Return to Transcripts main page


Confessed Murderer Testifies in Son`s Trial

Aired August 5, 2013 - 21:00   ET



DR. DREW PINSKY, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, confessed killer Big Josh Gouker testifies about how he murdered his stepson with language so foul, we can`t even air it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I told you I done it, I admitted everything I`ve done. I`ve been sentenced for it, life in prison. Yet here I am, going over the same (EXPLETIVE DELETED) story.

PINSKY: Can this madman save his own son little Josh, who himself is accused of taking part in this heinous crime?

The behavior bureau sounds off on this psycho path.

And we`ll reveal a letter from him in prison, made public for the first time right here.

Let`s get started.



PINSKY: Good evening.

My co-host is attorney and Sirius XM Radio host Jenny Hutt.

Coming up --


PINSKY: Good evening.

The former cop who burned down his house down to cover his tracks goes ballistic in court, Jenny.

First, though, Joshua Young, the teen on trial for helping murder his stepbrother. His father, big Josh Gouker, already had confessed to the murder, serving a life sentence. So he had no reason to censor himself on the stand. And he surely did not. Take a look at this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t deny nothing I`ve said. I`m not a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) liar, you know I mean?

I know what you`re doing. You`re trying to make microscopic little holes (EXPLETIVE DELETED) that I didn`t even give a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) about two years ago.

So how can I tell you the exact thing now when I really didn`t give a (EXPLETIVE DELETED). It`s not like I wanted Trey to die or if I could do it over, I`d kill him again. His mother killed a couple of mine and it just felt right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How did Josh and Trey not get along?

UNIDENTIFEID FEMALE: Josh had more of an aggressive personality. He joked on people. Teased and made fun of. Josh thought it was funny to vandalize and torment.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Josh Gouker had asked me if I knew who killed Trey and I said, no. And he said, little Josh did. And I looked at little Josh and I said you killed Trey, and he said, yes.

Gouker and Young were talking about it. And they were kind of laughing about it like it was funny. He beat him to death.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Little Josh had said that he did it and that he used a slugger. I beat the hell out of him, somewhere in those gather of words.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED), I`ve lied this whole (EXPLETIVE DELETED) time except since arraignment. Since arraignment court, I`ve told you I`ve done it. I`ve admitted everything I`ve done.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you feel bad about anything you have done?



PINSKY: Jenny, I got to tell you, the look on your face is something I`ve really never seen before. Stunned? Is stunned the right word? Or shocked? Or disgusted? Or all these things?

HUTT: All of the above, Dr. Drew. Frankly, this was such a creep fest in court today, I couldn`t look away because it was a real train crash. And I was disgusted, nauseated. I can`t comprehend much of what`s going on in that courtroom. It`s out of control.

PINSKY: Jenny, if you had to defend that guy, this is the guy that walks around with a cat`s eye on a stick telling people he`s got his eye on them.

HUTT: Winner!

PINSKY: Could you do it?

HUTT: No, no. I don`t think that I could, Dr. Drew. He`s one of the most reprehensible, vile, disgusting creatures I`ve yet to see in my life.

PINSKY: Well, I don`t know how your kind does, but Mark Eiglarsh joins me on the panel, Mark defends nefarious tops.

We`ve also got former prosecutor Loni Coombs, author of "Your Perfect and Other Lies Parents Tell."

Brian Copeland, talk show host of KGO Radio in San Francisco, author of "Not a Genuine Black Man."

And Ryan Smith, attorney, host of "HLN AFTER DARK."

Ryan, I go to you first, what was the point of having that monster on the stand and did it work?

RYAN SMITH, HOST, HLN AFTER DARK: Well, I`ll tell you this. For the prosecution, it was to talk about his conflicting stories.

Originally, he talks about how neighborhood kids killed Trey. Then his son killed Trey. Then he killed Trey, but he killed him because he stole some food and sold his lighter. And then, finally, in court today, he talked about killing him because his mom aborted some of his kids.

This guy is as foul as they come. But the reason he was up there in the state was all those stories don`t add up. They feel like he`s covering for little Josh.

PINSKY: Got it.

SMITH: But I actually think this witness helped the defense because he`s a guy who doesn`t care about anybody but himself. He`s so bad in court. And at the same time, would he take the stead of his son in this case, he says, no, I don`t care about him, I don`t love him, and he said that on the stand.

PINSKY: Brian, follow that up.

BRIAN COPELAND, RADIO HOST: Well, you know, again, as Jenny said, this is a man who is -- I don`t want to call him a man. He`s like a waste of flesh walking around on the earth who is completely reprehensible, who has absolutely no remorse, has no human feeling or compassion, who laughs about killing animals, who laughs about trying to start a race war.

There`s no on God`s green earth that this guy was going to take the wrap to do something nice for his kid. I don`t see a motive for him taking the blame for this if he didn`t do it. So, despite the fact that he`s a psycho and a liar, I do believe he`s telling the truth that he committed this murder.

PINSKY: I don`t know about that.

Mark? I`m coming to you now, my friend. Even guys like this deserve advocacy? It`s so hard for us to get our head around. What do you say?

MARK EIGLARSH, ATTORNEY: Yes, don`t you want him in prison for the rest of his life? In order for that to happen, the Constitution requires that he has competent counsel by his side. It doesn`t mean that the Constitution guarantees him Mark Eiglarsh. It just means somebody who doesn`t have to like him -- understand something.

I defend a lot of people. Look, my kids wouldn`t go to private school if somehow I had to like everybody that I defended. My obligation is simply to get them the best possible outcome that exists under challenging circumstances. That`s all.

PINSKY: But, Loni, the best possible outcome would be this guy put away forever. By the way, as I understand, this guy walked into court and told his attorney after he got in the courtroom, I`m going for guilt. I`m guilty.

LONI COOMBS, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Yes. He just came in, didn`t want to hear them, didn`t want to talk to them. Just said I`m pleading guilty to everything and let the judge do what he wants to do.

You know, we talk a lot about what`s a depraved mind. That`s a legal term that jurors are supposed to figure out what that means.

Here`s an example. If you want to know what a depraved mind is, this is the man, when you look it up in the dictionary. What we heard today in court is a depraved mind.

I`ll tell you, I don`t even know why the prosecution called him to the stand. I would have waited, put on these witnesses who are all saying that either little Josh told them or someone else told them that it was little Josh, Joshua Young who did the killing.

Let the defense put this guy on. Keep him at arm`s length and then cross-examine the heck out of him and show all of his --

PINSKY: I want to show you some more of him on the stand. Take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Even if you`re beating a dog to death?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was just one whack. Y`all make it sound more sinister than it was. (EXPLETIVE DELETED) on everything, he was broke.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Killed a cat and threw it away?



PINSKY: Jenny, glee about killing a dog. It was a broke dog, it crapped around too much. Yes, can you imagine all the killings that would go on in this country if a little poo poo caused a dog to be broke?

HUTT: Yes, this is just one of the worst -- really, one of the worst people I`ve ever seen. And the only thing I can think of is the reason for the prosecution to have him maybe is because they thought the apple doesn`t fall far from the tree. That maybe that would convince the jury that Josh Young, or little Josh --

PINSKY: All right. Jenny, I want Ryan in here. Ryan, go.

SMITH: Yes, that`s complicity charge. It`s a complicity charge, guys. So the idea is that he helped kill Trey, not that he did it himself.

So, they`re bringing him up to say this is the kid who helped this guy. He`s a monster. His stories are flip-flopping.


SMITH: You know what, how can you believe that he would actually say --

PINSKY: Go, Loni.

COOMBS: But the problem with the prosecution`s theory of complicity is that`s not the evidence. The evidence is either big Josh did it or little Josh did it. That`s the evidence.

SMITH: That`s a flaw in their case. That`s on the prosecutor doing it wrong.

PINSKY: Mark, go.

EIGLARSH: Let me tell you something. The more -- hold on, Brian. The more abhorrent the father is, the better it is for little Young. The reason why? Is because apparently, if you believe the state`s case, he admitted to two people, the defendant did, the teenager, that he killed his brother.

Well, what kind of kid would make up a story about killing his little brother, someone who`s got that as a dad.

PINSKY: Or Brian, that`s the kind of kid that would kill his brother, too.

COOMBS: To please his dad.

EIGLARSH: One or the other.

COPELAND: Well, I don`t know. Big Josh is a manipulator. He`s intimidated witnesses. He gets people to lie because they`re afraid of him. I think that it shows exactly the kind of control he could have exerted over his son.

I also think the reason the prosecution put him on, it`s like what are you trying to hide? He is a central figure in this case, why aren`t you putting him on? Why are you waiting for the defense to do it?

PINSKY: I want to show you again the woman who testified that big Josh tricked her into giving he and little josh a ride out of the state after the killing. Take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was just as terrified of Josh Young as I was Josh Gouker.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How were you afraid of Josh Young?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He was just terrified, the way he looked, the way he acted.


PINSKY: First of all, this woman doesn`t look like she`d be scared bay lot, and yet she says she was terrified of 15-year-old Josh.

Jenny, do you have a reaction to that?

HUTT: Yes, I think she was terrified of big Josh. She did know them. She knew them. So she had them in the car because she did know them. I don`t really think she was tricked.

PINSKY: I don`t know. What do you think, Loni?

COOMBS: Well, you know what? Like we`ve been talking about, the apple doesn`t fall far from the tree. I really think this young boy, Josh, when he was with his dad, was like his dad. He was a mini me. He was his soldier, and he was trying to please his dad to, you know, get attention. Everybody wants their dad to love them, right?

And when you see that this is the dad, you know what kind of behavior this son is going to have to do to get this dad`s attention.

PINSKY: I`ve dealt with kids that are offspring of monsters, and even though they want the love from the monster, they don`t fall under their spell of -- they don`t do horrible things.


PINSKY: Loni, finish me up.

COOMBS: But remember, Dr. Drew, this son did not have any backup. He had been sent by the state to go back and live with this dad. Where else is he going to help me from but his dad? His lifeline.

PINSKY: All right. Smiling, cursing, rolling his eyes -- the behavior bureau is going to break down Josh Gouker`s body language.

And later, Gouker`s letter from prison. What does it reveal about the murder? We have it exclusively. We`ll share it with you.

Back after this.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Trey came downstairs?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t know if he came downstairs or came in from the back porch or wherever he came from. I don`t know.

I know what you`re doing. You`re trying to make microscopic little holes in this (EXPLETIVE DELETED) that I didn`t even give a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) about two years ago. So how can I tell you the exact thing now when I really didn`t give a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) then? It`s not easy to be a mastermind when you`re dealing with dumb people. That guy couldn`t find (EXPLETIVE DELETED) at a strip club.

I`m done answering it.

I`ve lied this whole (EXPLETIVE DELETED) time. Do I have to answer that question?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ain`t there a fifth?

I don`t deny nothing I`ve said. I don`t deny nothing I`ve said. I`m not a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) liar, you know I mean? But I was probably telling the truth about that. I don`t know.


PINSKY: I don`t know what he`s telling the truth about.

The behavior bureau is going to try to figure this out.

Jenny Hutt, co-host. What do you say, Jenny?

HUTT: I just have to say I do think it`s easy to be the mastermind when dealing with dumb people. It`s just what I have to say.

PINSKY: I`m just saying when somebody`s a diabolical person, they can manipulate -- and they don`t have to be right sometimes to be manipulators themselves. We all want to think the best of people and they manipulate in ways that take advantage of that.

Of course, we`re talking about the trial. Joshua Young, the 17-year- old charge in connection with the murder of his 14-year-old stepbrother. Young`s dad big Josh, who you just saw there, was on the stand today.

Joining us to discuss, the behavior bureau: Samantha Schacher, social commentator, host of "Pop Trigger" on Young Turks Network; Cheryl Arutt, clinical and forensic psychologist: Tiffanie Davis Henry, psychotherapist; and HLN contributor and body language expert, Blanca Cobb.

Blanca, I`m going to you first. What did you make of big Josh, both of what he said and what you observed about his body language?

BLANCA COBB, BODY LANGUAGE XPERT: He wanted to tell the truth when he wanted to tell it. Meaning little details, he would come forth and correct. Yes, I threw the stuff in the dumpster, but that was the next day. But when he talks about -- when he was talking about what happened during the murder, that`s when he just took a step back, leaned back, tilted his head and just like yes, whatever you`ve got to say, he`s going to agree with.

It was interesting, that those were the times, the most critical times he did not want to come forth with information.

PINSKY: Cheryl what do you say about him?

CHERYL ARUTT, CLINICAL & FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGIST: Well, I think that this guy is such a classic sociopath. And you can really see the glee and the delight that he felt in torturing the animals, and the kick he seemed to get when he could get one over on somebody was something that really made an impression on me.

He was just like, hey, I can`t be expected to keep track of my lies. You can`t ask me this now after what I said then. Whatever I said then, yes, that`s what it is.

So, he really -- he doesn`t really feel any remorse or anything.

PINSKY: Yes, Cheryl, you bring up sort of the key points for me, is the fact that he lies without conscience and is mad at people for anybody trying to hold him accountable for something -- approximating the truth. How can you expect me to be truthful? And then the dog thing and the animals.

Now, he talked about beating a dog to death. Just look at what he said. I`m going to show you something.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You admitted to hurting some animals during that statement, didn`t you?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You admitted to beating a dog to death?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, it was just one whack. Y`all make it sound more sinister than it was. The thing (EXPLETIVE DELETED) on everything. It was broke. It was a broke dog --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You admit now that you beat a dog to death.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, I`ve been sentenced for it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And you beat a cat, you killed a cat and threw it away?



PINSKY: Tiffany, glee when he talks about this, number one. And number two, what occurs to me, I thought wow, what was her name, Amanda? Was that the mom`s name?

She thought it was cool to hang out with this guy and have sex with him. Help us understand.

TIFFANIE DAVIS HENRY, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: Yes, it says a lot about both of them, actually, that she would want to hang out with someone like that, and that, you know, there is absolutely no remorse. Again, I think exactly what Cheryl just said, classic sociopath. There`s a lack of remorse, lack of care, lack of love.

But he`s also got that charming beguiling factor, that`s very seductive to the right person. He sucks them in and takes complete advantage of them and can manipulate them.

PINSKY: Jenny, not you, Jenny.

HUTT: Yes, not.

PINSKY: Maybe Samantha.

Samantha, how about you?

SAMANTHA SCHACHER, SOCIAL COMMENTATOR: Oh, absolutely, Dr. Drew. He`s so seductive. I could not believe his behavior.


SCHACHER: I could not believe his behavior today in court. It was just as disgusting as his criminal behavior. I mean, he clearly did not give a beep, as he said, over and over and over again. I still can`t believe that he laughed at the fact of killing a cat. That he justified killing a dog because it went to the bathroom in his house. I mean, he is a despicable, disgusting human being.

HUTT: Oh, no.

PINSKY: Jenny, no?

HUTT: No, no, he justified killing the dog because it was just one wag.

PINSKY: No, one whack. One stroke, because the dog was broke, Jenny, don`t you understand?

HUTT: I thought he was saying one whack of the dog --

PINSKY: No, one swipe of the bat and it was gone. No big deal.

HUTT: Now I understand.

ARUTT: This is like just one murder, not like it was a whole lot of murders.


PINSKY: Cheryl, it`s the same thinking when he says, well, my wife got rid of a couple of my kids. He was talking about these abortions. Therefore, it felt right to go kill hers. What are you doing to do? Just one whack over the head, and that`s the end of that.

It`s stunning.

HENRY: None of this, Dr. Drew, is a justification for his behavior. We do all I think agree and understand that this is a very sick guy with a very serious psychiatric disorder. And he`s in the right place now. Thank God.

PINSKY: Yes, I`m not even sure we would call him psychiatric.

Blanca, I want you -- I know you have something else to comment on, but I want you to think about this question. I can`t get enough of watching this guy on the screen. What`s wrong with us?

COBB: Well, he`s mesmerizing. He draws us in. He`s very aggressive when he wants to be. When he doesn`t want us to know something, he comes at you. Just wants to claw at the prosecuting attorney, to get her to back down.

What does he say? You`re sadistic. You want me to go through these details, it`s your problem. You`re the one who`s sadistic, not me.

PINSKY: Cheryl --

COBBS: It`s like he distanced himself from the crime.

PINSKY: Yes, Cheryl, is there something wrong with me? I think the viewers think the same thing, too.

ARUTT: That`s the seduction, Dr. Drew.


ARUTT: Can I just say I wish Michelle Ward were here with us, too, because she`s a sociopath expert.


ARUTT: I think the charm and the way these guys initially bring people in, like I don`t think the women actually initially see the really sick side. They see the charm initially. But this is not a guy you want to cross. Once he has noticed you and he`s got you in his sights, this is somebody who you do not want to piss off because when he comes at you or he retaliates or he does something, there is no ceiling, there`s no limit.

PINSKY: And, Tiffanie, I see you smiling and nodding -- Tiffanie.

HENRY: That`s the seduction. That`s the seductive part.

I know you guys are cringing at the actual word, but this is what that is. It is luring them into the cave before we whack them on the head. This is what he does. This is what he does.


HUTT: Dr. Drew, I understand what she`s saying. I think -- I get it. She`s so repulsive, he`s so disgusting that if you`re a woman who could be sort of -- if you could fall for that, then once he gets you in, then you want to be part of his club. Then you might get taken by it.

PINSKY: No, it`s not that clear.

HENRY: Jenny, he would not have a chance with you, hon.

HUTT: No, with me? Ew!

PINSKY: I think Samantha is a little more his speed. I don`t --

SCHACHER: What? I would whack him on the head when I found out he did that to animals, Dr. Drew.

PINSKY: I guess that`s drawing the line.

And the point being and I`m making fun, but the point is, some women have a liability for these kinds of guys. And as we say, and by the way, if you remember Jodi Arias with the borderline disorder, the borderlines tend to go with the cease sociopaths. And those tend to be the women that have the liability for this. And they -- woe is to them for having been around these guys.

Hang on, guys. Behavior bureau will be back later on.

If you have a question for the bureau, tweet now. @DrDrewHLN #behaviorbureau. I`ll try to get to it.

Next, was Tray Zwicker killed with a baseball bat or was it a pipe? I got a forensic, there he is my forensic expert, Dr. Bill Lloyd. He`s got both. He`s going to tell me which it likely was.

And later, Josh Gouker`s letter from prison and what does that say about the murder. And we have it exclusively. We`ll share it with you. Don`t go away.


PINSKY: I`m back with my co-host Jenny Hutt. We are talking about the trial of Joshua Young, the teen accused of having a role in the murder of his stepbrother. The murder weapon, one of the things being discussed, was the weapon a bat or a pipe. An expert witness testified today and graphic pictures were shown to the jury, causing actually the defendant to break down.

Take a look at this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Whack. Head up. Like this. One person. One instrument.

I could not exclude a police baton. I could not exclude a plumbing pipe. Someone using a rod or rod-like structure forcefully striking the head, the neck, the upper back.

In my opinion, a regular baseball bat didn`t do it. Done by a single person standing in the exact same foot place.


PINSKY: The medical examiner himself is expected to take the stand tomorrow. But our own pathologist, Dr. Bill Lloyd, is here with us as well. I`ve got Mark Eiglarsh, Brian Copeland, and Samantha Schacher.

Dr. Lloyd, I read the autopsy report today and it`s gruesome what they did to this poor kid. You`re holding the autopsy report right now. So, the thing that was disgusting in court that you`re going to clarify for us, was it a pipe or a bat, and I got to tell you something, when I was reading the report, I even thought about a hatchet the way there was a big flap. I got to tell you -- there was a huge flap under his skull where the occiput was completely crushed.

DR. BILL LLOYD, PATHOLOGIST: Yes, it was massive injuries, blunt force injuries that took this young man down. And the key injury was delivered to the back of the skull, like you said, the occiput.

So, an enormous force by it like, a three-quarter pipe, was described by the expert today, was delivered to the back of the skull. Broke the bone in three places and allowed the brain tissue basically to move within the skull. There`s also some separation of the bones within the upper spine.

But the original medical examiner claimed that wasn`t sufficient for death. Not that injury alone. The second question then is two murderers, two weapons. Why wasn`t it a baseball bat?

Well, the autopsy report identified multiple consistent parallel injuries. It`s indicating the same weapon that struck the body`s surface again and again and again. And the dimensions of those strikes, those impacts tended to match the size of the linear pipe versus the tapered baseball bat -- Drew.

PINSKY: Now, there was also he had some facial injuries, like maybe somebody did in fact punch him in the face first. Big Josh said he punched tray to knock him down. The expert testified the first shot was with a pipe. I don`t know.

I think -- his nose was broken. Do you think he could have been hit in the face first?

LLOYD: Yes, it sounds like this is one time when big Josh is actually telling the truth. It sounds like he did deliver a punch to the face, like you mentioned. Plenty of findings, the facial trauma there.

Then the young man goes down, face-down on the ground, and then big Josh teed off on the back of this young man`s head. They found these findings in autopsy. It`s hard to believe after giving this man a lethal pounding, he would then roll him over and punch him in the nose.

PINSKY: Mark, I want to ask you something. Why didn`t the defense push big Josh on the specifics of the murder? Like get him to go step by step to see if the forensics match up with what he`s saying. He`s such a liar, but at least they can get him lined up with the forensic, if that`s what they want him to do.

EIGLARSH: I think the less with him, the better. You don`t want to make him out to be anything other than a big fat liar, which they did. I think Dr. Big Pipe over there corroborated what could potentially be --


EIGLARSH: Was that funny?

HUTT: Yes.

EIGLARSH: Reasonable doubt in this case because --

PINSKY: Big knife, big pipe, big bat. Which is it for you, Mark? I mean, I`m getting --

EIGLARSH: Tonight it`s pipe, because his testimony matches the expert that the defense called. That it was a pipe. That would be inconsistent with what little Josh was -- or little defendant Young was claiming was his weapon of choice, which was a bat.

So if it`s not a pipe, then it`s consistent with the defendant. If it is a pipe, like the expert, Dr. Big Pipe says, then this is all the big guy, not the little guy.

PINSKY: Brian, I don`t know if you agree with me, but I think the little guy is the one that did this. I mean, there was all this testimony today from people who had seen Josh after the event talking about what he had done. Do you agree with me on that?

COPELAND: No, I don`t. The more I hear, the more I see, I believe that Big Josh did it, and this solidifies it more, in my mind. Big Josh says that he used the pipe. He said that tray had a pipe that he came at him with. He punched him in the nose, took the pipe from him and beat him to death with it. Young Josh is saying a bat.


LLOYD: Yes. An investigators report, there`s only one set of footprints there. The big question, though, Drew, is little Drew showed up at his girlfriend`s with a blood-soaked bat. Whose blood and what`s the story with that bat?

PINSKY: Jenny?

HUTT: Here`s my question, Dr. Drew --

COPELAND: And if you believe her. If you believe her.

PINSKY: I think he said little Drew shows up with the baseball bat.

HUTT: He did.

PINSKY: I got confused.

HUTT: He did say that.

PINSKY: Oh, good. Well, normally, I don`t show up with a baseball bat just FYI, but go ahead, Jenny.

LLOYD: Where`s your alibi?


PINSKY: Oh, great. Go ahead, Jenny.


HUTT: Here`s my question. We know that Big Josh is the most vile person ever, right?


EIGLARSH: Beyond a reasonable doubt.

HUTT: Do we think that this sociopath -- right. OK, Mark. Would this sociopath protect his son? Would that be the one time that he would - -


PINSKY: I want you guys to hold that thought until I read you the letters. We`ve got some letters from prison coming up in just a couple minutes, and that`s exactly what I want to get at. Dr. Lloyd, do you want to finish us up here?

LLOYD: Well, I don`t think we completely excluded the baseball bat. The injuries to the back, the linear injuries were by a three-quarter inch pipe to the upper torso. But you can certainly do plenty of skull damage with a baseball bat.

PINSKY: Yes. I read it pretty carefully. And if somebody was swinging hard enough -- remember, young Joshua at one point was saying he was enraged and he couldn`t stop. He was swinging and swinging and swinging. And that`s what it looks like to me on that autopsy report, potentially a baseball bat.

I`m just saying I`m going to take a break here. We`re going to talk about the letter next that Joshua Gouker, Big Josh wrote while he was awaiting trial for the murder. There it is right there. We have it exclusively. We`re revealing the bombshell contents when we come back.

And later, the former cop convicted of murdering his wife and burning their house down learns his fate. And then, he goes off on the judge. We`ll be right back.

VINNIE POLITAN, HLN ANCHOR: Coming up top of the hour on "HLN After Dark", what a huge day in court today. Big Josh takes the stand, I guess for the state, but for his son really.

RYAN SMITH, HLN ANCHOR: Yes. And when you think about that, you start wondering is Big Josh covering for his son? That`s our bold question tonight. Our ladies and gentlemen of our in-studio jury ready to decide.

POLITAN: They look smart.

SMITH: Oh, yes.

POLITAN: Top of the hour, "HLN After Dark."



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Gouker is charged with the murder of his 14- year-old stepson, Trey Zwicker.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, his mother aborted my kid. And I tried to let it go and I couldn`t.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Within the last month, he has become more aggressive.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Her husband Josh Gouker is this thuggish, horrific monster of an ex-con who has already admitted that he killed her son.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He has been pushing, shoving, and slapping you?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hit the puppy in the head with the ball bat and killed it. The cat was getting pretty big sized, but he was mostly an outdoor kind of cat, but Josh hated it so bad that he threw it off of a second floor, then he took the eyeball of the cat and put it on a stick and was running around telling everybody he had his eyes on them.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know, it`s one murder, you know? It`s not like it was a whole bunch of murders.


PINSKY: Back with my co-host, Jenny Hutt. The "Behavior Bureau" is back with us, Samantha Schacher, Cheryl Arutt, and Tiffanie Davis Henry. We are talking about the trial of Joshua Young, the 17-year-old charged in connection with the beating death of his 14-year-old stepbrother. Jenny, there he is for all his glory, and you had quite a reaction to his cruelty to animals, but if you notice, he thinks the same way about murdering a human.

HUTT: Yes. He`s a really, really bad guy. But before the break, you said you were going to share with us something about maybe like, is he going to try to protect his son now? Is this like his come to Jesus moment? I mean --

PINSKY: No. Hold on. Samantha, do you want to say something here? I saw you ready to ring in,

SAMANTHA SCHACHER, SOCIAL COMMENTATOR: Listen, I don`t think that somebody like Big Josh has a compassionate, selfless bone in his body. And if he really cared about his son, I don`t think he would expose him to such sadistic, vile behavior.

PINSKY: And Tiffanie, your hands up. Everyone wants to ring in on this before I get to the letter. Go ahead, Tiffanie.

TIFFANIE HENRY DAVIS, PH.D., PSYCHOTHERAPIST: I loved Jenny`s question because I`ve been thinking about it all day. And I think, you know, when she said if a sociopath would really fall on the sword for their son? I don`t think so. I think he did it out of his own narcissistic need to get the credit for what happened.

No way is he going to let his son take the fall for this because he wants the glory for what actually happened. He wants to take credit for having killed Trey Zwicker.

PINSKY: And Cheryl, I see you nodding, but I`m going to go right to the phone now if you don`t mind. I`m going to talk to Robin Gunter. She is Joshua Young`s aunt and Joshua Gouker`s former sister-in-law. Robin, let`s talk about what you saw Big Josh in court today. How did you feel, what did you see, how was his demeanor?

VOICE OF ROBIN GUNTER, JOSHUA YOUNG`S AUNT: Big Josh Gouker, he`s doing exactly what he said he was going to do. He`s going to project an image of a monster, a horrific type of individual. He`s putting on a show that he said he was going to put on because he`s going to keep performing until he feels like he has saved Little Josh.

PINSKY: Now, earlier this year, Robin received a letter from Joshua Gouker when he was awaiting trial for the murder. In the letter, he writes about his son Joshua Young, Little Josh. He says this in part, quote, "I`m truly alone and trying to save him. His life is on the line. It doesn`t matter if the whole world thinks I`m wrong for doing it. He`s a good kid. He`s been dealt a you know what hand. That I went to prison didn`t help. I do know that a lot of this is my fault. I wish I would have grown up faster."

Robin, is Little Josh a good kid?

GUNTER: Yes, he is.

PINSKY: Jenny?

HUTT: Yes. So, OK, so this is my question, Dr. Drew. Does it cut -- maybe this is an act. I mean, it`s pretty convincing --

PINSKY: All right. I`ve got more. I`ve got more letter. Let me give you more letter. Here we go. This is more here of his more jailhouse letter. Quote, "So many people are trying to jump on his case and hurt him. It`s like I`m in a game of chess with known and unknown opponents. It`s easy to say that you`ll die for somebody, but I wonder how many people would actually follow through with it. I`ve got to do whatever it takes to save him."

So, Robin, you`re actually saying this guy that smacks a dog over the head and pops a cat`s eyeball out and talks about just being one murder as opposed to multiple murders is somehow an act?

GUNTER: I don`t know if the animals are an act, but I know the performance that you`re seeing now is an act.

PINSKY: Cheryl, help me.

CHERYL ARUTT, PSY.D., CLINICAL & FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGIST: Oh, I have really gone over this letter, and I think that it`s fascinating. I think that he is really writing the letter to try to get a read on Robin. That he says multiple times that he wishes to know where her heart is, like he doesn`t know what her position is. And he also kind of says everybody`s watching.

He`s kind of bragging about that, too, but he`s also kind of saying this is in code, I hope you pick up on the message that I`m sending you between the lines in this kind of letter. And, I was really struck by the very last thing after he says I do know a lot of this is my fault, I wish I would have grown up faster.

He immediately says oh well, spilt milk. Now is the only thing that matters or that I can try to control. I think that this is very much about this kid is a trophy, a possession. You know, I think he was more than happy to let his child take the fall for this murder until he put together that his son`s going to lose his life, too.

And this eye for an eye thing isn`t going to work. So, suddenly, he wants his kid to have a life because then he`s going to lose his kid, too.

PINSKY: Samantha.

SCHACHER: I -- you know, at the end of the letter, he states that he knows that the security, that the police officers are going to read the letter. And I think this is just another way for him to manipulate.

PINSKY: Yes, and I think that`s right. Jenny, you`re the one that started all this. I think being manipulated on so many levels, I think the fact is you get going and spinning. You spin like a top, you don`t know what`s true and what`s --

HUTT: Wait, wait, wait. But Dr. Drew, what is the point of saying once he`s already incarcerated, already found guilty. What`s the point of saying I`m going to protect my son to the end? I`m putting on an act. Like what is the point of that if he`s already in jail?

PINSKY: Robin, what do you think the point was for that?

HUTT: If he really doesn`t care.

GUNTER: He does care about his son.


GUNTER: He always has cared about his son. He had custody of Little Josh when Little Josh was six months old. And he lost custody way back then. And the only way they got rid of him was when he went to prison the first time. As soon as he got out, Kentucky gave him custody again.

PINSKY: The son feels more like a possession than a son. But thank you, Robin, for joining us. I`ve got to go, panel.

Next, Brett Seacat, former cop convicted of murder his wife and then bringing the house down, the wife`s house now with the kids in it. He lashes out at a judge during a sentencing. We`ll be back with that after this.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And we do know that you thought you were smarter than law enforcement. You thought you were smarter than fire officials. And you thought you were smarter than 12 jurors who heard this case.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why did you melt the two hard drives as opposed to just tossing them in the trash?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That`s what you`re supposed to do with hard drives.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Your guilt in this case was overwhelming. Evidence to support your defense of suicide is totally unbelievable and virtually unsupported by any credible evidence.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is anybody inside?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She`s dead. She shot herself. Her (EXPLETIVE DELETED) head`s gone.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He claimed to be her protector. And in the next breath on the stand said the evening in question, you would destroy her. And destroy her, you did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She told a friend a week and a half prior to this incident that you threatened to kill her.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You threatened to burn the house down and you threatened to make it look like she did it.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: On the primary conviction of intentional premeditated murder in the first degree, I impose a life sentence without the possibility of parole for 25 years.


PINSKY: Back with my co-host, Jenny Hutt. Brett Seacat, former Kansas cop, convicted of murdering his wife and burning the house down to cover up the crime, sentenced today to life in prison. Back with us, Mark Eiglarsh, Brian Copeland, and Samantha Schacher. And joining us now is Sydney Woodside. She is the niece of murder victim, Vashti Seacat.

Sydney, you were in court today. You actually were able to confront this man. Your reaction?

SYDNEY WOODSIDE, VASHTI SEACAT`S NIECE: To which part? it went from some really lows of him, you know, bashing our family to all of a sudden he`s bashing the judge. I honestly didn`t know what to do, whether my mouth should just drop open or if I should laugh or -- I mean, I was in shock, to be honest.

PINSKY: You knew this guy before all this went out. Can you imagine this is the same guy you knew before?

WOODSIDE: Actually, yes. This did not surprise me whatsoever. All Brett did was show his narcissism to the world. This is Brett. What you saw today was Brett.

PINSKY: We`re looking at some footage of you on the stand there today. What did you tell him?

WOODSIDE: I talked about his voice. I didn`t feel the need to reminisce what he did that night or remind him his life was over. I wanted to talk about the boys that were affected and that they are happier children and they are in the second-best place for them.

PINSKY: I want to show you part of the 15-minute diatribe Seacat had to say to the judge today. Take a look at this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This day, your day, the day that you`ve been planning on since May 12th, 2011 when you met with Vashti`s family and told them you were going to sentence me to the hard 50. Before I was even in custody, before you`d seen an affidavit, before you`d seen any of the evidence you`d later helped to suppress.


PINSKY: Mark, the judge called Seacat arrogant, controlling, self- centered, narcissistic, and he is accusing the judge of suppressing evidence. What do you say?

EIGLARSH: Well, the first part, the arrogance, the list of things that you said about him, his defects in character. I would agree. Circle gets a square. As to the other stuff, the judge suppressing evidence, that`s just ludicrous.

That is, you know, ramblings of a guy who`s going to spend the rest of his life in prison around a bunch of people who probably want to kill him. And that`s OK. The fact that he may get parole, that bothers me.


COPELAND: Well, my thoughts are that there was nothing surprising about this at all, because if you read anything about family annihilators, they`re all narcissistic. You know, I`m no psychologist, but he`s a classic narcissist. Nothing is his fault. The whole world is against him.

PINSKY: It`s a little different than Gouker. It`s a little different. His sort of point of view begs no alternative. Samantha, your thoughts on this.

SCHACHER: I could not believe his denial in court, his arrogance in court. And not only did he take Vashti away from his children and her children, but then he decides to insult them? I mean, this is his children`s relatives. I cannot believe what a disgusting human being he is.

PINSKY: Stay with us. More on Brett Seacat after this.


PINSKY: Back with my co-host, Jenny Hutt. Still with us, Mark Eiglarsh, Brian Copeland, and Samantha Schacher, and Sydney Woodside, she is the niece of murder victim, Vashti Seacat. Brian, you had a question for Sydney.

COPELAND: Yes. You spoke out today in court. Seacat is going to be eligible for parole in 25 years. Do you see yourself speaking at his parole hearings? Do you see yourself being the family representative in the future?

WOODSIDE: Absolutely. I would do anything to keep Brett from coming back into those boys, whether they are adults, teenagers, or well into having their own children and grandchildren. I don`t want him to have anything to do with being in their life.

PINSKY: Mark, is it the case that really kind of depends on what state someone is in that determines whether or not someone is likely to get parole in situations like this?

EIGLARSH: Yes, and it troubles me, quite frankly, that we even have to deal with that issue. Someone who does something as abhorrent as this and takes the jury six hours to essentially negate his ridiculous defense, we shouldn`t have to deal with that person again.

PINSKY: Go ahead. Samantha.

SCHACHER: Sydney, first of all, I just want to say, my deepest condolences to you and your family. Just touching on what Dr. Drew asked you earlier, was there ever a time where Brett Seacat was somewhat likable or normal or did you always feel like there`s something a bit off about him?

WOODSIDE: It was kind of one of those you have your normal moments, as normal as they got, and then he would say something absolutely crazy kind of like what he did today. It almost just made him unlikable. It`s one of those you just always feel like there`s a chip on your shoulder and there`s something you can never just like about someone.

PINSKY: And Sydney, as I recall, when we last spoke to you, during the trial, you said you thought steroids were involved here too and that can make somebody like this completely go into outer space.

WOODSIDE: No, I just think Brett`s crazy.

PINSKY: All right. Thank you, panel. Thank you, Sydney for joining us. "Last Call" is next.


PINSKY: It is time for the "Last Call," and it goes to my co-host, Jenny Hutt.

HUTT: Yes. So, Dr. Drew, how do you reconcile quantifying the levels of monstrous behavior?

PINSKY: You know, it`s funny you say that, Jenny, because if you remember Casey Jordan last week said we don`t have sufficient language to really describe the degrees of monstrosity and evil and sociopathy that exists out there, but we`ve been looking at some pretty, pretty awful cases tonight. One monster almost worse than the next.

Thank you, Jenny. Thank you all for watching. We`ll see you next time. "HLN After Dark" starts right now.