to get caught up in the glamour of what Hollywood feeds us, where complex cases are often solved with a single touch of a button. But what our favorite movies and TV shows don't fully capture is just how hard these individuals work to do their jobs with relentless dedication, unwavering attention to detail, and a tireless pursuit of the truth. And while this case was coming to a close, there was one last loose end that I needed to tie up.
I'm gonna get that handshake.
Is this like a serious thing you guys want? Like, I don't—
Yeah, come on, Ricky.
Like a cup thing to do. High five. Whoa, business.
[Music]
Assess the scene.
Partners in crime.
One interesting fact about this project is I was actually in the middle of a 12-week boxing fight camp while filming this video, and a key part of balancing all of that was hydration. So thank you so much to Liquid I.V. for sponsoring a portion of this video.
Whenever I hit the gym, I make sure to pack my favorite Liquid I.V. hydration packs to keep me hydrated during training. Drinking one Hydration Multiplier hydrates faster than water alone. It has three times the electrolytes of the leading sports drink, has eight vitamins and nutrients for everyday wellness, and is packed with B3, B5, B6, and B12.
You guys can use the link below to get 20% off plus free shipping on your next order, or purchase Lemon Lime Hydration Multiplier in Sugar-Free in stores at Costco. So thank you again so much, Liquid I.V., for sponsoring a portion of this video.
Article published · Updated