transcript

[00:00] Legal team, Chime is changing the way people bank, and they offer the most rewarding fee-free banking, built for you. They're not like traditional banks that charge you overdraft and monthly fees. When I was a struggling bartender, paying my way through college, I would have loved to have had a checking account with no overdraft fees. And they have thousands of fee-free ATMs. Why pay to get your own money? Chime is built for you, not the 1%. Chime is rated five stars by USA Today for customer service. Real humans 24-7. With Chime, you're not just switching banks, you're upgrading to America's number one choice for banking with the Chime checking account. Get 5% cash back on Chime card in a category of choice, like gas or groceries, and you get savings that grow faster with a 3.75% APY. That's nine times higher than the national average. Plus, you get premium travel perks like airport lounge access. Chime is not just smarter banking, it is the most rewarding way to bank. Join the millions who are already banking fee-free today. Head to chime.com/docket. That is chime.com/docket. It only takes a few minutes to sign up. Chime is a fintech, not a bank. Banking services for MyPay and ChimeCard provided by Chime's bank partners. Optional products and services may have fees or charges. Stated annual percentage yield and cash back for ChimePrime only. No minimum balance required. Checking account ranking based on the JD Power Survey published October 20, 2025. For more information on APY rates, MyPay, SpotMe and travel perks, go to chime.com/disclosures. That was my responsibility to pay more attention when there's red flags. The whole thing was a red flag. It was all fake and you knew exactly what you were doing and we have the text messages and emails, receipts to prove it and so did the federal prosecutors and that's why you went to jail. Serving time should be retribution, it should be restorative, it should be rehabilitative and if you come out of it, not in that way, it didn't do its job. At least have some humility about it, reflect on what you did instead of this. This makes me realize you learned nothing and you took this plea thinking that you were a little innocent which is why I hold and she'll probably do it again. Welcome to The Bravo Docket, where your favorite reality TV drama meets the courtroom. I'm Cesie. And I'm Angela, and we're two attorneys with a passion for pop culture, here to dive into the juiciest lawsuits and legal battles in the world of reality TV. Whether you're here for the facts, fun, or just some Law 101, let's get into today's case. Hi everyone, welcome back to The Bravo Docket. Today, we are going to talk about the interview that Jen Shah gave to People Magazine. It was her first interview post-release. We wanted to do a watch of it and then give our immediate thoughts and recount facts from her case to combat everything that she's saying in her interview. I watched it when it came out on April 1st. I was just curious to see what she was going to say. I know a lot of people wanted to avoid it. I was not one of those people. I wanted to see it because I wanted to hear what her excuse was going to be for accepting a plea. And I'm glad I heard it and watched it because excuses she did give. So if you're one of the people who's like, I did not want to watch this. I completely understand that. I can empathize with that. However, take our podcast as a way to watch it without giving her the views. You should still support people, of course. They're a great publication. But in terms of not wanting to support her, you can watch this if you're curious, listen to us and hear what she had to say through listening to us. So you don't have to go directly to her. Yes. I concur with everything Cesie just said. We don't want to talk about Jen Shah, but it's important to talk about these types of fraudulent schemes because people are still attempting them. Hopefully, this knowledge may help someone else from potentially getting scammed. I am still okay talking about Jen Shah. I'm of that mind too. Yeah. I don't mind speaking about her crimes and what she actually did. I don't want to see her on House of Villains or Special Forces or something like that. I don't want to see her on reality TV anymore. Before we get into it though, I wanted to shout out Bjo Meal Prep. He does meal prep for you and he will make you meals for the week. If you live in West Hollywood or the surrounding areas, you go pick them up. They're like 14 bucks a meal. Learned about it on Reddit. I reached out to him because I was like, this is perfect. I definitely need to do that. And I went and met up with him and he listens to the podcast. Oh, how cool. He listened to the podcast before I even reached out to him for years before. That's so cool. Isn't that so wild? Yeah. Just randomly found him on Reddit and was like, I want these meals. I need it. Because I'm a bad door dash person. And yeah, we met and he was like, I was at the crappies and I saw you and I was like, oh my God, I was just DMing with her about these meals. So if you live in the surrounding area, I highly recommend checking him out. His account again is weho.mealprep. Okay, so going back to the interview, it was about 30 minutes long. We're only going to cover about 10 minutes of it. When she's talking about the crimes, when she's talking about her plea, the other 20 minutes of it are her time in prison. So she goes through how it was living in prison, how she was in there with other known, notorious, infamous inmates, including Elizabeth Holmes and Ghislaine Maxwell, but she became friends with Elizabeth Holmes. So she talks about that. We're not gonna get into all of that in here because that's not relevant or pertinent at all to our coverage. If you're curious about that, you can go look up the interview yourself on YouTube. But like I said, we're only covering about 10 minutes of this interview. A lot of misrepresentations in that 10 minutes. I don't know if there were misrepresentations. She knows exactly what she did. She's twisting it. No, especially the Katabachi case, her text messages. We're gonna get into that, but I think she said everything for the most part correctly, like in terms of what she was charged with. I think she's intentionally distancing herself from it in a way that is disingenuous. So the last time we spoke about her, she was being released from federal prison. When we talked about her on the episode, we weren't sure if she was in a halfway house. We knew she was still in confinement. It just wasn't clear where that was. Now she's confirmed that she is in home confinement. So she's been home for the holidays. She's been there for about 90 days, I think as of the date of the interview. I'll play that at the end so everyone can hear where she is in her own words and she has an ankle monitor. So she's still in custody. As of today, her release is in or around August 2026. That could change. I believe she has some motions where she's challenging the date and the calculation based on different reasons, but we're not going to get into that today. I understand that people have their opinion and their feelings because they are basing it off of what they saw in the media. They're basing it off of the headlines, but what I would hope is that they would give me grace to at least hear me and to understand that I'm more than just the headline. People especially our listeners are not basing things off of the headlines, and you said I think in a post she must think we're real stupid if that's what we're doing. We in our previous episodes have gone through and laid out the facts, the evidence they had against her, exactly how the scheme worked according to the federal prosecutors, the details of the sentencing memorandum, which I'm sure we'll get into, that may be in opposition to what she's saying. So that just makes me mad hearing her say that. It's like, oh, I'm a victim and people are dumb and they're just believing the headlines, and they have an opinion based on me off of that. No, this isn't fake news. This isn't media headlines. You did all these things. They were very wrong, and you knew exactly what you were doing and you knew how wrong it was. Yeah, so I touched on this as well when we re-released our sentencing episode number one, which we did a couple weeks ago, that even if people were just going off of the headlines, the headlines were right. The headlines were reporting on this correctly. The headlines were saying, you pleaded guilty. This is what you did. Even if people are going off of the headlines, so what? They're not getting it incorrect. You did all of this. I take issue with that. It's a very classic line that people say in interviews like this. Don't believe the headlines. Let me give you context. Listen to me. Okay, but in this instance, everything's right. I didn't see any headlines that were incorrect. Even the worst of them were getting it correct. So she really must think we're dumb if she thinks everyone's just going based off of little snippets of information. Because several people were reporting on this, even content creators who were reporting on it in smaller clips of information and were still giving the large audience enough information to form their own opinions on. So people didn't even need to listen to our podcast to know what she did. There was a whole Hulu special about it that, by the way, we are both on giving legal commentary. Yeah, you're right. There weren't just headlines about this. But I did want to go back because we've talked about the sentencing memorandum a lot. But one of my favorite things was the transcript when she pled guilty. So the pleading transcript, which we talked about once before, but I thought it would be worth reading what she said in her own words that she was pleading guilty to because she seems to have forgotten as well. So if you want to read it. So this is Jen Shah speaking directly to the court with her attorneys present in her sentencing. She says, Yes, Your Honor, from 2012 to March 2021, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere, I agreed with others to commit wire fraud. I did this by knowingly providing customer names to people who were marketing business services that had little or no value. However, I knew the purchasers of those services were misled about the value, and that's why they bought the services. We used interstate telephones and e-mails to market and sell those services. Furthermore, while doing this, I knew many of the purchasers of those services were over the age of 55. I knew this was wrong, I knew many people were harmed, and I am so sorry. That was obviously written with the help of her lawyers, because when she is having to admit to what she's done wrong, she has to meet all of the elements of what she's pled guilty to, and those are very specifically worded. While that doesn't have a ton of detail in it, it does fully comply with all of the elements to what she was pled guilty to, which is wire fraud. Yes, and I just wanted to read this, though, so people have it in their minds while we go into the rest of it. Let's continue. It's one of the reasons that I fought for my innocence, because the timeframe that was listed in the, noted in the indictment, in 2012, I wasn't running any companies in 2012 for quite a long time until, you know, recently before the indictment. I was working for, for different corporations, right? I was, worked in marketing. And so that was a little bit confusing for me when that happened, because I didn't understand why I wasn't running anything at that point. I was literally an employee at a company, but I worked in the industry. Okay, that makes me furious. I am filled with Aries rage. First of all, the Katabshi case, the core conspiracy began in 2012 to 2017, and there was a full jury trial for the Katabshi case that happened that Jen Shah was also monitoring during that time. And then also during that time, Jen Shah was found to be a high level tier A participant across multiple leads for these cases. The first wave of indictments for the Katabshi case was in 2017. Also, there was the FTC case that she had, the civil case that she gave a deposition in, where a bunch of these companies got shut down. She knew that this was wrong, and she was involved in this conspiracy since 2012. The prosecutors were not wrong. Yeah, so I did a post about this that I wanted to read. So she's really hung up in this statement on the fact that the indictment notes that this started in 2012 to at least March 2021. And she's really hung up on the fact that she wasn't a leader during that time or not a leader beginning in 2012 or as early as 2012. But that doesn't really matter because that's not what she's being charged with. And I want to read from the indictment because it says, from at least in or about 2012 until at least in or about March 2021, Jen Shah, Stuart Smith, the defendants, together with others known and unknown, carried out a wide-ranging telemarketing scheme that defrauded hundreds of victims. So the indictment just says that they carried this out. The indictment doesn't say, you guys were the leaders. And she's trying to say, well, because I wasn't the leader in 2012, I was confused. I wanted to maintain my innocence. And that just doesn't make sense. It's confusing because that's not what they're charging you for. And even if they were, you were eventually a leader. So do you want a cookie because you weren't a leader from the outset? It just doesn't make any sense. That's not what they were charging you for. Yeah. It literally doesn't say that. It's a distinction without a difference. You're exactly right. It doesn't matter for that. And the fact that she knew what was going on and then made sure that she became a leader in short order with all of this doesn't help her case at all or whatever position she's trying to take here and absolve herself of some sort of responsibility or say the prosecutors got it wrong somehow and that she's being martyred because she had to plea to this and it wasn't fair. That's ridiculous. Right. Right. I could see her getting this indictment and saying, but I wasn't a leader. I was just an employee. Okay. That has two issues because like I said, one, you weren't being charged as a leader. That's not what it's saying. It's not saying Jen Shah led it. The indictment literally just says she was involved in this and orchestrating this. Even still, she did become a leader. And then the second issue I have with it is that she was an employee, realized what she was doing was illegal, and then decided to be a leader. Exactly. How does that make it better that you were just an employee first? It's actually worse that you were quote unquote an employee, saw what everyone was doing, saw everyone going down for it and decided, you know what, I want to do this too. That's crazy. I want to be in charge of it and be making be on the top, yeah. That makes no sense. So I put in the slides for my post in here, wanted to go through them just briefly. You could go to our Instagram if you actually want to read what the prosecutors said in the sentencing memorandum about this specifically, but I wanted to read my summaries of it just to keep it high level. That was pretty early on in the interview too when she said that. That's what made me stop and do the post. I was like, what are you saying? Yes. And so this also came up in the Kitabshi case that I'm going to keep mentioning here because, again, she was also monitoring what was going on in that case and texting Stu Chains and the other co-conspirators about it. But yeah, I guess we should pause there and say that there was another case going on. There were people who were above her, and that led to other cases. Oh no, those people weren't above her. But there are other cases where there are people above her. And I think that's what she's trying to get at is that I'm not the top of the top. There is this whole scheme going on. She wasn't the top of the top of the top. There are other schemes going on. She was up there, eventually. But when she started, she was not the top of the top. There were other people that were at the top of the top. This is like a global scheme happening. There were several other cases happening. And there were several other cases involving people who were worse than Jen. She was bad, horrible. But there were other people worse than Jen. And I think that's what she's trying to get at is that there were these other people. And they should be going down. It's not me. They should all be going down because they're the ones who got me into this. I'm just following their blueprint. I think that's what she's trying to get at. There is this overarching scheme going on, but she is an integral part in it. That's what she's ignoring. And we haven't really spoken as much about the entire big old scheme because it's sprawling. But just to orient the listener, I think that's what she's trying to get at. Who was above her because she was right at the same level as all these people. And in fact, in the Katabshi case, they were actually at a lower level than what she was operating at. She was pretty high up pretty quick. And they prosecuted this one first and got the evidence in order to prosecute the higher up people, which included Jen Shah. She's tier A, level one, whatever you want to call it. She's at the top of this criminal enterprise. From 2012 to 2016, Jen Shah worked for so-called coaching fulfillment companies called Thrive Learning, LLC and Guidance Interactive. Both Thrive and Guidance obtained leads from lead generators, that is marketing companies that offered products such as pamphlets to individuals who indicated an interest in earning money from home. Jen Shah, while employed at Thrive and Guidance, sold those leads to individuals operating sales floors that sold victims' so-called coaching sessions. At times, those sales floors included those operated by co-defendants Kevin Handren and Cameron Brewster in Utah and Nevada, those operated by William Sinclair and Michael Fenacciario, both of whom were defendants in the related case of United States v. Katopchi et al. And those operated by Ryan Holt and Jason Sager, who were also charged in Katopchi. Once the victims were sold coaching sessions, Jen Shah typically required the coaching sales floors to use Thrive or Guidance to provide victims with the so-called business coaching sessions, which were merely part of the scam. While victims of the business opportunity scheme were falsely told during coaching sessions that the sessions would help victims earn money from their internet businesses, at no point did the victims earn any of the promised return on their intended investment. Instead, the purpose of the coaching sessions was to convince victims that to make their internet businesses succeed, the victims needed to purchase additional products and services, which were of little to no value. And giving them even a little value is generous. The Katopchi case was the first wave of the federal government's crackdown on this massive interconnected scheme that Cesie's been talking about. And that evidence and testimony is really what helped the Department of Justice take down the people above, like Jen Shah. To summarize this, basically from 2012 to 2016, she worked with these two companies, Thrive and Guidance. They were back-end service providers, and her role was selling leads to sales floors and then feeding victims into the system that ultimately routed them back to those companies that she was working for. So she was wheeling and dealing even back then, even as an employee, like she's calling herself back in 2012. 91% of dog parents say their pup is an important member of the family. Safe to say, people are obsessed. I would say I fall into the obsessed category as someone who has my dog tattooed on my arm. And lucky for me, if anyone gets being dog obsessed, it's Ollie. They're relentless about delivering the best food and experience for you and your dog. Ollie's fresh recipes are developed by real chefs and backed by vet nutritionists. They're obsessed with making the best meals with the highest quality ingredients. With Ollie, you don't just get the food. Through their app, you can actually check in on your dog's health with real vets. Just by uploading a picture, their team can check in on your dog's weight, digestion, teeth, and coat, because they're obsessed with making sure your pup is as healthy as can be. Buddy does not skip a meal when there's Ollie around. So get ready for both you and your pup to be obsessed. Head to ollie.com/docket. Tell them all about your dog and use code DOCKET to get 60% off your welcome kit when you subscribe today. Plus they offer an obsession guarantee. If you're not completely obsessed, you'll get your money back. That's ollie.com/docket and enter code docket to get 60% off your first box. Ollie, feed the obsession. If you're looking for items to spruce up your home this spring, then you need to check out Wayfair ASAP. It's wayday at Wayfair from April 25th through the 27th, which means you can score the best deals in home. Like 80% off with free shipping on everything. Right now in my home, I'm trying to do a Beverly Hills hotel vibe. So I'm thinking pinks, plants, greens, and Wayfair is helping me achieve that goal. Did you know you can buy plants on Wayfair? I bought a banana leaf plant and it is just adding to the vibe perfectly. I also recently bought a walking pad from them. I didn't even know they had those in stock. Like they have everything and it's so easy to find and it came within three days. And now I have a walking pad so I can watch Summer House, look for clues between Amanda and West while getting a decent walk-in. So if you're looking to spruce up your home, looking for some fitness devices, you need to check out Wayfair and Wayday is the sale to shop the best deals in home. We're talking up to 80% off with fast and free shipping on everything. Head to wayfair.com April 25th through the 27th to shop Wayday. That's wayfair.com. Wayfair, every style, every home. So then in 2015, like we eluded to before, she was already testifying in FTC proceedings against sales floors that she had sold leads to. So she knew that there were FTC investigations going on and she testified in them. She was deposed. It's crazy. Oh, and then there's more. By 2016, the FTC was also investigating Thrive and Guidance. So those were the companies she was working for. And instead of ceasing her participation in the deceptive telemarketing scheme, she continued and tried to find ways to hide her communications. By 2017, Thrive and Guidance were sued by the FTC. And instead of just stepping away, her role expanded. So while she had previously focused on lead generation and distribution, she moved into running her own sales floor, meaning she went from supplying leads to sales floors to operating her own. So these were the ones who were making the calls to victims, making sales and deciding how else to make money from the victim. So she went, Oh, those companies I was working with, they got sued by the FTC. You know what I'm going to do? I'm going to start my own sales floor. From what I can tell, the first wave of indictments in this Kitabshi case happened in March 2017. And it looks to be like she took advantage of that and then was like, oh, there's space to fill here. I can create my own sales floors just like Cesie is saying and step in and do this even better and make even more money. She's like, oh, a gap in the market. Now that I know how the investigation went, I know how to hide it better. So March 2017, arrests were made. So she's aware of the FTC actions, now aware of the arrests. And we have text messages that we'll read from on that. And yet she just continued on. All to say, her saying, I was just an employee, ignores that even as an employee, she was doing something illegal. It ignores that she didn't remain just an employee like she wants to call herself. She moved up at each stage. She had more visibility, more functionality, more control over how this operation functioned and even did things to hide how the operation was functioning, like opening accounts in Kosovo and using encrypted messaging applications like Telegram. Let's continue. So I think, how does one get there? Or how does that come about? I think it's just a matter of who I worked with, the companies I worked with. And doing direct response marketing. And it's such a, you think you're doing the right thing. I thought I was doing the right thing for the majority of the time. And also under the direction of other people that were running the companies. And honestly, you get there if you're not careful. You get there if you are not being diligent in your business dealings. You get there if you're not paying attention to the red flags. You know, that's how you get there. And it can happen without your intention for it to happen. But you have a responsibility, you know, once you are in that business position to make sure that you're being diligent. And I mean, the fact of the matter is, in 2012, I was a W-2 employee for a fulfillment company. I worked for multiple fulfillment companies in the Valley. So that there was, I literally was not the kingpin, you know. Okay, you were shaking your head no a lot. My blood is just boiling. You should still be in jail. You knew exactly what you were doing. You were not just some leaf that fell in a stream that got caught up in what everyone else was doing. You were calculated. And the other thing too is when we went through all of her text messages in the emails, she's smart. Like she's not a dummy. Not only did she see what was happening, know it was illegal, know exactly how it was illegal, she set herself up to do it more and even, I don't want to say better, but more effectively than the people that were already in trouble. And then her previous companies, she set herself up to be in that position. And when you read those emails where she's directing them is exactly what to do and where to hide this money and how to get more out of people and what she needs and what she wants. She knew exactly what she was doing. Everything she said is garbage. She should still be in jail. It makes me furious. I'm sure people paid her for this interview too. I'm sure it will go straight to whatever restitution pool she has to pay, which that's good, I guess. Yeah, great. Yeah. But it's infuriating that someone can go to jail, have been participating in this for this long, and then come out. And instead of being like, I want to teach people how to not get caught up in this. I want to help people that are in this now and that are potentially committing crimes now. I want to help the FTC and the prosecutors. I want to work to help them take this down. Instead, she's saying, I was just this innocent victim floating down a stream, and I should have paid more attention. And yes, that was my responsibility to pay more attention when there's red flags. The whole thing was a red flag. It was all fake, and you knew exactly what you were doing. And we have the text messages and emails, receipts, proof, timeline, screenshots, whatever, to prove it. And so did the federal prosecutors. And that's why you went to jail. It's ridiculous. It's making me angry. Yeah. And there were a small minority of people in our comments being like, what do you want her to do? She's already served her time. Well, you know, I'm of the mind that serving time should be retribution. It should be restorative. It should be rehabilitative. And if you come out of it, not in that way, it didn't do its job, in my opinion. I'm not going to say go back and be there forever. At least have some humility about it. Reflect on what you did instead of this. This makes me realize you learned nothing. And you took this plea thinking that you were still innocent, which is wild. And she'll probably do it again. When you have this level of separation from it, you're giving yourself an excuse to jump back in. She could have even maybe written a book talking about, this is how I got caught up in this. And this is the decisions I made along the way that led to me thinking that it was okay to do this to people. And I have intimate knowledge of how these operations work and how they train people. I helped write the scripts for it. I want to help people now. No, that's not what she's saying. She is not doing any of that. I agree with you. If you serve your time, you pay your restitution, you know that you made a mistake and you did something wrong, that shouldn't be held against you for the rest of your life. I agree with that. But that's not what she's saying. What she's saying is, I got caught up in something and I didn't pay enough attention and she's still separating herself from the actual facts of what she did and the real harm that she caused. That was her. She could have stopped it. She could have turned them in at any time. She had a husband that had a good job, that made great money as a college football coach and I think still does. I don't know. I haven't looked him up to see what he's doing now. But she didn't even need to be doing this. It was unnecessary. She wasn't someone that was struggling to survive. Also, the people that got harmed were not, if you listen to our sentencing episodes on this, the co-conspirators, the people that got harmed were not just the people that were sold these bullshit garbage services that were meaningless. It's also the people that were employed at the low levels. Those are the people that could come back and say, I thought this was a real company. Yeah, like the actual employees. I forgot about that. Remember the sentencing episodes we did? The one guy got recruited from another guy that was already in this business with Jen Shah at an AA meeting. Oh, God, I completely forgot about that. Thanks for bringing it up. Yeah. Oh, it makes me so angry. Yeah, she took advantage of these poor people working for her. And a lot of those were lower level people. Some of them didn't even have college education. And then they're getting paid $40,000 a year and now they have huge restitution to pay and they're convicted felons. She has harmed so many people from this. She knew exactly what she was doing and she didn't need to do it. She wasn't someone that was like, I've got two mortgages, I'm a single mom with three kids, I was doing this to support. No, she didn't even need to do it. She didn't need to do it. No, I think she liked being in charge. I think she liked the power it gave her. She loved it. And it's very clear from her emails and text messages. And not to like say that these two women are comparable by any means because their crimes were just so different. But it does remind me of Karen Huger's interview that she gave to Andy Cohen after coming out of jail where she was just trying to distance herself completely from having an issue with alcohol. Left a really bad taste in my mouth. Worst taste here, but I know we haven't spoken about the Karen Huger. I'm upset that she's back, to be honest. I didn't think that she was taking much accountability in that interview. I feel really uncomfortable actually with her coming back next season. I will watch because, you know, I love Miss, but it's giving me that vibe. You're leaving room to have another drink. You're right, because I did watch that interview. She refused to refer to herself as an alcoholic, which, okay, fine. But I don't disagree at all with what you were... There's a wall. There's a wall. She's put up a wall with semantics. Jen Shah's doing it beyond semantics. She's just straight up saying, there's a wall. It wasn't me. Yeah, but I just had a similar feeling with them. Of course, much more anger towards Jen Shah, but it's a similar decentering. You're shifting yourself out of it and acting like the person who did this is not you. So you give yourself space. Anyway. So she also said this at the plea hearing. This is from the transcript. The court asks, Ms. Shah, when you did these acts, did you know that what you were doing was wrong and illegal? She responds, yes, Your Honor. I know they discuss it in the sentencing memorandum, but like I said, I wanted to get back to the plea hearing. And this is from that. And this is the prosecution going over everything that they would have shown at trial. Yes. So this is the Assistant US. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, the prosecutor. It says, Your Honor, we're Jen Shah to proceed to trial. The government anticipates that the evidence would show that between approximately 2012 and 2016, Jen Shah primarily acted as a lead broker responsible for selling victim information to other sales floors, that she shared in the profits that those sales floors earned when they lied to victims and that she directed sales floors as to which so-called fulfillment services they should use, which upsell floors they should use, and how the sales would be conducted. During this time period, the government would introduce evidence that Jen Shah was made aware of several Federal Trade Commission lawsuits brought against sales floors that the defendant worked for or worked with and that these floors were engaged in deceptive practices. The government would further show that between 2017 and 2021, in addition to acting as a lead broker, Jen Shah owned and operated a Manhattan-based sales floor called Mastery Pro Group. Remember what Cesie and I said, the Katabshi case, the first indictments came out in 2017, and that's when she starts Mastery Pro Group, her own sales floor. Just like you said, it's like, oh, there's a gap in the market. So instead of being like, oh, all these indictments happened, this is clearly illegal, we're doing something wrong. Now I know for sure that not only is it civilly wrong because of the FTC, it is criminally wrong. Also, she's married to a lawyer. Like, I just cannot. This doesn't stop people. I've been doing a little spring reset with my closet lately, focusing more on quality over quantity. Just building a wardrobe of pieces that are well-made, versatile, and easy to reach for every day. That's why I keep coming back to Quince. The fabrics feel elevated, the fits are thoughtful, and the pricing actually makes sense. Their spring pieces are lightweight, breathable, and effortless. The kind of things you can throw on and instantly look put together. And I love that Quince works directly with ethical factories and cuts out the middlemen. So you're paying for quality, not brand markup. What I'm loving right now is Quince's Italian swimwear. There are so many colors to choose from. You can mix and match, the fabric is super high quality, and the designs are simple, classic, and elegant shapes that are so flattering. I'm particularly loving the Italian full coverage ring triangle bikini top with the matching bottoms. Refresh your spring wardrobe with Quince. Go to quince.com/docket for free shipping and 365-day returns. Now available in Canada too. Go to quince.com/docket for free shipping and 365-day returns. quince.com/docket. Legal team, when our network told us that Tumble had reached out to be a potential partner, I was so excited. I'd been searching all over to find a new rug. Why is finding a rug weirdly harder than it should be? It's like you either pick an overpriced rug and then you're constantly worried about staining it or for me, one of my cats enacting vengeance upon it. Rugs transform the look of your room, but most rugs aren't designed for real life. But with Tumble rugs, you can finally have both. These rugs are spillproof and machine washable. They come with an integrated rug pad, which by the way was super fun to put together. It was like putting together a giant puzzle and their cushioned non-slip rug pad tucks into a hidden corner pocket on the underside of the rug and it keeps everything securely in place. They have over 30,000 five-star reviews. Machine washable rugs made better. For a limited time only, our listeners get 10% off plus free shipping at tumbleliving.com/docket. That's T-U-M-B-L-E, living.com/docket. After you purchase, they'll ask what you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them that The Bravo Docket sent you. So, the government continues. In that role, the defendant oversaw the sales floor herself handled victim complaints and charge backs and supervised salespeople who directly lied to victims of the scheme. She was aware the government would show, so he's saying a trial, through witness testimony, electronic communications, screenshots on her phone and other evidence that the salespeople that worked for her lied to victims about their ability to make money in their home-based businesses, the value of the products that her business was selling to those victims, and more. While the defendant was operating mastery pro group, the government anticipates the evidence a trial would show that the defendant became aware that other individuals engaged in similar conduct, that is operating bizop sales floors, were criminally charged in this district. The evidence would show, and this would come in through cooperator testimony and electronic communications taken from electronic devices. The devices would further show that the defendant used encrypted applications to communicate with co-conspirators, that she and her co-conspirators took steps to move the operation of certain aspects of the scheme offshore to Kosovo, and that she and co-conspirators incorporated several businesses in Wyoming to conceal the ownership of those businesses. So I was going to say, we should explain what chargebacks are in case people don't know. If you have a charge in your credit card that you believe is fraudulent, and if you listen to our Erika Jayne coverage with regard to Marco Marco, that's what Erika Jayne did with all of the Marco Marco charges. She disputed them with American Express, and then American Express gave Erika Jayne all of her money back, even though Marco Marco has shown through a bunch of evidence that he provided all the services. So when people would realize what was going on or maybe be like, hey, I looked at my elderly mom's credit card and she has all these charges for these business coaching devices or services or whatever, and they aren't real, then you would try to dispute them with the credit card. Not only are you defrauding people on the outset, then you're taking affirmative steps to dispute these chargebacks and make sure that they can't get their money back that they put on their credit card. And one of the big goals that Jen Shah and her co-conspirators had was to prevent charge backs whenever possible because that creates red flags. It's so bad on every end and every level and every part of the scheme. And it's so obvious that they knew what they were doing, especially at the high levels, was so wrong. It's just frustrating. And we've talked about this a bunch, but I put in here the text messages that show that she was keeping track of the prior lawsuits and indictments. Oh, no, I want to read them again. I want everyone to remember exactly what she said and exactly what evidence the government had. So one of the co-conspirators is sending a link to the six Jerseymen charged in Manhattan Federal Court for telemarketing fraud scheme targeting the elderly. And Jen Shah's response on March 21st, 2017, is all caps, holy fucking shit, with 10 exclamation points. She sends to Stuart Smith another article, Justice.gov, it's two men found guilty, wire fraud and money laundering connection for telemarketing fraud. And that was sent November 14th, 2019. Another one, she sends a press release and it says, there's the latest press release link that shows all 15 people's names and companies. And that is January 14, 2019. Yeah. So like we've talked about, March 2017 is the first indictments for the Katabji case, which are actually like the lower level co-conspirators. Their verdict in that case, because they went to a jury trial, was November 7th, 2018. And that was after a 12 day jury trial. And there's tons of evidence that she was following that very closely. And by the way, that the Katabji case, it was a 12 day jury trial. And the both people that were, that took that case to trial, the lower level conspirators, Katabji and the other individual were found guilty. And it publicly exposed all of the inner workings of what they call the money sucking website, which is the lead generation tool that Jen Shah had been using since 2012. In the government sentencing memo, they talk about how she was actively monitoring the Katabji case and that she performed Google searches and set up docket alerts to see if they were cooperating with the government. And those two guys did not because they were actually were lower level. They actually, unlike Jen Shah, had more of a defense to be like, I didn't realize how bad this was. I read the trial transcript. I read the testimony of the victims and the evidence against them. And they were on a much lower level than Jen Shah. So she's monitoring this to see, are they cooperating? Are they giving up evidence? And I don't actually blame those two for taking it to trial because they were lower level. And it wasn't such a slam dunk case as the government had against Jen Shah and the other Cook & Spaniards. So just a reminder, what she's saying is, I just worked with these people. Which is crazy. Okay, let's play the next one. That's why I really felt and fought for my innocence because I truly believed in my innocence. Because at that time when the indictment came out, I was like, wait, what are they talking about? And we were waiting for supporting documentation. The accusations were in the indictment, but you have to go through the legal process to find out, your attorneys are trying to find out from the prosecution and the government. What are the facts or what is the evidence? What is the documentation that you have to back up these claims? I mean, that is just wild to me because she knows what she did. She knows exactly what she did. She's economical with the truth. She is a fabulist. She knows exactly what she did. She knows exactly how wrong it was. She knows that it breaks the law. She is waiting to see what evidence the government has against her. She's not waiting to figure out. She wants to see how much they know. She wasn't waiting to see if she was guilty. She wanted to see how much they got. She's like, oh, wait, I thought I hid all my text messages via encrypted messaging, which, okay, yes, but there's still so much. Also wild to say I was maintaining my innocence. Let's continue. I made the decision to accept a guilty plea and I take full responsibility for everything that comes with making that decision to accept a guilty plea. She doesn't say I pled guilty because I'm guilty. I accepted a guilty plea and everything that comes with that. No, yeah, she's saying, yeah, I accept the responsibility that comes with making the decision to accept a guilty plea. What about accepting responsibility or like what you did? Not like, oh, my hands were tied. I had to accept the guilty plea and I accept it. I just, I had to give it up. I had to give in. Oops, that is wild freezing. Also, I found this in one of our outlines. After she pled guilty, her attorney gave this statement to Page Six. Jen pled guilty because she wants to pay her debt to society and put this ordeal behind her and her family. Ms. Shah is a good woman who crossed the line. She accepts full responsibility for her actions and deeply apologizes to all who have been harmed. Did she? No. Did she? Did she? Because she's not now. She probably still hasn't even paid that attorney. Okay, let's play the next one. My charge is for conspiracy. And so under the law, what does the government need to prove to find me guilty under conspiracy? That's when my attorneys are educating me on, okay, these are the jury instructions in order for them to find you guilty under conspiracy. There does not need to be an overt action to be found guilty under conspiracy. There just needs to be enough text messages, emails, communication to show that you conspired with others, with somebody like with my co-defendant. I mean, she's technically correct. She was charged with conspiracy, and it is technically a lower burden to prove. But I would argue they probably could have charged her and gotten a guilty verdict charging her with just straight up fraud. And she's like, oh, they had to show an overt act. Not what I did. I didn't have any overt acts. I would argue they did. I would argue there was evidence of overt acts on her behalf. So for her to say, oh, all they had was emails. They just had emails of me conspiring. Oh, no overt acts, everyone. So I wasn't actually guilty of fraud. No, she was claiming via her defense attorney in like some of the pretrial pleadings that we talked about that she didn't know that these services were not of any value. She was claiming that she didn't know that no one made any money from them. And so that's what she's trying to say. Like I didn't have the requisite mens rea or the knowledge that this stuff was all garbage, which she absolutely did. Even if she is arguing that she didn't have the mens rea, I still think that there are enough overt acts beyond knowledge to show that there was an overt act here to support a finding of fraud. And just because they didn't go after her for fraud doesn't mean that she didn't commit fraud. She didn't really do anything. That's what she's saying. That's what her argument is. Let's continue. It was also the very first time that I actually saw that there were actual victims as a result of this conspiracy. Like that was the first time I had ever seen anything with my own eyes. At that point, that's when I had to realize, what are the risks now? Now this is real. Now I'm seeing these things in front of me. That's a lie. She knew of multiple victims. She knew about all of them. She knew all of them. She was the one who was leading the way, telling people how to act with her victims. She knew about all of them. I put in this outline and I know you have it in your notes too. The 85-year-old victim, we have a text message about it. One of the employees saying, hey, what should we do about this guy? He's really sick. She directs them how to defraud him even further. This is from January 2018, by the way. If you want to look at the exhibit yourself, you can find it. It's exhibit GX719, and it involves conversations between Jen Shah and one of Jen Shah's employees at Mastery Pro Group, which is the group that she set up, the company she set up in 2017 and 2018, right after there was a hole in the market because her other co-conspirators got indicted and ended up going to jail. So the employee of Jen Shah was consulting with Jen Shah on how to handle a charge back, which again, we've talked about as a situation where somebody is trying to dispute the credit card charge. And her employee informed her that they were having trouble resolving the dispute and specifically said, quote, we have been calling him every day with no answer. He is really sick and 85 years old. And Jen Shah's response is she's not halting the transaction for this elderly ill victim, focused entirely on processing the payment. And she gave specific instructions on which company merchant account to use to rerun or process the payment or charge back, question why the employees had processed the payment in three smaller amounts rather than one large lump sum, and reminded employees that her entities, Menstri Pro Group and the other one, don't have a transaction limit, meaning they should have taken all of his money at once. This is directly from Jen Shah in 2018. She knew. She knew of her victims, every single one. Okay, let's play the next one. There is a risk, you know, because the burden of proof that the government has to prove to find me guilty, it's a little bit different now, now that I'm seeing the information. And now that we finally saw what the documentation looked like, and I saw that there were people hurt, and really looking at it, what was the risk now for me to go to trial? Because it just takes one person, right? One person on the jury to maybe not agree, or to say, you know what, I don't know. I think she was able to explain the context of all of these emails or text messages, but I don't know. Maybe she was so close with this person, maybe it just takes one person to think that. And I really thought, well, just the truth is going to prevail. Here, she's trying to say, I was weighing the risks of taking the plea agreement. She doesn't say it as clearly as that, but she was trying to weigh the risks of taking the plea versus going to trial. And she was trying to argue to herself or maybe even to her council, well, all you need is one person. All you need is one person to go against the grain and say that you're not guilty in order to be found not guilty. So maybe there's one person that's going to see the context of my text messages and hear me out and hear the context of my e-mails and just say you know what maybe she's not guilty and she's like and then maybe the truth will prevail. What? Are you going on about it? No, you are a merchant of illusions. It's wild because okay, so there is the one person out there that's listening to this, this being her interview and not this episode and is taking what she's saying at face value. They're going to be like, oh my gosh, gosh, that must have been so hard for her to gamble that and think, maybe, maybe if I had just gone to trial, maybe, and that this person is going to think that there was this context that would have changed what she was saying in her text messages. No, no, her texts were very clear, very clear. I don't think there's any context that would change their message. The emails, text messages, all of her overt acts in furtherance of this fraud and conspiracy are very, very clear. I mean, let's just read another one from one of her employees in June 2018. I'm digging through the database as we speak. Scheduled a guy that no showed from a few months back who said he had to put his biz on hold for a while, but is looking to get back in, so should be a decent lead. We'll try and find a few others today as well. Then Jen Shah texts back and says, I'm coming in to set appointments for these guys tomorrow. Please get my 24 karat gold headset and diamond encrusted mouthpiece ready. Poppy needs money for the weekend and Stewie Z needs baby mama money. What are you talking about? You thought there would be evidence at trial that would maybe clear things up? No, no, she knew that she would go to jail for a lot longer if she made them go through an entire jury trial to prove everything she did. If she maintained her innocence within the face of all of this and went to trial, she knew that her eventual sentencing would be worse than what she got. That's why she pled guilty. Right. And I do want to acknowledge because, you know, in law school, you take all these criminal law cases, or at least I did, and in college, I found the concept of punishment very interesting. So it's something that I studied, and there is a gamble that goes into accepting a plea deal. And I can give that sort of grace to people that you sometimes are put in a difficult position, and you think, what if I do go to trial and I lose? And that gamble just isn't worth it for you. So then they end up pleading guilty. I would say the majority of the people that do plead probably were going to be charged of something at trial. So I can understand that. I can understand that there is this decision making that can go into the decision of whether or not to plea. However, I cannot extend that grace to Jen because she's not someone who would have gone to trial and had some exculpatory evidence come out or had some sort of context that would change everything she did. To me, it's just so clear cut and black and white that she's not someone that I'm giving that grace to of being like, well, that must have been really challenging for her to... No... .to like weigh the risks. There's endless circumstances in our criminal justice system, which has a large amount of flaws and problems. This is not an instance where those come into play. We could talk for a long time about the pitfalls and the way our plea bargain system has changed from what it should be and all of the ways that our criminal justice system are unfair. This is not an example of that. There's none. It's like a deal or no deal. Is what I'm being offered going to be better than what's in my briefcase if I go to trial? For Jen's situation, no, no, no. What she has in her briefcase was far worse than what she was being offered by the, what's the guy called in deal or no deal? The banker. Yeah, the banker gave her a much better, much better deal. As you guys know, we have demanding jobs as attorneys, but life itself can be demanding. And I'm just the type of person that I need my full eight hours of sleep. I need good quality sleep. If I don't have my eight hours of sleep, I lose focus the next day. I'm just completely ruined. My energy levels crash and I'm not billing as much as I should be billing. So to me, it's super important to make sure that I'm doing everything I can to optimize my sleep. And that includes upgrading my bedding. And Boll & Branch Bedding is designed for exactly that kind of rest from their signature organic cotton sheets to plush pillows, breathable blankets and temperature regulating comforters. Everything is made to create a bed that truly supports sleep. I recently swapped everything out to Boll & Branch and it is incredibly soft, breathable and built to get better over time. I felt the softness straight out of the box. Boll & Branch is truly making my sleep experience a luxury sleep experience. I look forward to going to bed now. So upgrade your sleep with Boll & Branch. Get 15% off your first order plus free shipping at bollenbranch.com/docket with code docket. That's bollenbranch, B-O-L-L-A-N-D, branch.com/docket to unlock 15% off exclusion supply. I just saw someone purchase a Bottega bag, a Bottega tote for $400. I'm truly in shock and it was in a live auction for designer goods on the app Whatnot. It is the number one live shopping app in the US. It's all about real time bidding with a host, real people, real conversations and truly unbelievable deals. I went on today, I was looking at the designer goods and there were multiple Louis Vuitton wallets going for under $200 via auction. I went into the designer watch auction where they were auctioning a beautiful vintage Gucci watch. I bopped into the sunglasses auction where they had some Karl Lagerfeld sunglasses. There was also one for exotic plants. I bopped into one for Disney memorabilia, like Disney pins, which I happened to collect. There were also comic books, so many auctions for different types of products all in one app. So really, there's something for everyone in there. You can pop onto the app, do a search for a product that you're looking for or a type of collectible or designer good, and it will direct you either to the product itself or to a live auction. It's a really fun way to shop. It's truly exhilarating. And you can leave with a great steal, which is the best part. Download the Whatnot app today and get free shipping on your first order. Just search W-H-A-T-N-O-T, Whatnot, in the app store, and start scoring amazing deals. Mind you, she just said the truth would prevail. And they said it's not about the truth at Trial Jen. It's about the story that is told and what story is the jury going to believe. And that was like the hardest decision that I ever made. Because at that point, I was like, do I continue to do, do I drag my family through this and go to trial and perhaps still lose? And then what? I get the maximum? Okay, first of all, all of her co-conspirators had pled guilty already. They were all gonna testify against her if they had to, especially Stoochains. They had all the evidence from the Katabshi trial. They had all of her co-conspirators pleading guilty. They had all of her digital evidence from when they raided her house, like her computers, all of those other things. All of this stuff is in there. There was no way she was going to go to trial. The truth wasn't gonna come out because the truth is, she knew about all of this. She was 100% involved in it and she knew exactly what she was doing and she knew it was illegal. And all of her co-conspirators were gonna testify against her. They had already pled. Let's continue. And not only that, but now I've... destroyed their credit, their lives, right? I mean, putting, you know, my family was gonna get on the stand and speak on my behalf and, you know, do I put them through all of that heartache and through their names getting dragged through the mud, right? Just because I want to prove my innocence so badly. And that's when I looked at it and I said, I can't do that. I can't do that. I have to... It wasn't worth it for me any more at that point because I could not... I couldn't barter or risk or gamble with my family. She pled guilty to save her family. She put herself through that just to save her family because she didn't want them to go through that. She is so noble and benevolent and she went to jail so that her family wouldn't have to go through that. No, right, she's making it all about her family and how she didn't want to put them through anything. Also, when she said, not only that, but now I've destroyed their credit, their lives, their lives, right? I thought she was talking about her victim's credit. No, she's talking about not wanting to destroy her family's credibility. She didn't want to destroy their credibility by going through trial. And actually, Coach Shah was promoted to Associate Head Coach, Cornerback Special Teams Coordinator in January 2026 for the University of Utah. So for her to say she didn't do it because of her family, they would have been fine. Anyway, this is where it gets fun. And knowing that when I saw the documentation that I did have responsibility, because under the conspiracy law and seeing that I had responsibility, I should have done more. I should have been more diligent. Been more diligent, a couple examples from the text messages and the emails we just read were from January 2018. That was after those other lower level co-conspirators had been found guilty in a 12-day jury trial with way less evidence than they had against Jen Shah. She's speaking as if there was some external force that she could have stopped had she been more diligent and if only she had been paying more attention, she could have stopped this force that was committing all these crimes outside of herself. Like this third party entity was committing all these crimes and if only she had paid attention more, she could, but she was the one doing it. She was the one doing it. And she's crazy. That's crazy. She's acting like I could have stopped it all. I could have been a hero, a martyr. It could have been me. No, it was you. Oh, and who should she have been stopping? Let's see who she says. You know, there was some red flags with my co-defendant. I should have dug in more when things didn't sound right. And so at that point, that's when I said, you know what? I have to be accountable. And it was hard for me, but I thought this is on me. At what point do you let your ego go so that you can do what's right, so that you can take care of the people in your life that you should? And that's when it wasn't important to prove a point anymore. It was important to take accountability and say, you know what? I had a part. I chose to do business with my co-defendant. I chose to do business and it wasn't about anymore, just trying to prove I'm innocent. I couldn't risk my family dragging them through that. I could have still gone, you know? My husband, he was there with me and I couldn't imagine being away from him or that this was happening because I had fought the whole time thinking that truly believing that I was innocent. I should have paid more attention to my co-conspirators. Are you kidding me? She was telling Stu Chains what to do the whole time. He was under her thumb. Even on the show, even if we didn't know what was happening, he was basically her bit. Not just that, there was a bunch of other co-conspirators that she was bossing around and telling them what to do. She was absolutely in charge of this. I remember when we first started going through all the evidence that we were able to actually look at when the sentencing memorandum came out, which is 333 pages, including exhibits, and we went through it. I remember looking at that and us actually being impressed with her. She had actual business skills in acumen, and if she had applied that to something legal and good, she could have been the CEO of an actually valid company, but instead she took all of her skills and all of her opportunities and time and everything else and just used it to get better and better at defrauding more and more people and running more and more of these sales floors and operations. She's smart. Her being like, oh, I just didn't know I wasn't paying enough attention. Yes, you were. You knew exactly what was going on. You knew where the money was going, and you were also the one that led the change to using Signal, to opening accounts in Kosovo, to doing all of the stuff to make sure that it stayed hidden for longer. What are you talking about? No, Stu. I wish I would have done more to stop Stu. What I would say to somebody that lost money because of this is that I'm sorry for any part that I had, and I'm sorry that I didn't do more due diligence. I'm sorry that I didn't do more that could have possibly curtailed some of the victims from happening in the first place. I'd like to say that I'm sorry, and I'm here in accepting responsibility, and have made it my mission as part of my consequences, and my responsibilities to make sure that people are paid back through the restitution. I hope that everybody else that had a part in this does the same thing because these people deserve to be made whole. The only valid thing she said there was that the victims deserve to be made whole. That's it. That's the only reasonable true statement in what she said. I can't get over the fact that she didn't need to do this. No, she still thinks she's innocent. She had to. She needed her story out there. She could have stopped. Her husband's a high-level football coach at a major university. She starts getting a salary on the Real Housewives of Salt Lake City. She didn't ever need that income. That was all for her vanity, for her pride. She led the way in the charge and created more of these companies after she knew without a doubt how illegal it was in 2018, and she kept doing it. I'm just flabbergasted. I was just listening to that, and I could just see her going and pleading and getting a sentence before Stu and just crying and being like, but he needs to get the same thing I do. Just like cry yelling and being like, but he doesn't fucking get the same sentence I do. Just feeling as though this is all his fault, and she wants to take him down, completely ignoring her participation in it and her leadership in it. That was actually a pretty good impression of her too. I thought that was good. I can see that, but also she had the opportunity when she saw the Katopchi co-conspirators, she's married to an attorney. She had the opportunity to be like, I'm at risk of getting in big trouble here. She could have gone to the feds then, and been like, I know all of the stuff that's going on, I know how it's done, I want to help you make sure that everyone, but no, that's not what she wanted to do. She didn't want to do that. What she wanted to do was be in charge and make even more money and be at the top of the pyramid of fraud. She had so many opportunities to stop. But I think she's very convinced, and it's clear here that Stu was as guilty, if not guiltier, more responsible for everything than her. No, she does not believe that. No, I think she does believe it. That's where I disagree with you. She hasn't convinced herself. She has decided that this is the fraudulent story that she is going to tell about herself. She knows what she did. She knows how wrong it was. She knows how illegal it was. And she knows the people that she harmed, and she does not care. No, I think both things are true, but I do think that she thinks this is all Stu's fault. Like that Stu has a bigger fault than she does in this. I think she's convinced herself for sure. No, I think she's just very comfortable telling a story of mine. But that's how she was on the show too. She would blame everyone else for things that she did. She did very openly. She makes noise. But what she believes is that she can tell this story that she knows to be false and that people are going to believe it. No, I think she knew she was at the head when it was happening. And as soon as she was arrested and had to face trial or accepting a plea, she convinced herself it was him and she pointed her finger at him and was like, why is he not getting the downfall for this? I think she fully believes that it was him, that he's the one that deserves all this. I think that's the only point where we disagree on this. She knows what she's doing. She just thinks everyone's stupid enough to fall for whatever story she's going to tell now. Also because I think her ego is so big. She knows she was in charge in orchestrating it, and I think she's still proud of it, to be honest. I think that's how she feels inside. I was in charge of this and these stupid people that fell for it, that's their fault. No, I think she was there until it was beneficial to her to put that aside. And once it was beneficial, then that was her story, that was her truth. When I was away, I asked my husband and my children to send me, to send me impact letters because I needed to know. I needed to know how I hurt them. I needed them to be honest with me and tell me everything because that's the only way mommy could get better. And I needed to hear it because I know they were so hurt. I needed to hear how I felt when the raid happened, you know? I didn't want to hear these things, but I knew I had to. I needed that. I needed to hear that raw feedback. First of all, no. She and her attorney, prior to her sentencing, had the 333-page sentencing memorandum and she had all the copies of it prior to her sentencing with all of those victim impact statements. She didn't need anyone to send her that while she was, to use her words, away. And by the way, you weren't away. You were in prison. That's where you were because that's where you belong. She already had all that information prior to that. So first of all, that's just false to begin with. Misunderstanding, because that's the same thing I thought, that she wanted the victim impact statements. No, no. If you listen to what she said, she said, I was away. I asked my husband and children to send me impact letters because I needed to know how I hurt them. She's talking about she wanted letters from her husband and her two sons on how it impacted them. She didn't want the victim impact statement. That's not what she's talking about. And I thought the same thing you thought when I first heard it. But I went and re listened to it and read this again. She's talking about letters from her husband and kids. Those are the impact statements she wants. So for the entire time she was maintaining her innocence and they were using their own funds and whatever to retain a federal criminal defense attorney on her behalf, that she didn't understand the impact that all of this was having on her family. That's insane. But that's what she means because she said I needed to know how it impacted my husband and my children. That's the only way mommy could get better if they were honest with me. Well, she's not better. She's not. But isn't that crazy that we were giving her some, not even a benefit of the doubt, but being like, oh, OK, she wanted the victim impact statements. No, she didn't even want those. I don't even think she ever read them. She was like, I want to know how I hurt my family. She doesn't give a fuck about the victims. She cares about how she hurt her family, which she should have known, like you pointed out. But you were there. Not wild. I was like, oh, that's nice. And then as I was preparing for this, I read that and I was like, oh, wait, not those. I mean, I was already mad when I thought that's what she was saying, because she did know I was already mad about that. No, she's not even talking about that. No, she's not. Just to close this out, this is her saying where she's at physically, not mentally. We know that. I'm on home confinement until August or possibly a little bit before that. But so how it works is, you still get to go out, but you get it approved. You can request to go out for employment reasons, for work, religious, whatever you need to do based on your security level, I guess, so to speak. Some people, you have to earn certain levels. They approve everything that you do. So I wear an ankle monitor all of the time, and it basically monitors when you leave your residence and come back. So that's that. Let's just remind everyone, the federal government identified thousands of victims impacted by this telemarketing scheme. And this wasn't just financial harm, but there was also psychological and physical harm to these victims from what happened to them. They specifically preyed on the elderly and the vulnerable. They targeted people over the age of 55 who were not tech savvy. Multiple victims reported losing their entire retirement funds. In multiple victim impact statements, several individuals detailed how they had to take out second mortgages or were evicted from their homes because of the money Shah's companies took from them. An elderly woman lost over $40,000 and stated she contemplated suicide because she could no longer afford her medical bills because of what she paid from the scam. Another man lost his house after being convinced to invest in these business services that never existed. A widow lost her life insurance payout from her husband, which she intended to use for her grandchildren's education. That's just a couple of examples from the victim impact statement. But no, Jen Shah is the victim here because she didn't pay enough attention. She pled guilty to save her family from having to deal with that. Fuck you. It's very interesting to hear how she speaks when she speaks about the crime and her decision to plead guilty and everything because she stumbles over her words completely entirely. It's like ums and you knows and whatever. Then when you go and listen to her talk about her experience in prison, which I think she's being very truthful about and transparent about because no harm there. She's very clear and very direct. If you're interested in hearing that, the rest of the interview is up on YouTube. Like I said, we only just went through 10 minutes of it, but the rest is non-controversial. It's just her talking about how she was on toilet duty. May she get the reception and response that she deserves. All right. Thanks for listening. Thanks for tuning in to another episode of The Bravo Docket. Don't forget to follow us on Instagram, at The Bravo Docket, and subscribe to our podcast anywhere you listen. You can also join our Patreon for extra content. Until next time, legal team. Bye.