Episodi

  • The charcoal pencil that defied the ban on cameras

    The charcoal pencil that defied the ban on cameras
    Sep 7 2026
    A courtroom bans cameras, but a freelance artist-reporter arrives with a pad and charcoal pencils. His drawing becomes the only visual record.

    The charcoal pencil that defied the ban on cameras

    This episode explores the story behind a drawing that captured a pivotal moment in a Mississippi courtroom in 1955. It delves into the artist's unique approach to journalism and the profound impact of his work.

    Person: Franklin McMahon
    Date: 1955
    Location: Sumner, Mississippi
    Event: Emmett Till murder trial

    - Franklin McMahon, a 32-year-old freelance artist-reporter, drove to Sumner, Mississippi, with only a pad and charcoal pencils.
    - Cameras were strictly prohibited in the courtroom during the trial of the men accused of murdering Emmett Till.
    - McMahon's drawing captured Moses Wright pointing at the two men he believed murdered his great-nephew.
    - McMahon developed his observational drawing style after being a prisoner of war, where he drew his captors without an audience or permission.
    - His work as an "artist-reporter" involved rendering stories in real-time, in public, using drawing as his journalistic medium.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    Mostra di più Mostra meno
    17 min
  • The wedged phone that undid a perfect life

    The wedged phone that undid a perfect life
    Sep 7 2026
    A family's perfect image shatters when two young children vanish from their Colorado home. The father's calm demeanor raises questions about what truly happened.

    The wedged phone that undid a perfect life

    This episode explores the story of Christopher Watts, an Anadarko Petroleum employee, and the disappearance of his family in August 2018. It delves into the stark contrast between public perception and the devastating reality that unfolded.

    Person: Christopher Watts
    Date: August 15, 2018
    Location: Weld County, Colorado
    Event: Recovery of two children from oil tanks

    - Christopher Watts, a 33-year-old Anadarko employee, directed investigators to the location of his children.
    - The Watts family home in Frederick, Colorado, was purchased in 2013, the same year their first daughter, Bella, was born.
    - Shanann Watts, Christopher's wife, was 15 weeks pregnant with their son, Nico, at the time of her disappearance.
    - In 2015, the family filed for bankruptcy, despite Shanann's successful sales of wellness products for Le-Vel.
    - Shanann's friend, Nickole Utoft Atkinson, reported her missing after Shanann failed to answer calls and texts following a work trip.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    Mostra di più Mostra meno
    14 min
  • The Dissent That Lost Him the Chief Justiceship

    The Dissent That Lost Him the Chief Justiceship
    Sep 7 2026
    In 1976, during India's state of Emergency, a Supreme Court justice writes a lone dissent against unchecked government power, risking his career.

    The Dissent That Lost Him the Chief Justiceship

    This episode explores the 1976 dissent of Justice H.R. Khanna during India's state of Emergency, when four Supreme Court colleagues ruled the government could indefinitely detain citizens. It delves into the historical roots of judicial independence and the institutional pressures that led to Khanna's pivotal decision.

    Person: Justice H.R. Khanna
    Date: 1976
    Location: India
    Event: State of Emergency
    Topic: Judicial independence

    - In 1976, India was 21 months into a state of Emergency, with civil liberties suspended and the press censored.
    - Four Supreme Court justices ruled that the government could detain individuals indefinitely without charge or trial.
    - Justice Khanna wrote a dissent arguing that the state cannot deprive a person of life or liberty without the authority of law, even if Article 21 is suspended.
    - The concept of judges serving "during good behavior" rather than "at the king's pleasure" originated in England's 1701 Act of Settlement.
    - In 1973, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's government had already bypassed three senior judges to appoint Justice A.N. Ray as Chief Justice, signaling a shift in judicial appointments.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    Mostra di più Mostra meno
    18 min
  • The petit bleu that toppled a celebrated officer's career

    The petit bleu that toppled a celebrated officer's career
    Sep 7 2026
    A torn bordereau and a found petit bleu put a celebrated French officer at the center of a treason hunt; how do you fall from that high?

    The petit bleu that toppled a celebrated officer's career

    In this episode, we follow the ripple of events set off when fragments of a secret memo were pulled from the German Embassy trash and a second scrap - the petit bleu - landed on a counterintelligence desk. The episode traces how handwriting, suspicion, and institutional pressure turned one captain into the accused, and asks whether a single voice could break the machinery built to produce guilt.

    Person: Alfred Dreyfus
    Date: 1894-1896
    Location: Paris, German Embassy; French Army headquarters
    Event: The bordereau and the petit bleu discovered in embassy wastebaskets
    Person: Colonel Picquart

    - Six torn pieces of paper from the German Embassy were reassembled into the bordereau listing French military documents offered to a foreign power.
    - Alfred Dreyfus, a 35-year-old artillery captain of Alsatian Jewish background on the general staff, became the suspect largely due to access, religion, and outsider status.
    - Major du Paty de Clam staged a handwriting confrontation by dictating the bordereau to Dreyfus and noting his trembling hand as incriminating evidence.
    - Handwriting experts produced conflicting opinions, and officers created diagrams arguing that differences in script were deliberate disguise rather than exculpatory variance.
    - In 1896 a petit bleu - an unsent telegram addressed to Major Esterhazy - arrived in counterintelligence, prompting Colonel Picquart to reopen the files and compare Esterhazy's hand to the bordereau.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    Mostra di più Mostra meno
    16 min
  • The Zurich bank account that Bronston swore he never had

    The Zurich bank account that Bronston swore he never had
    Sep 7 2026
    Under oath about a Zurich bank account tied to a collapsing film empire, a man gives one careful answer - will it reach the Supreme Court?

    The Zurich bank account that Bronston swore he never had

    In this episode, we lay out the rise and fall of Samuel Bronston’s audacious filmmaking gamble and the bankruptcy and courtroom drama that followed. We trace how a single question about a Zurich bank account and a precise answer turned a financial collapse into a landmark legal fight: what actually happened next?

    Person: Samuel Bronston
    Event: Production of The Fall of the Roman Empire
    Location: Las Matas, Spain
    Date: London premiere March 24, 1964; New York opening March 26, 1964
    Status: Chapter 11 bankruptcy filed June 1964

    - Built the largest exterior film set of its time in a field outside Las Matas to recreate the Roman Empire for The Fall of the Roman Empire.
    - Spent $16,000,000 producing the film while box office returns totaled $4,800,000, creating an $11,200,000 deficit that threatened Bronston Productions.
    - Pierre S. du Pont III had guaranteed financing, then assumed control after Bronston owed him over $5,600,000.
    - Bankruptcy proceedings followed and attorneys focused on asset traces, including the existence of a bank account in Zürich.
    - Under oath, Bronston gave a narrowly worded answer about the Zurich account that became central to a federal perjury dispute escalating to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    Mostra di più Mostra meno
    15 min
  • The sponge he warned them about - and then closed him with it

    The sponge he warned them about - and then closed him with it
    Sep 7 2026
    A surgeon warns a sponge is inside a patient - then closes him up anyway, risking lives across Dallas. How could they miss the warning?

    The sponge he warned them about - and then closed him with it

    In this episode, we trace the chain of surgeries, decisions, and institutional choices that let a single surgeon operate across multiple Dallas hospitals despite mounting harm. What did credentialing, resignation letters, and temporary privileges allow to happen - and why did the warnings fail to stop him?

    Person: Christopher Daniel Duntsch
    Event: Surgical errors across 31 operating rooms
    Location: Dallas area hospitals
    Period: 2010-2013
    Case: Retained surgical sponge in Jeff Glidewell

    - Duntsch warned operating room staff that a four-by-four sponge was inside Jeff Glidewell’s throat, then closed the incision anyway.
    - Baylor Plano accepted Duntsch’s resignation after a patient bled to death and issued a clean letter instead of reporting to the National Practitioner Data Bank.
    - Dallas Medical Center granted temporary privileges that were not reportable at the time, allowing Duntsch to move between hospitals.
    - Residency records show Duntsch logged fewer than 100 supervised procedures while typical graduates log over 1,000, plus prior complaints about substance use.
    - After Glidewell developed sepsis, vascular surgeon Randall Kirby reopened the throat and found and removed the sponge.

    To listen to this podcast ad-free and access premium episodes, try our subscription with a 14-day free trial at obomedia.com.

    © 2026 OBOMEDIA. All rights reserved.
    This episode and its content (audio, text, and related materials) are the exclusive property of OBOMEDIA and are protected by applicable copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution, editing, or commercial use, in whole or in part, without prior written permission from OBOMEDIA is prohibited. For permissions, licensing, and business inquiries: business@obomedia.com.
    Mostra di più Mostra meno
    17 min