Top Maryland Officials Caught in 'Nude Photo' Scandal

I'm standing here, sitting here today uh. because I am absolutely disgusted. disgusted about what was published and. circulated in the media. And frankly, I. am angry. >> What started as a private dispute. [music] between two of the. highest-ranking officials in a Maryland. county has now become essentially. [music]. a public fiasco with the county. executive and the sheriff basically. going to war over allegations of nude. selfies. [music] Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law&Crime. I'm Jesse Weber.

If you're watching this, [music] if. you're putting things out on social. media, if you're into content creation, you might be wondering, how are we able. to share so many of these clips from all. of these stories, these breaking. stories, so quickly? We use something. called Opus Clip, okay? This is an. all-in-one AI editor that makes it so. easy to cut, create, and upload videos. across any platform. Through AI, Opus. Clip generates b-roll, it reframes. footage, and it even cleans up audio. And it is so easy. You just visit. opus.pro/.

and in minutes you have perfectly edited. clips ready to go for TikTok, Shorts, Reels. Opus Clip is really your one-stop. shop. And having a tool like Opus Clip. means that our producers can get you. viral courtroom updates instantly. This. is the most powerful tool there is to. share ideas and edit like a pro. So, go. to opus.pro/sidebar. to get a free week and then 50% off. >> Three years, I have been forced to. address the same false allegations over. and over again.

So, let me be crystal clear. And I want. there to be absolutely no. misunderstanding about what I am saying. As the county executive of Wicomico. County, I have never sent inappropriate. photographs to a deputy, to county to a. county employee, or to anyone else. I never have. I never would. Period. >> That's what County, Maryland County. Executive Julie Giordano absolutely.

livid that she's once again having to. address these rumors that nude photos of. her somehow ended up in the hands of a. local sheriff's deputy. Now, the. allegations have apparently been. circulating for quite some bit for. years, but things really came to a head. last week when Giordano called this. last-minute press conference. And what. followed could potentially blow a hole. right through her loud denials. Could. this lead to any legal consequences down. the line? Who's right about the law? We're going to talk about it. So, to get. into this, let's go back for a second.

We go back to 2022. That was the year. that Giordano, who according to the. county government website was married. with one child, ran for and was elected. to Wicomico County Executive. That's. essentially the county's mayor. The. county website says she was the first. woman elected to that role. The. executive also works alongside one of. the county's other high-ranking elected. officials. The sheriff, Sheriff Mike. Lewis, was named the area's top cop in. 2007. He's held the position ever since. Now, Wicomico County covers a large area.

surrounding Salisbury, Maryland, south. of the border with Delaware. But since. Giordano took office, according to media. outlets such as WBFF in Baltimore and. WEOC in Salisbury, persistent rumors. have circulated that she sent nude. photographs to at least one sheriff's. deputy. So, these allegations have. reportedly plagued Giordano for years, including a WBFF report claiming that. there was evidence that such images. existed and had been shared. So, the.

exact catalyst for all of this kind of. remains unclear, but both Giordano and. Lewis, we're not sure, I just have to. mention this, they're both up for. re-election this year. Something to keep. in mind, okay? Now, things came to a. head last week on June 10th. This was. when there was this news conference, kind of last-minute, kind of like almost. happened out of nowhere, and Giordano's. fury at these rumors, at these. allegations was evident. >> These allegations are completely false.

They are not based on facts. They are. not supported by evidence. They are not They are nothing more than. a deliberate attack on my character, my. integrity, and my reputation. >> According to a WBFF report in Baltimore, Giordano allegedly sent the letter to. Sheriff Lewis addressing the photos. And. Lewis replied apparently with his own. letter. >> What makes this even more outrageous is. that the story today was supposedly.

about letters. Yet the entire story became a vehicle to. resurrect years-old rumors about alleged. photos that have never surfaced because. they do not exist. Let's be honest about what happened. here. The letters were simply the excuse. They. were the hook. They were the masquerade. used to drag these false accusations. back into the public eye for one.

purpose, to damage me politically and. personally. This is fake news at its finest. For 3 years I have repeatedly. repeatedly denied these allegations. For. 3 years I have asked for proof. For 3. years I have requested that anyone. anyone making these claims produce these. alleged photographs. And after 3 years,

where are they? Where is the evidence? Where are the. photographs? Where is the proof? The. answer is simple, there are none. Because as county executive, I have. never sent them. What infuriates me the most is not that. I have to stand here and defend myself. again. What infuriates me is the damage. this reckless reporting causes to. innocent people. This morning, do you know what I had to.

do? I had to call my mom and my dad who. live in Baltimore and tell them exactly. what was said about their daughter. I had to call my sister. I had to sit. down with my son and explain why his. mother was being attacked in the news. Think about that for a moment. I had to. explain TO A CHILD WHY why people were. spreading allegations about his mother. that I know are completely false. That.

is what irresponsible reporting does. That is what political hit jobs do. The people who push these stories do not. have to answer questions from a child. They don't have to explain to their. parents. They don't have to live with. the consequences. My family does. And as the only Republican female county. executive in the state of Maryland, I. cannot ignore the timing, the. motivation, or the pattern.

Every time these allegations begin to. fade away, someone finds a way to drag. them back into the headlines despite the. complete lack of evidence. This is not journalism. This is not. accountability. This is a desperate. desperate attempt to defame me. This is. a desperate attempt to destroy my. reputation. And ultimately, it is a. desperate attempt to distract from the. tremendous.

the tremendous progress that this county. has made over the last 3 and 1/2 years. While others are focused on rumors, my administration has been focused on. lowering taxes and improving public. safety, strengthening our schools, investing in infrastructure, growing our. airport, and moving Wicomico County. forward. The people behind this story. want me distracted. They want me. intimidated, and they want me silent. They don't know me cuz that's not going.

to happen. I will not, and I'm going to repeat. this, I will not be bullied, I will not. be intimidated, and I will not. allow lies to go unanswered. I am. standing here today to tell the people. of Wicomico County what exactly I have. been saying for the last 3 years. These. allegations are false. The alleged. photographs have never been produced. because they do not exist. And as county. executive, I have never sent.

inappropriate photographs to a deputy or. to anybody else. That is the truth. It was the truth 3. years ago. It was the truth today. And. guess what? It'll still be the truth. tomorrow. Thank you. >> Giordana left the press conference, didn't take any questions from. reporters. When all of this first started to make. waves, reporters reached out to Sheriff. Lewis. Now, he apparently declined to. comment, also declined to release these. alleged letters. I would say, what was. it? Within hours of Giordana's public. statement, WBOC announced it had.

received the correspondence as part of a. public information request and published. it. So, letting people decide for. themselves who was telling the truth. You got this letter on official Wicomico. County, Maryland County Executive. Letterhead, dated September 12th, 2024, was seemingly sent and directed to. Sheriff Mike Lewis. Here's what it says, quote, "Dear Sheriff Lewis, after much. deliberation, I'm writing to formally. request an investigation into the. alleged sharing of pornographic images.

of me by one of your deputies. It is. deeply concerning that a deputy would. share such a photo, and even more. troubling that you have acknowledged. possessing such an image. You mentioned. this to a private citizen, a group of. individuals in Annapolis, to which you. added that the image was shared from a. government phone, and in a meeting with. your chief deputy, the state's attorney, the assistant director of. administration, and myself, all without. my consent. Since we last discussed this. issue, it is my understanding that no. investigation has been initiated by any. member of your command staff, your.

deputies, or any outside agency. On. February 13th, 2024, you told Matthew. Litsel, deputy director of. administration, that under Maryland law, revenge porn only applies in the context. of an intimate relationship between the. parties. While I agree that no such. intimate relationship exists between. myself and the deputy in question, your. interpretation of Maryland's revenge. porn statute is incorrect. The law does. not require an intimate relationship. between the individuals for the. prohibition against distributing.

explicit images to apply. No member of. the Wicomico County Sheriff's Office or. any other law enforcement agency has. permission to possess any visual. representation of myself with my. intimate parts exposed or while engaged. in an act of sexual activity. By the. way, it might be a typo there. You're. going to see it being addressed later on. in the sheriff's letter. I have never. consented to the creation of any visual. representation of myself with my. intimate parts exposed or while engaged. in an act of sexual activity. I have. never provided anyone consent to. distribute any visual representation of.

me with my intimate parts exposed or. while engaged in an act of sexual. activity. This matter is. straightforward. Either a deputy shared. a nude photograph of me or they did not. If such an image has been shared, this. constitutes a criminal act. Such conduct. is a violation of Maryland criminal law. See Maryland Annotated Code Criminal Law. Section 3-809, as well as potentially federal law. And. we'll talk about that. Any deputy. involved in sharing or distributing. these images must be held accountable.

and should face criminal charges. As the Sheriff of Wicomico County, you. are responsible for upholding law within. this jurisdiction. I ask that you. request an investigation into this. matter, as I know your office is. conflicted and pursue charges against. the deputy responsible as you have. knowledge of this alleged criminal act. I am prepared to cooperate fully with. any investigation. Thank you for your. attention into this matter. My personal. attorney and I look forward to an update. on the situation by the end of the. month. Sincerely, Julie Giordano, County. Executive. So, when these rumors, these.

allegations started circulating about. these letters, sources told local news. stations that Giordano had been sent a. cease and desist letter to keep her from. sending nude photos to Sheriff's Office. employees. And we'll talk more about. that in a second, but it seems that some. of the details might have been lost in. translation because Sheriff Lewis's. response on October 4th, 2024, it didn't. mention the words cease and desist, but. it was pretty scathing, okay? Here's. what it says, quote, "County Executive. Giordano, on September 30th, 2024, I.

received an email copy of a letter from. your office authored by you in which you. formally requested an investigation into. the alleged sharing of pornographic. images of you by one of my deputies. Since we last discussed your sharing of, quote, nude selfies to one of my. deputies, neither you nor anyone else. requested an investigation be initiated. into the possible dissemination of. these, quote, pornographic photos. Photos, of course, that any viewer could. quickly discern were self-generated, self-created, and ultimately. self-distributed. You stated in.

paragraph four of your letter that no. member of the Wicomico County Sheriff's. Office or any other law enforcement. agency has permission to possess any. visual representation of myself with my. intimate parts exposed or whole, I think. you meant while engaged in an act of. sexual activity. You further go on to. state, I have never consented to. creation of any visual representation of. myself with my intimate parts exposed or. while engaged in an act of sexual. activity. I have never provided anyone. consent to distribute any visual. representation of me with my intimate. parts exposed or while engaged in an act.

of sexual activity. Perhaps you should have thought about. that before you sent those selfies from. your phone. In your words, this matter. is straightforward. You have a choice to. make, Madam County Executive. As a key. witness to the nude selfies, I stand. fully prepared to testify as to how a. deputy requested permission to enter my. office and shut my door. While standing. next to my desk, the deputy proceeded to. scroll through multiple nude selfies of. you clearly taken by you now being. shockingly displayed on my deputy's cell. phone. These nude selfies were never. forwarded to my cell phone and I've.

never been in possession of these. self-created pornographic images. But, one can only wonder how many others have. been seen or been forwarded, perhaps by. you, these same photos. As for visual. representation of you engaged in sexual. activity, I have never claimed to see. that video. As you mentioned in. paragraph six of your letter of request, I am conflicted and my agency is unable. to conduct an investigation into this. matter. I am more than willing to. request an official investigation into. where these pornographic images, nude. selfies originated. I will make the.

request through the Maryland State. Police or the office of the State. Prosecutor. Once the investigation. commences, it will likely result in the. issuance of a search and seizure warrant. of your cell phone, personal and. government by investigators to conduct a. complete forensic examination to confirm. that the same photos shown to me did in. fact originate from one of your cell. phones or a previous cell phone owned by. you. All deleted messages, photos, and. emails are fully recoverable despite. one's best attempts to destroy them. Of.

course, once the investigation is. concluded, you will no longer be able to. deny to your own administration or to. the citizens of Wicomico County that. these photos not only exist, but so do. your text messages, phone logs, and. other video evidence detailing your. activities and life as Wicomico County. Executive. As the Sheriff of Wicomico. County, I'm deeply hurt and embarrassed. that a fellow elected official would. bring such disrepute onto a county where. I was born and raised. Our citizens. deserve better. My personal attorney and. I look forward to a written response.

from you outlining what investigative. measures you would like for me to take. to secure an outside agency to fully. investigate these serious allegations. Please respond within 14 days, 2 weeks. I eagerly await your response. Thank you. for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Michael A. Lewis, Sheriff, Wicomico County, Maryland. All right. Lot to think about here. Lot to make. sense of. I just My mind's blown with. this. Uh let me bring on right now a. special guest. I'm joined by Daniel. Sakowitz, who's a victim's rights and. trial attorney. Um would know a lot.

about this. First of all, Daniel, I I. got I got to tell you Um I don't think. I've seen uh correspondence between. uh elected officials like this. I don't. think I've ever seen correspondence. between a county executive and a sheriff. over let alone allegations over revenge. porn. But like this back and forth. letter to letter, have you ever seen. anything like this? >> No. I I mean, I read this letter from. the sheriff and it is absolutely. mind-blowing that he would put something. like this in writing on official. letterhead. Besides the fact of how.

incorrect he was under the criminal law, the concept that he would then go ahead. and blame someone that claims that. they're a victim of non-consensual. pornography is absurd and then using. official letterhead to do so. I mean, what's crazy is if you read the bottom. of the letter, it says, "Please now. consult with my private attorney." So. clearly he understands that there are. potential ramifications. He's using both. the public office and his private. attorney in order to try to seems like. in my view harass a victim of of a. sexual assault.

>> Let's talk about this for a second. So. under the law, let's start with Maryland. law, um even if someone wasn't in an. intimate relationship with another. person, and even if someone took um. uh photos of themself, uh because there's a back and forth. about how the photos were allegedly. obtained by uh the sheriff's deputy, if. that's true. But, what's the rule You. don't have to be in an intimate relation. with relationship with somebody to. to go forward with a revenge porn claim, and you don't even You could have taken. voluntarily taken the photos yourself.

Does it matter about whether or not you. sent them to anybody? >> It does not at all. So, Maryland has a. fairly standard revenge porn criminal. statute. It is somebody distributes the. intimate images with the intent to harm, harass, intimidate, threaten, or coerce. the person that took the photographs. Now, there is a second section. section to it that says that the person. could not consent to the distribution, and also that they had a reasonable.

expectations that the images would. remain private. There is nothing in this. statute that says that the person who. received the images had to be the. intended recipient. That person had to. be the one that received them and then. shared them. It's not here. It It. doesn't matter why you took the images. It doesn't matter who you shared them. with, candidly. The concept that. somebody potentially shared these images. without your consent, and they did it. with an intent to cause harm to the. victim, is what makes it criminal.

>> So, there's no reasonable expectation of. privacy that's eliminated if you send. the photo to someone else. Because the. argument would be, "Hey, you you put it. out there. You can't blame anybody else. for what happens." It's like someone. stole it off of your device or stole it. off the cloud or sent it improperly. themselves. Just the idea of if you sent it, you. have you don't have a right to claim. that you're a victim of anything because. you put it out there. That's not true. >> That is 100% correct. Otherwise, these. statutes would be absolutely meaningful. It's akin to the fallacy that a married.

person could a husband could not rape. his wife. The mere fact that you're. married to someone doesn't mean you. consent to sex. The mere fact that share. your intimate image with an individual. does not mean that you consent them for. it to be shared with the entire world. >> Let me ask you this, federal when they. mentioned the federal potential federal. crime, is that the take down act? >> That would be. So, when this letter was. sent, there was no federal crime in. existence at the time. So, presumably.

they were referring to the civil statute. that came into play, which was 15 USC. 6851, which only allows for a civil. lawsuit. However, recently the take it. down act was enacted that now makes it. criminal for someone to share someone's. image without their consent as well. >> What is going on here? Because you have. these letters back and forth from 2024. We're hearing about it now. What happened in the last two years? Cuz. it was boiling up, you know, there's. talk about you want to have an.

investigation. Okay, there's going to be. a search warrant of your phones. There's. going to be a back and forth. What do. you think happened in the last two. years? >> Yeah, I mean, I think we need to look at. this response to begin with from a. report from a crime that took place by. Sheriff Lewis. Um the concept that you. would put in writing that, okay, you've. been a victim, but now it opens up the. door for me, another political. individual within the community or an. investigator to gain access to all your. personal devices, all of your deleted.

information. This is a form of. intimidation. It's not accurate. It's. not actually a true statement. necessarily what he's saying, nor is it. somebody that's ever trained to. represent. victims or be a law enforcement of. victims of sexual assault should ever be. saying to someone that is filing a. report and claiming that they're a. victim. Even if they don't believe the. allegations. There is a reason that in. most states. the sharing of someone's intimate images. without their consent is deemed a sex. crime. It's handled by specially trained. police officers. In New York City, it's.

handled by SVO just like you see on the. television show. When the civil statute was passed at a. federal level, it was passed under the. Violence Against Women's Act because. there is the understanding that to share. someone's intimate image without their. consent is a form of sexual abuse. And. now you have a sheriff who is telling. somebody that it's okay, you can make. the report if you want, but it's going. to ruin your life. That is essentially. what he's telling this individual. So, I don't understand how the public could. ever have trusted anybody would take.

their claim seriously when somebody like. Sheriff Lewis was willing to put this in. writing and send it to a victim. Now, what has happened since. 2024? Unfortunately, it actually seems. as though this letter served as a. deterrent to Sheriff Manford to be. We. have not heard about an investigation. It's very possible the county executive. chose not to go through with the the. process of filing a criminal complaint. And it seems as though these letters. came out as base of a FOIL request later. on in response to her actually denying.

now that these images ever existed to. begin with. >> I mean, she was adamant during that news. conference that she never sent nude. photos as a county executive. I don't. recall if she was as adamant as saying. she never took them, but I thought it. was interesting that she held this press. conference. What did you make of that? >> You know, I think unfortunately there is. still a stigma in society for. individuals that choose to take intimate. images of themselves. The concept that. she herself referred to these images as. pornographic within her initial letter.

sort of shows that there's almost a. shame involved with this and that people. believe it could impact your political. career in the future. And we've actually. seen it impact individuals political. career when this comes out. I think a. lot of it has to do with potentially the. shame associated with that. You're of a. certain age and you're still sharing. these images and the acceptability. within society. Nowadays, unfortunately, it's almost like a first. date or or or. second base where someone will share. their intimate images. Um, there is a.

level of trust that exists and that's. why a lot of these laws have come into. existence. So, I believe that part of it. is her trying to protect what she sees. as her reputation. We don't know how if. these images did exist, and it seems. though that they may have, how the. sheriff obtained them. There are many. ways that perpetrators are able to. obtain these images from someone's. devices, whether through a hack, whether. through a third party. Uh we had a case. in New Jersey where someone was gaining. access to his coworkers' phones, pretending that he was locked out, and. then air dropping intimate images of.

other people to his own phone and. sharing them online. So, we don't know. all the facts, and I will also say that. this criminal statute is very narrowly. tailored. So, there is a possibility. when this deputy shared with the sheriff. the images, he didn't do it with the. intent to cause harm. He did it maybe. because he just wanted to show off that. he had these images. All that being. said, it doesn't make the conduct right, and it doesn't mean that uh Giordano. should feel shamed about what took place. in the situation. >> And look, those are the allegations. We're trying to sort out what exactly.

happened. I thought this part was. interesting from her letter. You have. acknowledged possessing such an image. You mentioned this to a private citizen, a group of individuals in Annapolis, to. which you added that the image was. shared from a government phone. And in a. meeting with your chief deputy, the. state's attorney, the assistant director. of administration, and myself, all. without my consent, it does make me. wonder how she knew this. I mean, assuming this is all true, that he had. these conversations. And by the way, he. rebutted that he personally had the. image, like he, you know, he said it was. shared to him. How do you think she.

knew, or allegedly knew, that he had. these conversations? >> Oh, you have to imagine people talk. I. mean, people talk about anything small, especially within small political. communities and parties. Uh there's no. doubt in my mind it somehow got back to. her through somebody that actually was. either present at the time, or there. were rumors going through the process. So, so I believe she had to have. received it from a third party who knew. from their own personal knowledge, or. heard it through the rumor mill. I mean, that's normally how individuals find out. about this. >> Are we learning about this now cuz it's.

politics, because it's election season? >> Yeah, I mean, I read this and I said, they have to be part of different. political parties. I mean, that was my. view, but looks as though they're. actually part of the same party. But, this is definitely politics at its. dirtiest. Both individuals were using. official letterhead to send. correspondence back and forth on private. matters, but this is definitely. politics. >> So, according to reporting from WBFF out. in Baltimore, earlier this year, what. Comico attorney Andrew Illuminati, what. a what a last name, Andrew Illuminati,

told their investigative team. that the county wouldn't be releasing. these letters because it was quote, "An. unwarranted invasion of personal. privacy." Also cited them as being part. of an investigatory record. Then on. Wednesday, WBFF reports that Illuminati. seemingly changed his mind, released the. records because of quote, "Public. interest." Wrote in correspondence with. WBFF reporter Gary Collins, quote, "The. sheriff has confirmed that there is not. an open investigation being conducted by. his office, and the matter has not been.

referred to an outside agency for. investigation. Additionally, given the. public attention, this matter is. receiving due to Mr. Collins' story, the. records are matter of public interest.". The sheriff's office confirmed that. there are no preservation notices to. cell phone companies. There is no known. evidence that images still exist, and. that there is not a cease and desist. letter or any other letter from the. sheriff instructing the county executive. to cease sending semi-nude, nude, or. pornographic photographs of herself to.

sheriff's deputies." Quoting from Mr. Collins' article. Daniel, what do you. make of that decision to reverse course. here to release these letters, and what. do you make of the rationale behind. doing so? >> I don't believe there's any law that. should have protected the release of. these letters. It's clear that they're. being done on agency letterhead. Um. there is an indication, there is no. investigation that was opened at any. time. While I understand it involves a. private matter, the parties did choose.

to use, again, the office of the county. executive letterhead and the sheriff's. office letterhead. I think there is a. public interest in the back and forth, and actually I think there should be a. public interest in the response from the. sheriff's office. It was up to me, county executive Giordano should have. actually turned around and said, "Yes, I. was a victim, and I want my story to be. heard so other people would not have to. be victimized as well." Because if this. is how a county executive is being. treated, I cannot imagine how other. normal citizens or everyday citizens are.

walking into the precinct and being. treated by the sheriff's office at this. time. What's also actually very. interesting about the timing of all of. this, back in 2024, is it seems as though the images were. originally released around February. Because in county executive Giordano's. letter, she claims that on February 13th, 2024, she was informed that under the Maryland. revenge porn statute, there needed to be. an intimate relationship, but these. letters are dated September and October.

So, clearly something was going on for. at least six to eight months that led. her to actually try to follow up with an. additional investigation. >> That's an interesting point. Um. look, you have a. According to reporting from the. Baltimore Sun, Executive Giordano, Sheriff Lewis, they had a rocky working. relationship for years. Sheriff Lewis. apparently told the Sun, "I have not. always had a good relationship with my. county executive. For the last year and. a half, I think we both have worked very. hard to get along for the betterment of. Wicomico County." WBFF's investigative.

team, Spotlight on Maryland, reportedly. texted Giordano to ask if she ever had, quote, any sexual or otherwise intimate. relationships with any member of the. Wicomico County Sheriff's Office, and. she reportedly texted back, "This. conversation is over. Talking to you is. literally not even worth my time. I'll. wait and hear from the attorneys. Oh, by. the way, this whole texting conversation. is off the record. I was literally. trying to help you see the entire. picture, but it's obviously not worth my.

time. And when Spotlight and Maryland uh. reporter the text it back that they. never agreed to be off the record, Giordana reportedly said, "All of your. questions will be answered in the. letters." What do we make of that? >> I view it as a further invasion of. privacy. Whether or not Giordana had a. sexual relationship with anyone within. the department is really nobody's. business. That that's the private. concept of it. And again, nothing takes. away from the concept that she believed. an image of her or several images of her. that she took and intended to remain. private are being shared without the.

sheriff's office and throughout the. sheriff's office. So, yes, I mean, there's some protocols that you should. always have in place when you talk to. the media about talking off the record. to begin with, and there should be. strict understandings back and forth. Do. I think it was an appropriate question. by them? While they may be curious, I. think there probably could have been a. more delicate way to ask her. Um and I. would understand why she believes that. her privacy is being invaded even more. >> What do you think's going to happen now? >> Not much, unfortunately. Um. I believe that given all this took place.

back in 2024, there's probably statute. of limitations issues if there were any. criminal actions to begin with. There's. a potential for a civil lawsuit against. the sheriff that had originally shared. or the deputy had originally shared. these images. There is no civil tort. that you can bring against someone who. views images. I mean, the First. Amendment does protect that. So, the. concept that at least Sheriff Lewis. viewed the images, you can't really hold. him responsible for that. But you can. hold her responsible for the person who. made available the images to begin with. Do I think there's going to be more back. and forth over this? Yes, I do think.

there are more facts that were not being. made aware of. I do hope, just again, for the sake of everyone else within the. county, that the police officers take a. deep look into how they handled this. situation and reconsider how they would. respond in a normal situation because. this response. just causes more and more victims to go. forward and is why these laws were put. into place to begin with. >> Yeah, it's a it's a weird one. Very. public now. Daniel Sagalowitz, thank you. so much for taking the time. Really. appreciate it.

>> Thank you. Appreciate you having me on. >> And that's all we have for you right now. here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so. much for joining us and as always, please subscribe [music] on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you. should get your podcast. You can also. check us out on NBC's [music] Peacock as. well. If you want to follow me, X, Instagram, my NewsNation show, Jesse. Weber LIVE, Monday through [music]. Friday, 11:00 p.m. Eastern. See you next. time, everybody.