Welcome, everyone, to episode 22 of the Undisclosed podcast.

This week's sponsor is Stamps.com.

Make sure you listen in for the spot later in the show and support Stamps.com because Stamps.com supports us.

Until then, enjoy the program. In our last episode, we went over how and why, if anything, the cell phone evidence proved that Joey could not have killed Isaac.

Because the cell records placed him at such a distance, it would have been impossible for him to get to

Isaac by the time he was shot. The jury at Joey's trial, however, wasn't able to grasp this,

and they ended up convinced the cell evidence actually proved Joey's guilt. But it wasn't just

the cell evidence alone that convinced them. It was a combination of everything the prosecutor

threw at them. And two of the most convincing pieces of evidence to many of the jurors

were this. The dead dogs connected to the case and a brand new witness that blindsided the defense.

Hi and welcome to episode 22 of Undisclosed, the State versus Joey Watkins.

My name is Robbie at Jodry.

I'm an attorney and a fellow at the U.S. Institute of Peace, and as always, I'm here with my colleague Susan Simpson and Colin Miller.

I'm Susan Simpson. I'm an attorney with the Volkov Law Group, and I blog at viewfm-l2.com. I'm Colin Miller. I'm an associate dean and professor at the University of South Carolina School of Law, and I blog a evidence prof blog.

In the movie Ferris Bueller's Day Off, Ferris, his girlfriend, Sloan, and his best friend Cameron, go to the Art Institute of Chicago.

As Ferris and Sloan kissed in front of a stained glass window, Cameron examines George Sorat's pointillism painting a Sunday afternoon on the island of Lagrangette.

Cameron soon began focusing on the little girl in the white dress in the middle of the painting as an instrumental version of the Smith song, please, please, please, let me get what I want, please in the background.

Director John Hughes then keeps cutting back between Cameron's tormented eyes and progressively

zoomed in shots to the painting as the girl keeps getting blurrier. Finally, there's a series of

four increasingly atomized shots of the girl until all we have is a series of unconnected dots.

As John Hughes later explained, I always thought this painting was sort of like making a movie,

the pointillist style. You don't have any idea what you've made until you step back from it.

...