Adam Montgomery Knows Where Harmony Is — Forty-Three Years Won’t Make Him Talk

**SPEAKER_1** (0:01)
This is Hidden Killers Live with Tony Brueski and Robin Drake.

**Tony Brueski** (0:08)
Adam Montgomery faces over 43 years on the convictions that still stand, plus more than 32 years on firearms charges. He's not getting out of prison anytime soon, so the retrial isn't necessarily about immediate freedom. It's about whether the system can deliver a murder conviction for a five-year-old girl whose body has never been found. His father knows where she is, and who has decided that silence is the last card he gets to play. Bob Motta with his defense attorney has got something to say about whether the law gives anyone the power to make Adam Montgomery talk and whether the answer matters more than the actual retrial itself. Montgomery was offered a reduced sentence at his first sentencing if he revealed where Harmony's remains are. He said nothing.
Bob, is there any leverage to that anymore today than there was back then? Is there any legal mechanism that can compel him to disclose your location or any carrot on a stick they could dangle out there? That would be worth dangling, not like, hey, tell us where she is and you're free.
But is there anything that makes sense here? Or if he's going to be silent, fine, go rot. I don't know. Yeah.

**Bob Motta** (1:16)
There's two different things that were contained in your statement there. One, no, you can't compel him. Two, is there some kind of offer that you can make him to maybe get him to talk? Potentially. But then what does that offer look like? Yeah. You know what I'm saying? What type of offer you have to give him to get him to disclose where her audience might be? That's a whole different thing.
How much are you willing to give this monster? What is it about? I mean, that's the dilemma for a prosecutor. It's like, because you could be guaranteed that every prosecutor that touches this case feels the exact same way about this guy as we do.
So that's their dilemma. All right. Well, like, what are we willing to offer this guy to try to find out, you know, if he'll give up where the body is? And ultimately, if it's if it's too much, then what are you accomplishing, really? You know what I'm saying? So like they're going to be handcuffed in terms of not wanting to offer him jack shit, because fuck you, you know?

**Tony Brueski** (2:18)
Yeah, what's it worth at the end of the day?

**Bob Motta** (2:20)
Right, you know, so but yeah, there's really no mechanism that Fifth Amendment is going to protect him from being compelled to testify against himself or, you know, which giving up the body's location potentially could be absolutely viewed as that because it's potentially the remains are still incriminating, you know, produce some kind of evidence potentially.

**Robin Drake** (2:42)
So what do you think the prosecutor is going to do? What do you think they're going to focus on in this one?

**Bob Motta** (2:45)
Oh, God.
I mean, they're going to have to try it with Kayla as the star witness. She's really the only evidence they have in terms of she's the eyewitness, you know, and they're going to be hamstrung in terms of what they're going to be able to get in the second time around is in terms of the prior bad act. So, it's going to really be limited to this one occurrence, you know. And like, they're going to have to try to get more detail out of her, you know, but the problem in that situation, like, you know, like, was she moving? Like after he struck her the last time, you know, and if she didn't raise it in the first trial, if you're the defense, you're saying, okay, well, you know, your testimony has changed from first trial to second trial. Why is that?

**Robin Drake** (3:37)
You know, she's going to be really careful too, because she's going to be so calculated in everything she's saying, because she's so culpable as well.

**Tony Brueski** (3:46)
Yeah, I mean, she already made a deal the first trial, and we don't know the details of that deal, but does she, does that deal survive into the second trial? Or is this a whole new deal that they have to make with her to get her to testify? Or could she just plead the fifth and not self-incriminate herself? She made her deal, she did her trial. Is she done if she wants to be?
Or does she have no choice? Could they come to her and be like, look, we're going to make another deal or we're going to find new evidence, again, depending on what that deal was, and we're going to charge you next. I mean, do they present something like that? I mean, it's obviously not the first time a murder conviction is overturned in deals with witnesses that existed in the first trial. Do they carry to the second?