Speaker 1: Why you're in Canada. Are you a Canadian? Is that
Speaker 1: what I understand?
Speaker 2: I am in Toronto.
Speaker 1: Yes, yeah, that would make you a Canadian, even though
Speaker 1: people in Quebec would deny that.
Speaker 2: You know, I remember learning in I think it was
Speaker 2: Grade five about the nineteen ninety five referendum when Quebec
Speaker 2: wanted to separate from Canada, and I got to say,
Speaker 2: there is a decent amount of animosity at times between people,
Speaker 2: especially in the Western provinces, towards those in Quebec. But
Speaker 2: we love our friends in Montreal and elsewhere.
Speaker 1: No, you don't. The fact is that the referendum law
Speaker 1: referendum loss by about one percent of the vote. You
Speaker 1: know that that is true.
Speaker 2: Yes, for your listeners, there was someone by the name
Speaker 2: of Jean Cherie who was the premier of Quebec and
Speaker 2: he ran for the leadership of the Conservative Party. And
Speaker 2: even though this happened in nineteen ninety five, it remains
Speaker 2: a very discussed issue in Canadian politics. That was one
Speaker 2: of the main kind of central points throughout his campaign.
Speaker 1: Good thing, nobody check that.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So what.
Speaker 1: Was interesting about that referendum is that the rest of
Speaker 1: Canada was actually surprised that it was that close. The
Speaker 1: rest of Canada was amazed that it was that close.
Speaker 1: They did not realize there was that level of animosity.
Speaker 1: What nobody realized is what would have happened if that
Speaker 1: had actually gone through. Do you know what would have happened?
Speaker 2: Uh, tell me what you were going to say, and
Speaker 2: I have some thoughts afterwards.
Speaker 3: Go ahead.
Speaker 1: I don't know why my headphones are so unbalanced. Jesus,
Speaker 1: Hold up a second. I've like I hear you at
Speaker 1: a ten and I hear myself at a two, and
Speaker 1: some nights it actually works, right, But this is not
Speaker 1: one of those nights. But that's sor right. It's symbolic
Speaker 1: of everything that's happened tonight. Hold on a second, let
Speaker 1: me put in. Let's try the other input, because I
Speaker 1: got four hours to kill here. Hold on, test, test, test.
Speaker 1: You know it's such. It's a great radio station and
Speaker 1: it has great facilities. But man, the munchkins come in
Speaker 1: and eat these earphones. Give me one more second. Normally,
Speaker 1: you know these things will be tested by text. But
Speaker 1: you know it's all right, all right now. What would
Speaker 1: have happened is the rest of the country would have
Speaker 1: realized that Quebec is bankrupt. It is the poorest of
Speaker 1: all the provinces, and the amount of subsidies from the
Speaker 1: rest of the government that supported are profound. The minute
Speaker 1: it's separated from the rest of the country because of
Speaker 1: language issues, the people of Quebec would find out just
Speaker 1: how poor they are.
Speaker 2: Which just for your listeners, because right now obvious.
Speaker 1: Wait, wait, stop, stop, you keep talking like it's meet
Speaker 1: the press. I don't have any listeners. I have a listener.
Speaker 1: Listener singular singular. We refer to them in the singular.
Speaker 1: I'm not on a stage with a PA system at
Speaker 1: high school these I have a listener alone in the car,
Speaker 1: praying that the kids in the back don't wake up.
Speaker 2: Okay, Well in that case, for your listener. Thing happening
Speaker 2: right now in Alberta, that is, which is Canada's kind
Speaker 2: of most well known western province that's not getting a
Speaker 2: lot of discussion in the United States, and that is
Speaker 2: they are going forward with something very similar to what
Speaker 2: Quebec tried to do in nineteen ninety five with the referendum.
Speaker 2: But the difference here is obviously Alberta's oil sands contributes
Speaker 2: greatly to the Canadian economy, and so let's basically happen.
Speaker 2: Happening is the Premiere of Alberta, which is like the
Speaker 2: Canadian equivalent of a governor, is putting forth a vote
Speaker 2: that Albertans will have on whether or not there should
Speaker 2: be a referendum, which is kind of confusing because it's
Speaker 2: basically a referendum on whether or not there should be
Speaker 2: a referendum. But the underlying kind of issue here is
Speaker 2: that there are a number of people in the province
Speaker 2: of Alberta who want to separate from the rest of Canada.
Speaker 2: It's getting a lot of discussion, and I think the
Speaker 2: part that's getting lost in all of this is you
Speaker 2: can't just dismiss it as easily as people dismiss the
Speaker 2: Quebec referendum, because in Quebec, to your point, they don't
Speaker 2: contribute economically as much to the rest of the country
Speaker 2: as a province like Alberta. Dos I think it's quite
Speaker 2: dangerous when you have that level of animosity from Alberta
Speaker 2: Albertans towards the rest of the country, and that's certainly
Speaker 2: what we're seeing now.
Speaker 1: All I know about Western Canada is Jan Arden.
Speaker 2: She's a great Canadian.
Speaker 1: She's a great Canadian and easily your most talented Canadian.
Speaker 1: And I heard her give a speech at Canadian Music
Speaker 1: Week a couple of years ago, and it blew me away.
Speaker 1: I said, Todio, my radio friends, I said, you must
Speaker 1: hire her to do a talk show. You must hire
Speaker 1: her now to do a talk show, because she's funny
Speaker 1: as hell. And then the only reason I mentioned this
Speaker 1: is because there's a TV show, having nothing to do
Speaker 1: with me that just dropped this week on Amazon Prime
Speaker 1: called Sterling Point, and Sterling Point is about cottage country
Speaker 1: in Canada. Rich cottage country teens, Rich cottage country teens
Speaker 1: hitting the prime of their adolescence, rich teens. And at
Speaker 1: one point, one of them is going through a box
Speaker 1: of stuff and there's a cassette labeled Jan Arden and
Speaker 1: I'm like, okay, I am the only person in the
Speaker 1: lower fourty who knows who the hell Jan Rden is.
Speaker 1: And then I said, well, wait a minute. They never
Speaker 1: took my advice and gave her a full time radio show.
Speaker 1: She is so funny, and bonus track, she's a lesbian.
Speaker 2: There are a number of underappreciated Canadians that I always
Speaker 2: think I wish more Americans knew who they were She's
Speaker 2: certainly up there as one of them. You know. The
Speaker 2: other thing, I was watching dragons Den Canada the other day,
Speaker 2: which is a very random thought, but as I was
Speaker 2: watching the show, I was thinking, we have it's similar
Speaker 2: to what you guys have as Shark Tank on ABC.
Speaker 2: And I was thinking, as I was watching the show,
Speaker 2: you know, there's so many great Canadian companies, great inventions.
Speaker 2: The dragons that are on you know, this panel are
Speaker 2: great people. Obviously they have lots of money they're investing
Speaker 2: in all these businesses. I thought, you know, sometimes the
Speaker 2: Canadian dragons Den is almost more interesting than the American
Speaker 2: Shark Tank, and it kind of goes back to that idea.
Speaker 2: I just wish there was in some cases greater you know,
Speaker 2: understanding of what goes on in Canada, because it's not
Speaker 2: all bad, despite what some Americans might be led to both.
Speaker 1: Dragon's Den was the precursor to Shark Tank. It was
Speaker 1: on first for a couple of years with Kevin O'Leary.
Speaker 1: He was on there, as was Robert Herzerberch that no
Speaker 1: one can pronounce. But even more interesting, have you ever
Speaker 1: seen the Australian version of Shark Tank?
Speaker 2: I have? There was this one kit I was watching
Speaker 2: on it. He ran, I think it was either like
Speaker 2: a cookie or a cupcake business or something, and he
Speaker 2: was literally like my age. And he comes out and
Speaker 2: he's like, I have six hundred thousand dollars in sales
Speaker 2: in the past year. And he got this like insane
Speaker 2: offer of like I think it was five hundred thousand dollars.
Speaker 2: They were gonna want ten percent of his company, and
Speaker 2: he said, no, I'm not going to take your deal
Speaker 2: because the valuation of his company was just that high
Speaker 2: and that good. And I thought, you know, imagine being
Speaker 2: a seventeen year old being able to reject a deal
Speaker 2: that has a five million dollar valuation to it. So
Speaker 2: I know, I think they have a lot of great
Speaker 2: talent too. And also the the UK version of Dragon's
Speaker 2: Den they have Peter Jones, mister Global as he's known,
Speaker 2: who went on the American version too recently.
Speaker 1: Yes, all right, now you and I are talking to
Speaker 1: Wyatt Sharp, who is a rising senior in Canadian high
Speaker 1: school land. He has a terrific podcast on YouTube called.
Speaker 2: What's it called What's called The Sharp Exchange Shark with
Speaker 2: a knee of course.
Speaker 1: The Shark Sharp Exchange, Sharp with a knee, and you
Speaker 1: give us updates on the news. Now, you broke a
Speaker 1: story on your YouTube channel and on this show a
Speaker 1: week ago about that wacky sheriff involved with the Savannah
Speaker 1: Guthrie mom situation. Tell us what it was that was
Speaker 1: revealed on that show and what you've learned.
Speaker 2: Yeah, So for your listeners who don't know what I said,
Speaker 2: for your sorry for your listener who doesn't know, I'm
Speaker 2: gonna keep doing it. You're gonna have to keep correcting me.
Speaker 2: So not this Saturday that just passed, but the one
Speaker 2: before that that marked six months since Nancy Guthrie, who
Speaker 2: is the mom of today's showing her Savannah Guthrie, was
Speaker 2: abducted from her home in Tucson, Arizona. And so as
Speaker 2: that day was approaching, I thought, you know, I haven't
Speaker 2: seen the sheriff who's the lead investigator in this case
Speaker 2: do a lot of interviews. And I thought, that's, you know,
Speaker 2: pretty puzzling. If you will. He's the lead investigator, people
Speaker 2: have a lot of questions. And I slowly started to
Speaker 2: realize that the reason he's not doing a lot of
Speaker 2: interviews is because he's turning everybody down, not because there's not,
Speaker 2: you know, an appetite for the interviews. So I thought, well,
Speaker 2: let me reach out to him. Maybe I can use
Speaker 2: the fact that I'm seventeen to my advantage. You know,
Speaker 2: I want to help my generation understand what's going on
Speaker 2: with this case. So I reached out to him. He
Speaker 2: agreed to do the interview, and like all of my interviews,
Speaker 2: I'd put hours worth of prep into the conversation, and
Speaker 2: I tried to develop questions that I knew could help
Speaker 2: advanced forward kind of the state of the case. And
Speaker 2: so I asked him about his relationship with the FBI Director,
Speaker 2: Cash Btel, which was the most interesting part. I think
Speaker 2: it might have been after we spoke last. He had
Speaker 2: said in the interview with me that Cash Patel, the
Speaker 2: director of the FBI, was misinformed. He said he was
Speaker 2: hurting the case with his involvement. And then Cash Ptel,
Speaker 2: just a few days after my interview, went on Fox
Speaker 2: News and responded directly to my conversation with the sheriff,
Speaker 2: And so, to a certain extent, I was thinking to myself,
Speaker 2: how is it that the director of the FBI and
Speaker 2: the lead investigator in this case are going at one
Speaker 2: another and focusing on the politics of this situation instead
Speaker 2: of looking for poor Nancy Guthrie, whos been gone now
Speaker 2: for six months, and so that was the most interesting
Speaker 2: part to me. You know, some of the other parts
Speaker 2: of the interview revealed kind of more information with respect
Speaker 2: to DNA and how they're using that to find out potentially,
Speaker 2: you know, the family members of who the suspect is
Speaker 2: and using the family members to then get to that
Speaker 2: main suspect. So there was really, you know, a number
Speaker 2: of interesting parts of that interview, and I think the
Speaker 2: fact that he did that interview, I have to say,
Speaker 2: I said this last time to you, giving me thirty minutes,
Speaker 2: and you know, even if he wasn't expecting it, the
Speaker 2: answers he gave certainly did move things along to an extent.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, congratulations, But what did he say?
Speaker 2: I mean, I think so on the genealogy piece, that
Speaker 2: was the one that really moved forward our understanding of
Speaker 2: where this case is at right now, because he said
Speaker 2: that they're using something called familial genial and I'm gonna
Speaker 2: kind of, you know, unpack what that means for your listener,
Speaker 2: and that is it's when you have different potential suspects
Speaker 2: and you're looking at the family members of those suspects
Speaker 2: to then root back to who the potential suspect could be.
Speaker 2: So it was just really interesting and actually very good
Speaker 2: news that he revealed that they are using familial genealogy
Speaker 2: in this case to try and figure out who the
Speaker 2: suspect could be. Because it's been six months, we have
Speaker 2: not heard a lot on where the investigation is at,
Speaker 2: in part because he has not done very many interviews,
Speaker 2: and so that was the first time in a while
Speaker 2: that he had came out and said something that actually
Speaker 2: did move things along, because now we know that they
Speaker 2: are still working behind the scenes and uncovering different techniques
Speaker 2: with respect to DNA to try and figure out the
Speaker 2: identity of the suspect. Now, another thing that I think
Speaker 2: is important to mention is people tend to think that
Speaker 2: the six month mark cases start to go cold. He
Speaker 2: made very clear that even though they are getting fewer
Speaker 2: and fewer leads, the Pima County Sheriff's Department is still
Speaker 2: receiving leads and leads of high quality as well. So
Speaker 2: he said, for example, something that struck with me was
Speaker 2: he said he had a conversation with someone in Ireland
Speaker 2: about a tip and that was kind of used by
Speaker 2: him to illustrate the variety to illustrates.
Speaker 1: That he is crap. Whytt it illustrates that he is crap?
Speaker 1: All right? Stand by, stand by. Walter Sterling The Other
Speaker 1: side of Midnight from the Red Apple Audio Network.
Speaker 3: It's the other side of mid Island with Walter Sterling
Speaker 3: in American Radio Hi, I'm retired Detective Vic Ferrari and
Speaker 3: on tonight's episode of Confessions of a Retired Detective. Firearm
Speaker 3: safety Isn't always what it seems in the New York
Speaker 3: City Police Academy. Coming up in moments with Walter Sterlington
Speaker 3: on the other side of Midnight Mayhem in Tacoma. Details
Speaker 3: later the veeople of Walmart Walter Sterling at the other
Speaker 3: side of Midnight. Red Apple Audio Network Florida Stories. It's
Speaker 3: the wildest, weirdest, stupidest, grossest, funniest, sexiest stories from Florida.
Speaker 3: I'm James Parker Florida Stories. He's coming up on the
Speaker 3: Red Apple Audio Networks.
Speaker 1: Nights fits Walter Sterling.
Speaker 3: The other side of Midnight.
Speaker 1: There's Wyatt Sharp, our Canadian friend, brilliant young man who
Speaker 1: is an excellent journalist and a dogged journalist who gets
Speaker 1: his sheriff. He was just summing up what he learned
Speaker 1: from the show. In the Savannah Guthrie mother case. The
Speaker 1: sheriff wasn't talking to people until Wyatt Sharp tracked him
Speaker 1: down last week, revealed it on his YouTube channel, and
Speaker 1: then next revealed it on our show last Sunday night.
Speaker 1: Then all these very slow, slow witted, lame other sources
Speaker 1: of information got on it, you know, Wednesday, Thursday, whenever
Speaker 1: they felt like it. But we had it on one
Speaker 1: week ago today. Whyatt, please sum up what you learned
Speaker 1: from the sheriff last week, but don't waste my time
Speaker 1: with it. Oh you know, he's got a viable source
Speaker 1: in Ireland, don't be ridiculous.
Speaker 2: I don't know. I thought that was pretty telling that
Speaker 2: if he's talking to someone in Ireland. I was like,
Speaker 2: you know, I could talk to someone in Ireland too, domestic.
Speaker 1: I could talk to someone in Ireland too. I just
Speaker 1: have to say, hey, can I buy you a beer?
Speaker 2: Yeah? So, anyways, so the sheriff, I think one thing,
Speaker 2: I'll tell you what he said the moment and kind
Speaker 2: of expand from that. But I also think the fact
Speaker 2: that to your point he's after my interview, started doing
Speaker 2: interviews with just about anybody who would talk with him,
Speaker 2: which to me, I thought was a little bit of
Speaker 2: damage control on his part, because he said some stuff
Speaker 2: in the interview that then he probably thought to himself,
Speaker 2: oh goodness, I need to clear some of that stuff up,
Speaker 2: and to that some of the stuff that he said
Speaker 2: was going back to his relationship with the FBI director
Speaker 2: Cash Patel. It's probably not a good look for someone
Speaker 2: like Chris Nanos, who, frankly not most people in the
Speaker 2: United States know who he is. They know him by
Speaker 2: the fact that he's the sheriff in the Nancy Guthrie case.
Speaker 2: They don't know his name though. So if the headline
Speaker 2: is you know, Nancy Guthrie sheriff is blasting the FBI director,
Speaker 2: If I'm Cash Pattel, I'm not going to be, you know,
Speaker 2: too eager to be friends then with the sheriff, And
Speaker 2: I think he probably thought to himself, I, as the
Speaker 2: sheriff and the FBI need to continue to have some
Speaker 2: form of a relationship if this case is going to
Speaker 2: be solved. And so that's a thin where the damage
Speaker 2: control was coming from. He did say that leads have
Speaker 2: slowed down in the case as well, which was interesting
Speaker 2: kind of contrasting that with the fact that he said
Speaker 2: the case is not cold. If I think of a
Speaker 2: case going cold, usually that corresponds to a significant decrease
Speaker 2: in the number of leads. So I think some of
Speaker 2: the contradictions that he made in the interview like that
Speaker 2: were also quite telling. And I'll just say lastly, but
Speaker 2: the actual logistics of the interview itself, I was very
Speaker 2: surprised by the fact that, just a little behind the
Speaker 2: scenes for your listeners, there were no PR people involved
Speaker 2: in the coordination of this interview, which, albeit p mccounty
Speaker 2: is a very small area in Arizona, they probably don't
Speaker 2: have a lot of people doing some of the communications
Speaker 2: for him and such. But again, I just thought for
Speaker 2: a sheriff who is under the spotlight as much as him,
Speaker 2: he might have want to clear it with his PR people.
Speaker 2: But I think Ashley Banfield said this to me, one
Speaker 2: of my good mentors and a legend really is crime reporting.
Speaker 1: And eighth, the audience I do so let's just be clear.
Speaker 1: You know, when you go kissing up to your little
Speaker 1: TV friends, they have no audience compared to this show.
Speaker 2: Actually Banfield got six hundred thousand subscribers, so I just
Speaker 2: want to defend her on that front. Ashley Banfield, No,
Speaker 2: what she said.
Speaker 1: I just want to say, I've never heard of that person.
Speaker 2: Well, she worked for a number of networks, but it's
Speaker 2: more important what she said.
Speaker 1: Job. Is that what you just told me?
Speaker 2: No, No, she's very talented. She's been a great mentor
Speaker 2: to me.
Speaker 1: But I just want to say, did she teach you
Speaker 1: to address the viewer in the singular?
Speaker 2: She told me that the sheriff thought that he was
Speaker 2: probably going into this interview thinking it was a high
Speaker 2: school project, and then you know, walking out of the
Speaker 2: interview thinking, oh my goodness, I can't believe I had
Speaker 2: to say that. And so that's why, again going back
Speaker 2: to the damage control, he had to do a number
Speaker 2: of interviews in order to kind of clear up some
Speaker 2: of that stuff for you.
Speaker 1: Listen, We're very proud of you. I always enjoyed putting
Speaker 1: you on. I always enjoy having you on the show.
Speaker 1: This is the great Wyat Sharp. How do we find
Speaker 1: you on YouTube?
Speaker 2: It's on YouTube, The Sharp Exchange.
Speaker 1: The Sharp Exchange, which is going to get him into
Speaker 1: Harvard or at the very least McGill.
Speaker 2: McGill's up there. I gotta say, one of the best
Speaker 2: Canadian school.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, it's the best Canadian school. And you should
Speaker 1: be very proud of yourself. We are proud to have
Speaker 1: you on the show. I particularly appreciate the fact that
Speaker 1: we can kid you a little and I thank you
Speaker 1: for that and I look forward to talking to you
Speaker 1: next week. Wyatt Sharp on the Other Side of Midnight
Speaker 1: with Walter Sterling