No Contest: The Kolsrud and King Report

Josh Kolsrud, Claudia King, Holland Reid
  • 0.0 (0)
  • True Crime
  • Updated Weekly

Known for their regular commentary on Court TV's Closing Arguments, MK True Crime, Crime Stories with Nancy Grace, and local news, Josh Kolsrud and Claudia King discuss the true crime cases that have everyone talking. They'll examine cases through the eyes of an attorney (Josh) and a former law enforcement officer and current Domestic Violence Expert (Claudia). Not only does this duo bring a wealth of knowledge and experience in their respective fields, they share a unique bond: they are both victims of traumatic incidents/domestic violence. But don't let their bonds fool you: Josh and Claudia don't hold back in sharing how they feel about each case, and disagreements are more common than a No Contest plea in court.

  1. Sep 24

    Lindsay Clancy: The Juror Debate

    The Lindsay Clancy trial ended in a mistrial, but the legal battle is far from over. In this episode of No Contest: The Kolsrud and King Report, attorney Josh Kolsrud and former law enforcement officer and legal analyst Claudia King take a close look at the controversy surrounding the lone holdout juror and the motions now being pursued by Clancy’s defense team. Josh and Claudia break down what happened inside the jury room, what we know about the 11–1 split, and the legal significance of a single juror refusing to join the other eleven. They also examine defense attorney Kevin Reddington’s efforts to challenge what happened during deliberations and investigate the holdout juror. Josh explains the legal hurdles involved, what a defense team must establish when raising allegations of juror misconduct, and why courts are generally cautious about interfering with jury deliberations. Claudia and Josh also discuss Reddington’s public approach toward the holdout juror and whether aggressively targeting a juror after a mistrial could have consequences beyond this case. Could the way jurors are treated after controversial verdicts or mistrials make ordinary citizens think twice about serving? Then, they look ahead. Could the case be dismissed? Could Lindsay Clancy face another trial? What happens if the court finds evidence of juror misconduct? And what legal arguments are likely to matter most when the parties return to court? PLUS, in Overtime: Even if Lindsay Clancy is ultimately found not criminally responsible, does that mean she will someday leave psychiatric treatment? Josh and Claudia discuss what continued commitment could look like, what courts consider when determining whether someone remains a danger to themselves or others, and why an insanity verdict does not automatically mean someone simply walks free. No Contest breaks down the law behind the headlines and the questions that remain unanswered in one of the most closely watched criminal cases in the country. Keywords: Lindsay Clancy, Lindsay Clancy trial, Lindsay Clancy mistrial, Lindsay Clancy juror, Lindsay Clancy holdout juror, Kevin Reddington, Lindsay Clancy motions, juror misconduct, hung jury, mistrial, insanity defense, not criminally responsible, postpartum psychosis, Massachusetts criminal law, retrial, double jeopardy, jury deliberations, criminal defense, true crime podcast, legal analysis, Claudia King, Josh Kolsrud, No Contest Podcast Josh and Claudia can be seen regularly on Court TV, Nancy Grace, and local News programs. No Contest features the true crime cases currently in the public spotlight. No Contest provides legal and social commentary. All opinions are those of the hosts. Your No Contest Hosts: Claudia King, Law/Crime TV Analyst, Domestic Violence Expert @realclaudiaking youarestrongenough.com Joshua Kolsrud, Criminal Defense and Personal Injury Attorney @joshua_kolsrud kolsrudlawoffices.com

    Lindsay Clancy: The Juror Debate

  2. Aug 30

    Lindsay Clancy: In Control?

    Attorney Josh Kolsrud and former law enforcement officer Claudia King examine the Lindsay Clancy case as the jury considers whether she should be held criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children. Josh and Claudia review the evidence presented by the prosecution and defense, the strongest moments through the trial, and the questions facing jurors after more than 10 hours of deliberations across the first two days. They explain the legal definition of Not Criminally Responsible in Massachusetts and why the state’s standard differs from the insanity defense used in many other jurisdictions. They also discuss Lindsay Clancy’s role in managing her treatment, including the difficult question of personal responsibility when mental illness and medication are central to the defense. The conversation also examines notable juror behavior, including a juror who cried during the prosecution’s closing argument and another who reportedly took no notes throughout the trial. Finally, Josh and Claudia consider how long deliberations could continue and when the possibility of a hung jury and mistrial may become a serious concern. No Contest provides legal analysis and former law enforcement insight into one of the most difficult and closely watched criminal cases in Massachusetts. Josh and Claudia can be seen regularly on Court TV, Nancy Grace, and local News programs. No Contest features the true crime cases currently in the public spotlight. No Contest provides legal and social commentary. All opinions are those of the hosts. Your No Contest Hosts: Claudia King, Law/Crime TV Analyst, Domestic Violence Expert @realclaudiaking youarestrongenough.com Joshua Kolsrud, Criminal Defense and Personal Injury Attorney @joshua_kolsrud kolsrudlawoffices.com

    Lindsay Clancy: In Control?

  3. Jul 24

    Nolan Wells Update & MN vs Hendrix

    Two cases dominating headlines. Two important reminders that criminal investigations and courtroom decisions are often far more complicated than they appear online. In this episode of No Contest: The Kolsrud and King Report, former federal prosecutor Josh Kolsrud and former law enforcement officer and legal analyst Claudia King break down the latest developments in the Shiloh Hendrix case and the investigation into the death of Nolan Wells. First, Claudia and Josh examine why Minnesota prosecutors charged Shiloh Hendrix with disorderly conduct following the viral confrontation at a Rochester playground. Josh explains why the prosecution focused on Hendrix’s conduct as a whole and whether it disturbed the peace, rather than attempting to criminalize one specific racially charged word. They also discuss: • Why Hendrix was not charged with a hate crime and how the First Amendment protects even deeply offensive speech • The difference between protected speech and conduct that may constitute disorderly conduct • Why the jury may have found Hendrix guilty of the count involving the child’s father but not guilty of the count involving the child • What the split verdict may reveal about how jurors evaluated each individual interaction Claudia and Josh then turn to the ongoing investigation into the death of 18-year-old Nolan Wells, whose body was discovered after a Fourth of July trip to Horn Island, Mississippi. They examine the early law enforcement missteps that fueled suspicion and concern, while also discussing why mistakes or poor communication do not automatically prove corruption, a cover-up, or criminal intent. The conversation also covers: • What the two autopsies have revealed and why no final cause or manner of death has been determined • Why toxicology and additional forensic testing could be critical • Questions surrounding the friends who were with Nolan before his disappearance • The danger of forming emotional conclusions before investigators have collected all the evidence • Why retaining an attorney early is a smart protective decision and should never be treated as proof of guilt This episode separates legal analysis from social media speculation and explains why waiting for evidence is not the same as ignoring legitimate questions. Listen now for a thoughtful, fact-based breakdown of the Shiloh Hendrix verdict and the continuing search for answers in the Nolan Wells case. Keywords: Shiloh Hendrix trial, Shiloh Hendrix verdict, Shiloh Hendrix guilty, Minnesota disorderly conduct, Rochester racial slur case, First Amendment law, hate crime charges, protected speech, Nolan Wells case, Nolan Xavier Wells, Nolan Wells autopsy, Nolan Wells toxicology, Horn Island death investigation, Mississippi investigation, Ben Crump, criminal investigation, legal analysis, true crime news, Claudia King, Josh Kolsrud, No Contest Podcast Josh and Claudia can be seen regularly on Court TV, Nancy Grace, and local News programs. No Contest features the true crime cases currently in the public spotlight. No Contest provides legal and social commentary. All opinions are those of the hosts. Your No Contest Hosts: Claudia King, Law/Crime TV Analyst, Domestic Violence Expert @realclaudiaking youarestrongenough.com Joshua Kolsrud, Criminal Defense and Personal Injury Attorney @joshua_kolsrud kolsrudlawoffices.com

    Nolan Wells Update & MN vs Hendrix

  4. Jul 20

    Karmelo Anthony: Post-Conviction Recap

    A jury has spoken, but the legal battle over the Karmelo Anthony case is far from over. In this episode of No Contest: The Kolsrud and King Report, attorney Josh Kolsrud and former law enforcement officer and legal analyst Claudia King break down Anthony’s murder conviction and 35-year prison sentence for the fatal stabbing of 17-year-old Austin Metcalf at a Texas high school track meet. Josh and Claudia examine one of the trial’s most controversial decisions: keeping cameras out of the courtroom. Would greater public access have helped combat misinformation and allowed people to evaluate the evidence for themselves, or was limiting courtroom coverage necessary to protect the integrity of the proceedings? They also explain what is legally required for a viable self-defense claim, including the importance of reasonable belief, proportional force, provocation, and whether someone can initiate or escalate a confrontation and later justify deadly force as self-defense. Did the evidence support Anthony’s claim that he feared for his life, or did his own words and actions undermine his defense? Editor’s Update: This episode was recorded before Karmelo Anthony formally appealed his conviction. His legal team has filed a notice of appeal, officially beginning the appellate process. Listen for a detailed, evidence-based discussion of the Karmelo Anthony verdict, the Austin Metcalf case, Texas self-defense law, courtroom transparency, criminal appeals, and what may happen next. Keywords: Karmelo Anthony, Karmelo Anthony appeal, Karmelo Anthony conviction, Austin Metcalf, Austin Metcalf murder case, Karmelo Anthony trial, Karmelo Anthony verdict, Karmelo Anthony sentence, self-defense law, Texas self-defense law, murder conviction appeal, notice of appeal, courtroom cameras, criminal trial analysis, legal analysis, true crime podcast, No Contest Podcast, Kolsrud and King Report, Josh Kolsrud, Claudia King Josh and Claudia can be seen regularly on Court TV, Nancy Grace, and local News programs. No Contest features the true crime cases currently in the public spotlight. No Contest provides legal and social commentary. All opinions are those of the hosts. Your No Contest Hosts: Claudia King, Law/Crime TV Analyst, Domestic Violence Expert @realclaudiaking youarestrongenough.com Joshua Kolsrud, Criminal Defense and Personal Injury Attorney @joshua_kolsrud kolsrudlawoffices.com

    Karmelo Anthony: Post-Conviction Recap

  5. Jul 9

    Tyler Robinson: Preliminary Hearing

    Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing: Strategy, Evidence, and What Happens Next The preliminary hearing in the Tyler Robinson case is revealing far more than just the evidence: it is providing a rare look at the strategies both sides are using as this high-profile prosecution moves toward trial. In this episode of No Contest: Kolsrud and King Report, criminal defense attorney Josh Kolsrud and former law enforcement officer and legal analyst Claudia King break down the biggest developments so far from the preliminary hearing and explain what they mean from a legal perspective. Why did prosecutors choose a preliminary hearing instead of presenting the case to a grand jury? Why was the hearing scheduled for five days when most preliminary hearings conclude in a single day? What is the defense hoping to accomplish through extensive cross-examination? Josh and Claudia also evaluate the investigative work presented in court, discussing where law enforcement excelled, particularly with video tracking, and where evidence collection may leave room for defense challenges. They talk about conspiracy theories and whether the prosecution is subtly quashing them through this hearing, and if they'll do the same during the trial. They also examine whether prosecutors may eventually consider removing the death penalty in exchange for a plea agreement, along with alleged prosecution missteps, including issues surrounding the court's gag order. Whether you've been following every development or are just catching up, this episode provides an experienced legal analysis of one of today's most closely watched criminal cases. In this episode: Why prosecutors chose a preliminary hearing instead of a grand jury Why this hearing lasted five days The defense's strategy during cross-examination Strengths and weaknesses of the investigation Could a plea deal remove the death penalty? Alleged prosecution missteps What happens next in the Tyler Robinson case Subscribe for weekly legal analysis of the nation's biggest criminal cases from criminal defense attorney Josh Kolsrud and former law enforcement officer Claudia King. Josh and Claudia can be seen regularly on Court TV, Nancy Grace, and local News programs. No Contest features the true crime cases currently in the public spotlight. No Contest provides legal and social commentary. All opinions are those of the hosts. Your No Contest Hosts: Claudia King, Law/Crime TV Analyst, Domestic Violence Expert @realclaudiaking youarestrongenough.com Joshua Kolsrud, Criminal Defense and Personal Injury Attorney @joshua_kolsrud kolsrudlawoffices.com

    Tyler Robinson: Preliminary Hearing

  6. Jul 7

    Michael Jackson: Controversy Reignited?

    Michael Jackson on Netflix: The Trial, The Documentary, and Why the Jury Said Not Guilty The new Netflix documentary on Michael Jackson has reignited one of the most controversial criminal cases in modern history. But does the documentary tell the whole story? In this episode of No Contest: Kolsrud and King Report, criminal defense attorney Josh Kolsrud and former law enforcement officer and legal analyst Claudia King break down the documentary, examine the evidence presented at trial, and explain why a jury ultimately found Michael Jackson not guilty on every count. From the prosecution's biggest mistakes to the defense strategy that proved successful, Josh and Claudia separate fact from emotion and discuss how high-profile cases can be shaped by media coverage, public opinion, and courtroom realities. Whether you watched the Netflix documentary or simply want a clearer understanding of one of the most debated celebrity trials in history, this episode provides a balanced legal analysis from two experienced professionals. Topics discussed include: The new Netflix Michael Jackson documentary The criminal allegations against Michael Jackson Why the prosecution struggled The defense strategy that resonated with jurors Key evidence presented during the trial The role of media coverage in high-profile criminal cases Why the jury returned not guilty verdicts Lessons for today's criminal justice system Subscribe for bi-weekly discussions covering today's biggest criminal cases, legal headlines, and courtroom controversies. Josh and Claudia can be seen regularly on Court TV, Nancy Grace, and local News programs. No Contest features the true crime cases currently in the public spotlight. No Contest provides legal and social commentary. All opinions are those of the hosts. Your No Contest Hosts: Claudia King, Law/Crime TV Analyst, Domestic Violence Expert @realclaudiaking youarestrongenough.com Joshua Kolsrud, Criminal Defense and Personal Injury Attorney @joshua_kolsrud kolsrudlawoffices.com

    Michael Jackson: Controversy Reignited?

  7. Jun 18

    Brian Hooker: New Evidence?

    In this episode of No Contest: Kolsrud and King Report, attorney Josh Kolsrud and former police officer and domestic violence expert Claudia King examine the latest developments in the Brian Hooker case and discuss newly reported evidence that could play a critical role in the investigation. The conversation explores an Apple Watch allegedly belonging to the victim and an infrared camera reportedly connected to Brian Hooker, raising important questions about what investigators know and what they may still need to prove. Josh and Claudia break down the legal and investigative challenges facing prosecutors in a case where a body has not been recovered, discussing why determining cause of death, manner of death, and time of death can be crucial in a homicide prosecution. They also examine the role of circumstantial evidence, the realities of building a criminal case without a body, and whether additional evidence could strengthen or weaken the allegations against Hooker. Throughout the discussion, Josh and Claudia emphasize a principle at the heart of the justice system: the victim's family deserves answers and justice, and Brian Hooker deserves a fair process, whether that ultimately leads to exoneration or accountability. Plus, they discuss the growing influence of public opinion, trial-by-media, and how a suspect's actions can shape perceptions long before a jury hears the evidence. If you're following the Brian Hooker investigation, true crime cases, criminal law, missing persons investigations, homicide prosecutions, or high-profile criminal cases making headlines, this is an episode you won't want to miss. Josh and Claudia can be seen regularly on Court TV, Nancy Grace, and local News programs. No Contest features the true crime cases currently in the public spotlight. No Contest provides legal and social commentary. All opinions are those of the hosts. Your No Contest Hosts: Claudia King, Law/Crime TV Analyst, Domestic Violence Expert @realclaudiaking youarestrongenough.com Joshua Kolsrud, Criminal Defense and Personal Injury Attorney @joshua_kolsrud kolsrudlawoffices.com

    Brian Hooker: New Evidence?

  8. Jun 3

    Mackenzie Shirilla: Was Justice Served?

    Mackenzie Shirilla: Was Justice Served?  The Mackenzie Shirilla case shocked the nation and continues to spark heated debate among true crime followers, legal experts, and victims' advocates alike. In this episode of The No Contest Podcast: Kolsrud, King & Reid Report, attorney Josh Kolsrud, domestic violence expert and former police officer Claudia King, and pop culture analyst Holland Reid take a deep dive into one of the most controversial criminal cases in recent memory. Was justice truly served in the deaths of Dominic Russo and Davion Flanagan? Did the defense strategy help shape public perception of Mackenzie Shirilla? What role did family dynamics and parental enabling play before and after the deadly crash? And why did Shirilla's appeal face significant legal hurdles? Our panel examines the prosecution's theory, the defense's courtroom strategy, Mackenzie Shirilla's behavior before and after the crash, the sentence imposed by the court, the controversy surrounding her appeal, and the broader societal questions raised by the case. Most importantly, we explore a question that affects countless victims and families navigating the criminal justice system: If a court outcome doesn't bring peace, how can victims redefine justice and healing for themselves? Topics discussed: • Mackenzie Shirilla trial analysis • Dominic Russo and Davion Flanagan case • Defense strategy and criminal trial tactics • Sentencing controversy • Criminal appeals and legal procedure • Parental enabling and accountability • Victim advocacy and trauma recovery • High-profile criminal cases • True crime legal analysis • Justice vs. healing for victims Subscribe for expert legal analysis, true crime discussions, courtroom breakdowns, and conversations that go beyond the headlines. #MackenzieShirilla #TrueCrimePodcast #LegalAnalysis #JusticeServed #CourtroomAnalysis #VictimAdvocacy #CriminalJustice #NoContestPodcast Josh and Claudia can be seen regularly on Court TV, Nancy Grace, and local News programs. No Contest features the true crime cases currently in the public spotlight. No Contest provides legal and social commentary. All opinions are those of the hosts. Your No Contest Hosts: Claudia King, Law/Crime TV Analyst, Domestic Violence Expert @realclaudiaking youarestrongenough.com Joshua Kolsrud, Criminal Defense and Personal Injury Attorney @joshua_kolsrud kolsrudlawoffices.com

    Mackenzie Shirilla: Was Justice Served?
See All (16)

About

Known for their regular commentary on Court TV's Closing Arguments, MK True Crime, Crime Stories with Nancy Grace, and local news, Josh Kolsrud and Claudia King discuss the true crime cases that have everyone talking. They'll examine cases through the eyes of an attorney (Josh) and a former law enforcement officer and current Domestic Violence Expert (Claudia). Not only does this duo bring a wealth of knowledge and experience in their respective fields, they share a unique bond: they are both victims of traumatic incidents/domestic violence. But don't let their bonds fool you: Josh and Claudia don't hold back in sharing how they feel about each case, and disagreements are more common than a No Contest plea in court.

Information

You Might Also Like