Utah News

The Key Takeaways for this article were generated with the assistance of large language models and reviewed by our editorial team. The article, itself, is solely human-written.

Two Utah toddlers are missing and facing “imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death,” after their “seriously depressed” father allegedly failed to attend a custody exchange.

An AMBER Alert was issued for the two boys, Will Richman, 22 months and Wesley Richman, 10 months, in Saratoga Springs, Utah, on Saturday, May 16.

One relative posted: “Please, we need your help and prayers for these boys.”

The AMBER Alert described their father, Dane Stephen Richman, as “seriously depressed,” and under financial stress. The alert, issued by the Utah Department of Public Safety, said that he had been selling his possessions and had abandoned his home.

Richman has been identified as a suspect. The children’s mother contacted the police to request a welfare check on Thursday, after Dane Richman missed a court-related deposition in an ongoing custody case, according to a report from KUTV.

The mother contacted police again on Saturday, after the children were supposed to be returned in a custody exchange, and no one showed up.

That call triggered the AMBER Alert.

The AMBER Alert states that “The first suspect is identified as Dane Stephen Richman. He is 6 feet 2 inches tall, weighing 195 pounds. He has brown hair and green eyes.”

The two boys have blonde hair and blue eyes. Will Richman is 2 feet 6 inches, and weighs about 31 Ibs. Wesley Richman is 2 feet 2 inches and weighs about 23 Ibs.

Authorities said that they are believed to be in a Black Toyota Camry with a Utah license plate A561HL, but note that the vehicle could have a temporary tag and that the license plate may not be visible.

A woman named Kate Walters shared a post to Facebook and identified herself as a family member. “My sister’s children have been abducted,” she wrote in the post, adding, “Please, we need your help and prayers for these boys.”

What is an AMBER Alert?

An AMBER Alert—short for America’s Missing: Broadcast Emergency Response—is an emergency notification system designed to notify the public when a child is believed to have been abducted and faces imminent danger of serious injury or death.

When law enforcement confirms that a child under 17 has been taken and meets activation criteria, the alert is issued. It pushes details about the child, the suspected abductor, and any associated vehicle across multiple channels, including Wireless Emergency Alerts, TV and radio broadcasts, and highway message boards.

Since its launch, the AMBER Alert system has been credited with helping recover more than 1,000 missing children across the United States.

The goal is to enlist the public’s help in the critical early hours of an abduction. This gives law enforcement additional eyes and ears to aid in locating missing children and apprehending suspects. Officials emphasize that such alerts are time-sensitive and are often deployed within hours of an abduction to maximize the chances of safely recovering a child.

Katie Chandler, who works as a bartender at Kate’s Bar in Evanston, can spot Utah residents right away. They’re the adults looking self-consciouslyover their shoulders before ordering a beer and a shot, like middle schoolers breaking the rules. 

Chandler gives them a sweet smile when she serves them their drinks, along with a piece of friendly, free advice.

“I always warn the people from Utah to be careful,” she told Cowboy State Daily. “Because we are at a much higher elevation, and you do get drunker quicker.”

Chandler, an Idaho transplant who has lived in Evanston for five years, experienced this while barhopping the first time in Evanston. She was drinking about one 5% seltzer an hour, which normally wouldn’t be a problem for her. 

But after the second one in as many hours, it felt as if she’d downed twice as many drinks in half as much time. 

“I was like, ‘Babe, we gotta walk home,’” she said. “So, I always warn people now: drink some water and stay hydrated.”

Just across the state line, Evanston is the first place people from Utah hit when leaving their state to dabble in vice. That state’s stiff liquor laws push some to make a run for the border to get stronger drinks and buy booze, along with placing bets and buying fireworks.

A new Utah law that went into effect Jan. 1 bans people convicted of DUIs with blood alcohol content measurements of 0.160% or greater from buying booze. That makes Evanston’s bars and liquor stores enticing for those who can’t buy alcohol close to home.

This One Time A Utahn Walked Into An Evanston Bar …

Kate’s Bar isn’t the only place in Evanston where the bartenders have stories about Utahns and their liquor. 

They’ve become the punchline in many off-hand jokes, and people love to tell their own “this one time, a Utahn walked into a bar in Evanston” jokes to whoever will listen. 

Rhonda Berlener, the general manager at Suds Bros. Brewery in downtown Evanston, has dozens of them. 

She, too, can spot the Utah “newbies” as soon as they sit down. 

They’ll order a beer, finish it, then carefully ask if they can have a shot now. It’s like they’re waiting for someone to swoop in and tell them it’s against the rules.

“‘OK, so we’ll take a beer, and then as soon as we’re done, we’ll take a shot,’” she recalled one Utah couple saying. “And we’re like, ‘Well, we can just bring you that shot.’ And they’re like, ‘What?’ And we’re like, ‘You’re not in Utah anymore. We can line them up. How many do you want?’”

Some get so tickled at the idea they can have more than one drink in front of them at once that they go a little overboard, ordering a whole line of shots across the bar, just because they can.

The situation has led to signs at some establishments poking fun at Evanston’s Utah neighbors — like the tavern which posted a sign making it crystal clear that the place really is a bar, just in case anyone from Utah was feeling the least bit confused.

The Joke Goes Both Ways

The funny stories run both ways, entertainer A.J. Lamb told Cowboy State Daily. 

He still laughs about the time he and a buddy discovered Utah’s famously weak beer at a party fresh out of college. At that time, Utah beer had a legal maximum of 3.2% alcohol content by volume. It was like drinking water to Lamb and his friend. 

It soon dawned on them that no one at the party was keeping up with them. They made a game of that, challenging anyone to outrank them. They still barely felt a buzz, even after guzzling a heroic amount of beer. 

A couple of weeks later, some of the Utahns from the party called Lamb up and said they were coming to Evanston for a rematch. They were “trained up and ready,” Lamb recalled with a chuckle.

What they didn’t count on was full-strength Wyoming beer at elevation. 

After just a handful of beers over a couple of hours, the Utah drinkers were wrecked. 

One managed to make it to his hotel room, though perhaps not the bed. The other fell asleep somewhere outside the hotel. The third landed in the Uinta County jail.

The takeaway line, which Lamb still uses when he’s talking to Utah friends, is “don’t drink with people from Wyoming.”

Here’s a funny, forgotten fact about that 3.2% beer, which was still in use up until 2019. When the law finally died, Budweiser brought its Clydesdales to Salt Lake City for a little parade — actually a funeral procession. 

Pallbearers carried a coffin that said “RIP 3.2% Beer.” Others held up signs that read, “Bud Heavy is coming Nov. 1!”

If Utah residents are the punchline in Evanston drinking jokes, it’s usually a gentle kind of ribbing, Lamb said, the kind where people don’t feel bad about laughing at themselves with you. 

t’s all in good fun, and usually includes a dose of empathy for folks who live in a state where ordering a nightcap has become a bit like taking the Uniform Bar Exam.

“People from Utah, they come up here and they’re just blown away,” Lamb said. “It’s like they’re on another planet when they see how we do things.”

No Sin City

With a population around 12,000, Evanston isn’t really a Sin City. You won’t see flashy signs and supermega hotels. 

It’s a friendly small town with tree-lined streets draped in charm and history. 

There’s an operating drug store with old-fashioned soda shop seats. Some of the restored buildings date back to the 1880s and house art galleries, restaurants and breweries, bakeries and coffeeshops, as well as the historic Strand Theater.

Despite the “Leave it to Beaver” vibe, Evanston has long had a Sin City relationship withUtah residents. It’s where they have been coming for decades to buy things their faithful neighbors might frown upon — a taboo trifecta of booze, fireworks, and lottery tickets. 

These days, Utahns can also add off-track horse betting and full-strength vapes to that shopping list. 

People still remember when the Utah Highway Patrol would set up in Evanston parking lots, watching their residents carting home illegal liquor from Wyoming, then confiscating it the minute those motorists crossed the state line.

Today, the law prohibiting out-of-state liquor from crossing the Utah state line has gone away. 

People may still feel like it’s hanging over them, but Utah residents legally buy up to 9 liters of liquor for personal consumption and haul it home.

A Tourism Tangent

But there are still a whole host of finicky liquor laws that rankle enough to keep Utahns driving to Evanston for the foreseeable future. 

Restaurants in Utah can serve drinks, but only when they’re tied to food. A plate of fries, then, even if you’re not hungry, is required.

Bars and taverns can pour without food, but they’re tightly age-restricted and carefully licensed. That means families with children younger than 21 aren’t allowed.

Restaurant or bar, only one drink at a time is allowed per person at any given table. Double shots in a cocktail aren’t allowed, nor shots to chase your beer. 

By contrast, Evanston’s border town offers Utahns a much simpler proposition. Walk in, grab a bar stool and order a drink. No need for a flowchart of what’s on your plate or in your glass. 

The relationship between Utah’s strict liquor laws and Evanston’s more relaxed bar scene isn’t just a cultural curiosity anymore. The dynamic has become part of the town’s tourism strategy. 

Business owners along Main Street talk about the importance of keeping things open for business on the weekends and maintaining a friendly, welcoming, no-fuss atmosphere.

“Those out-of-state visitors are a huge piece of keeping downtown alive,” Berlener said. “If they feel comfortable here — if they can find a place to eat, have a drink, walk around — they’ll keep coming back.”

And Evanstonians will keep telling those funny drinking Wyoming from Utah stories.

Renée Jean can be reached at renee@cowboystatedaily.com.

The Jazz had a relatively quiet offseason after finishing the 2024/25 season with a 17-65 record, the worst mark in the NBA. Utah had a 52.1% chance of staying in the top four at the 2025 draft lottery, but the team lost what was essentially a coin flip (47.9%), landing at its draft floor at No. 5.

In addition to selecting former Rutgers wing Ace Bailey with the fifth pick, the Jazz were also involved in a pair of trades last summer. The first saw the team send Collin Sexton and a 2030 second-round pick to Charlotte for Jusuf Nurkic, and the second sent John Collins to the Clippers in a three-team deal that netted the Jazz a 2027 second-round pick, Kevin Love, Kyle Anderson, and a traded player exception.

It’s hard to say if the Jazz had any intentions of trying to be more competitive in ’25/26, but considering they would have owed their 2026 first-round pick to the Thunder if it landed outside of the top eight, the team was certainly incentivized to finish near the bottom of the standings again to ensure that didn’t happen. And Utah wound up being near the forefront of the tanking conversation in an unusual season in which several teams were especially focused on draft positioning due to the widely perceived strength of the 2026 class.

The Jazz would likely point to starting center Walker Kessler suffering a torn labrum in his left shoulder in training camp, an injury he aggravated just five games into the season, as the beginning of downward trend for the rest of ’25/26. They were 2-3 when it was reported that Kessler would undergo season-ending surgery and just 16-35 after a win at Indiana snapped a six-game losing streak on February 3.

That’s also the date the Jazz made one of the more interesting deals ahead of the February deadline, acquiring Jaren Jackson Jr., John Konchar, Vince Williams Jr., and Jock Landale from the Grizzlies in exchange for Kyle Anderson, Georges Niang, Taylor Hendricks, Walter Clayton, the Lakers’ 2027 first-round pick (top-four protected), either the Cavaliers’, Timberwolves’, or Jazz’s 2027 first-round pick (whichever is most favorable), and the Suns’ 2031 first-round pick.

Memphis had renegotiated Jackson’s descending rookie scale extension during the 2025 offseason in order to bump his ’25/26 salary high enough to sign him to a new veteran extension that reflected the value of a regular All-Defensive contributor who had made All-Star appearances in two of his previous three seasons. Jackson will earn $49MM, $50.5MM and $52MM over the next three years before he has to decide whether to exercise a $53.5MM player option for ’29/30.

Utah, meanwhile, projected to have a good deal of cap room this summer, and rather than using it on free agents, the team made a pre-agency move for a player signed to a lucrative long-term contract.

The Jazz have been atrocious defensively in the four years since they traded Rudy Gobert to Minnesota, ranking 23rd, 30th, 30th and 29th in the league in defensive rating from 2023-26. Jackson, who turns 27 in September, is a former Defensive Player of the Year who’s versatile enough on offense to play in a jumbo-sized frontcourt that also features Kessler and Finnish star Lauri Markkanen.

However, Jackson’s fit with the team remains theoretical for now — he only made three cameo appearances for the Jazz after the deal, having undergone surgery to address a benign growth in his knee, and he didn’t get a chance to play with Kessler at all. While the sample size was obviously tiny, the team did perform very well when the former No. 4 overall pick was on the court.

Shutting down Jackson was the first in a series of “future-focused” moves for the Jazz, who ruled out Nurkic and Markkanen for the remainder of the season shortly thereafter. Keyonte George, who had a breakout third season and was dealing with ankle injuries at the time, only played a handful of games to finish out ’25/26.

Unsurprisingly, those tanking maneuvers resulted in the Jazz falling down the Western Conference and NBA standings, as they went just 6-25 over the final two-plus months to finish with a 22-60 record. That tied Sacramento for the fourth-worst mark in the league.

The Jazz won a tiebreaker with the Kings ahead of the draft lottery which turned out to be highly consequential, as Utah moved up from No. 4 to No. 2 on lottery night while Sacramento fell from No. 5 to No. 7. Winning the tiebreaker also guaranteed Utah could end up with no worse than the eighth overall pick, meaning the selection was guaranteed to stay with the Jazz even if they hadn’t gotten lucky in the lottery.

While four years of losing isn’t easy to stomach for fans, the Jazz are well positioned going forward as a result of their good fortune in the lottery. They’ll be able to add a potential franchise-changing talent on a very cap-friendly contract, locking in four years of team control and giving the front office time to determine the best ways to build out the roster.

Utah also enters the offseason with a surplus of future first-round picks and the financial flexibility to continue to seek upgrades on the trade market, though the club lacks the sort of mid-sized contracts necessary to add another near-max cap hit like Jackson’s.

---

The Jazz’s Offseason Plans

The Jazz have three major decisions to make this offseason: Deciding which prospect to select No. 2 overall, figuring out what a new contract for restricted free agent Kessler will look like, and determining how high they’re willing to go in rookie scale extension talks with Keyonte George.

EastIdahoNews.com Staff

Updated Sun, May 24, 2026 at 2:53 PM UTC

SARATOGA SPRINGS, Utah (KSL) — Authorities issued an Amber Alert early Sunday for two young children believed to have been abducted by a family member in Saratoga Springs, and are asking the public for help locating them and the suspect.

The suspect was identified as Dane Stephen Richman, 6-foot-2 and about 195 pounds, with brown hair and green eyes, according to the alert. Authorities said his clothing description was unknown.

“There is concern for the safety and well-being of the children as the suspect has been seriously depressed, selling possessions, facing financial stress, and abandoned his home,” the Amber Alert states.

Advertisement

Police identified the missing children as Wesley Dane Richman, an infant described as 2-foot-2 and about 23 pounds with blonde or strawberry-colored hair and blue eyes, and Will Thomas Richman, 1, who is described as 2-foot-6 and about 31 pounds with blonde or strawberry-colored hair and blue eyes.

Authorities said the abduction occurred in Saratoga Springs. Investigators said the suspect may be driving a black 2025 Toyota Camry with Utah license plate A561HL. The Amber Alert said the vehicle might have a temporary tag, and the license plate may not be visible.

Anyone with information is urged to call police at 801-798-5600 or dial 911 immediately.

The post Amber Alert issued for 2 young boys abducted in Utah; lives ‘in danger’ appeared first on East Idaho News.

The assassination of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University was a shocking reminder that political violence can touch us anywhere in today’s world. When dangerous people can track down their targets with ease, national tensions can play out in our own backyards.

That’s why it’s worth celebrating the passage of a new data privacy law that could make Utah a leader in the fight against political violence. HB450, signed by Gov. Spencer Cox in March, includes a provision to protect family homes from being exposed to attacks through campaign finance reports.

Previously, an individual who gave as little as $51 to a candidate in Utah had their street name and number published in state records for all to see. Exposing exact home addresses is not necessary to provide transparency to voters, and it puts Utahns and their families at risk every time they support a campaign.

It was once possible to dismiss these privacy invasions as trivial. Few people used — let alone abused — political contribution records when they were stored on paper. But the internet, smartphones, GPS and other technological advances changed the game.

Every year, it gets easier to access, analyze and weaponize the personal information these reports contain. In an era of rising political violence, states would be wise to clean up their laws now, before donors become targets. Utah did exactly that.

HB450 updates the state’s donor records for the digital age by removing the exact home addresses of individual donors. The money will still be transparent and traceable. The donations and the donor’s identity will still be public. But extremists will no longer be handed road maps for terror.

The law, which addressed a wide range of data privacy topics, passed 66-1 in the House and 28-0 in the Senate. That overwhelming bipartisan support is a reminder that privacy is not a partisan issue.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC), the bipartisan agency tasked with enforcing the federal campaign finance laws, agrees. The FEC has unanimously recommended that Congress pass similar reforms to redact home addresses from federal reports.

As FEC Commissioner Dara Lindenbaum has noted, the risk of publishing home addresses goes beyond political violence. Many vulnerable people want to keep their address off the internet, such as victims of domestic violence or stalking, or people whose jobs put them in contact with dangerous individuals.

Efforts to update and reform these laws have been underway for years. But the recent spike in political violence — including the killing of Kirk and the assassination of Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband at their home — has spurred more states to act.

Already this year,West Virginia and Minnesota have passed similar reforms to protect their citizens at home. Another donor address redaction bill is currently being considered in Arizona. Three other states — California, Texas, and Wyoming — already do not require home addresses to be exposed in political contribution records.

The lesson is clear. States don’t have to choose between transparent campaigns and donor safety. We can have both at the same time.

Redactions of sensitive personal information do not detract from campaign disclosure laws. They improve them.

Violent individuals should never be able to silence the voice of the American people. Utah leaders were wise to be proactive in safeguarding civic engagement. Hopefully the rest of the country soon follows suit.

In February 2026 , in a packed courtroom in Summit County, Utah, chief prosecutor Brad Bloodworth laid out the state’s case against Kouri Richins, for the murder of Eric Richins,  her husband and father of their three sons.

The case against Kouri Richins

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): The evidence will prove that Kouri Richins murdered Eric for his money and to get a fresh start at life.

It had been nearly four years since Eric died on March 4, 2022, of a lethal dose of fentanyl — served to him by Kouri in a cocktail, say prosecutors. She had spent almost three years in jail awaiting trial.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): More than anything, she wanted his money to perpetuate her facade of privilege, affluence and success.

Eric Richins owned a lucrative contracting business, and Kouri Richins worked as a real estate agent, buying and flipping houses. She was facing not just murder charges, but also insurance fraud and forgery counts.

Greg Hall: She was absolutely convinced … that she would be found not guilty.

Greg Hall is a friend and former colleague of Kouri’s.

Natalie Morales: What made her so  convinced of that … outcome?

Greg Hall: ‘Cause she knows that she didn’t do it.

Initially, authorities thought Eric may have died from an accidental drug overdose. But as investigators dug deeper, they concluded that Kouri poisoned Eric for financial gain.

Greg Skordas: “Watch out for Kouri, watch out if something happens to me.”

According to Greg Skordas, a spokesperson for Eric Richins’ family, Eric had raised concerns about Kouri to his family.

Natalie Morales: The night Eric died … were they immediately suspecting that Kouri took part in his death?

Greg Skordas: They suspected Kouri would take part in his death before it happened. And so when it did happen, it was everyone’s worst, you know, nightmare come true.

KOURI RICHINS TO 911 (crying): My husband is not breathing. He’s cold.

As the state built its case against Kouri Richins, her 911 call — saying she found Eric Richins unresponsive in bed — was an integral piece of evidence.

911 OPERATOR: If you need you to put me on speaker, put me on speaker – I’m going to guide you through CPR, OK?

The prosecution used the recording throughout the trial to call into question whether Kouri was even trying to resuscitate Eric.

911 OPERATOR: Start counting out loud so I can count with you, OK?

The operator repeatedly asks the phone to be put on speaker, so Kouri can listen while performing CPR.

911 OPERATOR: One, two, three, four — am I on speaker?

KOURI RICHINS: Yes.

But a prosecution digital forensic analyst testified that phone receiver sensor activity showed Kouri was actually holding the phone to her ear during the call.

CHRIS KOTRODIMOS (in court): There is a proximity sensor inside the device that activates the receiver.

Laura | Juror: The digital download expert … could actually see that Kouri did not put the phone on speaker phone … she was still holding it up to her ear. That means she wasn’t doing compressions or if she was, she was doing it with one hand.

The 911 call was impactful for jurors Laura and Eric, who requested we not use their last names.

Eric | Juror: Listening to the call, it didn’t seem like there was much effort in the compressions themselves.

The impression these jurors had of her resuscitation attempts didn’t match Kouri Richins’ description of events, which she texted to her friend, Chelsea Barney. Prosecutor Bloodworth read the messages  to the jury.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): “His lifeless body on my bedroom floor. … I pumped so damn hard, so hard screaming at him to come back to life that I needed him.”

Eric | Juror: Some of her text messages to a friend, she said she was screaming and beating on his chest. And the evidence did not show that.

Some of Kouri’s other actions the day Eric died puzzled the jurors we interviewed, like her behavior on a deputy’s bodycam footage, shown in court.

Laura | Juror: It was strange right after Eric died. Kouri was holding … her face with her hands …

Eric | Juror: It certainly looks like she was trying to hide her face, and her emotions.

DEPUTY (bodycam): — where are your children now?

KOURI RICHINS: One’s asleep in that room. Two are awake with their ear to the door.

And when the jurors compared Kouri’s behavior in the footage to Eric’s sister’s, they found the contrast startling.

Eric | Juror: Eric’s sister Katie Richins came in. She was hysterical … near — hyperventilating. And her first thought is: Where are the kids? Are the kids OK? And through that whole video, Kouri said, my kids are in that room. And one of ’em’s listening. But never did she move to go comfort those kids.

Eric’s sister, Katie, testified about arriving at the house.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): On the morning that Eric died, did Kouri Richins say anything about the house that they were living in?

KATIE RICHINS BENSON: Yes. … she told me she was going to sell it.

According to Katie, just hours after Eric’s death, Kouri was talking real estate: how she planned to sell their home, and how she needed to close on a house she had just purchased, known as the “Midway Mansion.”

KATIE RICHINS BENSON (in court): I had just lost one of the most important people in my whole entire life and she was planning on selling the house that he had just been wheeled out of, closing on a multimillion-dollar mansion. I could not wrap my head around it.

Prosecutors also presented evidence of something accessed on Kouri’s cellphone that morning — GIFs, seemingly celebrating coming into money.

Eric | Juror: I thought the GIFs were really odd. If she was the one that pulled them up, which it certainly seems like that is the case, that’s — just more evidence of her — state of mind at the time.

It was not clear to the jurors whether the GIFs were celebrating Eric’s death or celebrating the Midway mansion purchase. Either way, they found the timing curious.

Laura | Juror: It’s still inappropriate the day after her husband passed away that she’s accessing these. … So, it was strange.

Strange behavior aside, the state’s case hinged on proving Kouri intentionally poisoned Eric; that he did not die of an accidental overdose. The prosecution contends it was Kouri who administered the fentanyl — either in a cocktail, called a Moscow mule, or in a lemon drop shot, that she prepared for Eric.

Investigators found a note in a kitchen cabinet, which the prosecution says chronicles how Kouri killed Eric.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): Notice that here she writes “drink in bed.”

And the prosecutor told the jury about something else authorities found unusual. In the incident report, describing what happened that night, Kouri immediately writes about having a drink around 9:15 p.m. to celebrate work.

Laura: Her story that night that she wrote started with Eric drinking a drink that she made. … why would her story start then? … Why wouldn’t it start when she walked in the door and found that he wasn’t moving? That was just one of these really subtle things that I thought was really important.

Also important for jurors was knowing how Kouri obtained the fentanyl. For that, prosecutors turned to a witness who became a controversial figure in the case: Kouri’s housekeeper.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): Did you ask Kouri Richins about Eric’s death?

CARMEN LAUBER: Yes, I did.

BRAD BLOODWORTH: What did you ask her?

CARMEN LAUBER: I said, please tell me these pills were not for him. 

Jurors find housekeeper’s testimony credible

Carmen Lauber was Kouri and Eric’s housekeeper and she cleaned homes for Kouri’s real estate flipping business. Prosecutors say Carmen also did something else — she supplied Kouri with the drugs used to kill Eric.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): Did Kouri Richins ever ask you to purchase for her illicit drugs?

CARMEN LAUBER: Yes.

BRAD BLOODWORTH: How many times?

CARMEN LAUBER: Four.

Skye Lazaro: In a lot of ways … she is the key witness.

Skye Lazaro had been Kouri Richins attorney, before resigning from the case due to a conflict of interest.

Skye Lazaro: Carmen really was the only person who could tie Kouri to obtaining fentanyl.

Carmen testified that in the months preceding Eric’s death, Kouri asked her to get pain medication for a client, which Carmen did. Then, about two weeks before Eric died, Kouri made another request, for something stronger. Carmen says she reached out to a drug dealer friend and told Kouri she could get her fentanyl.

CARMEN LAUBER (in court): I had texted Kouri back and told her that I had a — a friend that could get them, but they were fentanyl pills.

BRAD BLOODWORTH: How did Kouri Richins respond?

CARMEN LAUBER: She said, OK, go ahead and get ’em.

The state contends Kouri mixed that fentanyl into the Moscow mule or lemon drop shot she served Eric. Carmen, though, has an arrest record from drug charges, and is not an ideal witness.

Greg Skordas: She had a history of drug abuse, and although I think she’s overcome that … Those are who you deal with in criminal cases … They’re not always the shiniest people in the world.

The jurors we spoke with were able to look past Carmen’s history and found her credible.

Eric | Juror: I put a lotta weight on Carmen Lauber’s testimony. I found it — very impactful — very important to the prosecution’s case. And her testimony was corroborated with the digital evidence.

The state’s digital forensic expert testified about hundreds of texts messages between Kouri and Carmen, that matched Carmen’s timeline of when Kouri contacted her for drugs. Because the messages were deleted, investigators could only retrieve the dates and times, but not the messages’ content.

CHRIS KOTRODIMOS (in court): Between the two of them, about 800 text messages.

The prosecution argued, throughout the trial, that this was not the first time Kouri used drugs to try to kill Eric. Investigators learned that two weeks before his death, on Valentine’s Day, Eric became ill after Kouri served him what they say was a drug-laced breakfast sandwich.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): On Valentine’s Day, it was a sandwich. When she murdered him, it was a drink.

As for a motive, prosecutors say Kouri needed  money. A forensic accountant testified about her money problems.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): What was the amount of Kouri Richins’ liabilities? 

BROOKE KARRINGTON: Right about $8 million. 

She said Kouri was in debt for nearly $8 million from her house flipping business, some of it from the recent purchase of that Midway mansion. And Eric, between his contracting business, property, and life insurance, was worth a lot.

BRAD BLOODWORTH: On the day that Eric died, his estate was worth over $4 million.

There was also evidence that Kouri took out an additional $100,000 life insurance policy on Eric, about a month before he died—and that Eric’s signature  was forged — a forgery, prosecutors say, committed by Kouri.

Juror Eric | Juror: She used her business address for this policy and made herself the beneficiary. … And frankly, even as a lay person, looking at the signatures, Eric did not sign that document.

And there may have been another motive for murder. According to the state, Kouri wanted a new life with Josh Grossman, a handyman she met  through her house flipping business. They had an affair for about two years.

Greg Skordas: I don’t know how much the family knew about the fact that she had a — a paramour. I don’t even know how much Eric knew about it. … that turned out to be a helpful piece of evidence that was discovered during the investigation.

Josh Grossman testified that after he heard Kouri had been arrested for Eric’s murder, by which time they had broken up, he reached out to Eric’s family.

JOSH GROSSMAN (in court) I was overwhelmed with guilt, sorrow, over my wrongdoings, you know, infidelity and uh …

Juror Laura: With respect to Josh Grossman, he seemed like a believable witness. I think we all felt really sorry for him at times that he was crying.

Josh told investigators about a conversation he had with Kouri, that now, under the lens of murder, took on new meaning. Josh,  who had served with the Army in Iraq, was asked about that conversation.

JOSH GROSSMAN (in court): She asked if — if I had ever killed anybody.

BRAD BLOODWORTH: Did she ask a follow up question?

JOSH GROSSMAN: Yes. … She asked me how it made me feel or something along those lines.

The jury was also shown text messages between Kouri and Josh.

Natalie  Morales (to Skye): I mean, you see those text messages back and forth, very lovey,  “Life is going to be different, I promise.” “If I was divorced right now and asked you to marry me, you would?” “I just want to lay on the couch and cuddle you, watch a murder documentary, and snuggle.” … I mean, you know, I don’t know that that gets any closer to the reality of what actually happened in this case.

Skye Lazaro: Yeah, in hindsight, I don’t think those, uh, probably well thought out. … these coming in the way they did and the timing of ’em — I think certainly did not help Kouri.

Something else that did not help Kouri was the reservation she booked for a romantic getaway with Josh.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): Did you know about a trip planned to the Secrets St. Martin’s Resort? 

JOSH GROSSMAN: Yes.

Kouri sent Josh the reservation she made before Eric died, with the trip planned for April — a month after Eric’s death.

Laura | Juror: The reservation for the trip was damaging to Kouri. … To me that made it look like she had been planning something for a while. And at some point soon, Eric would be out of the picture.

As the investigation proceeded, Kouri said the prosecution was worried about being caught. It showed web searches Kouri made after Eric’s death, including: “luxury prisons for the rich in america,” “how long does life insrance companies takento.pay,” “if someone is poisned what does it go down on the death certificate as.”

Eric | Juror: Kouri’s internet searches … the questions that were being searched led me to believe she had a guilty mind.

Skye Lazaro: These searches … were done after she was handed a search warrant when they searched the home … it kinda takes the sting out of them. I think it’s somewhat understandable.

Natalie Morales: So this is after the fact.

Skye Lazaro: This is after, and well after, in fact.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): She was looking for information based on what she found out after Eric died.

It was one of the points that Kouri’s own defense team made, as it tried to poke holes in the entire prosecution’s case.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court) You know what you’re never going to hear, is how that fentanyl got inside of him. Because there is zero evidence of that.

Kouri Richins’ defense takes aim at prosecution’s witnesses, claims

Just outside of Salt Lake City, home to famed ski resorts including park City, is the nearly 10-acre estate that Kouri Richins was planning on flipping.

Natalie Morales: … that looks ginormous.

 Skye Lazaro: It’s massive.

Skye Lazaro told us Kouri hoped to walk away with nearly $10 million in profit.

Skye Lazaro: I think this … was kind of her dream when she got into this idea of flipping houses was to be able to do properties like this.

And it was that estate, said Kouri Richins’ defense attorney Kathryn Nester in her opening statement, the couple were toasting the night Eric died.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): Eric and Kouri Richins … were celebrating.

KATHRYN NESTER: … They were celebrating because Kouri was about to close on the biggest real estate deal that her company had ever done.

KATHRYN NESTER: They had a lot to celebrate. They also had a wonderful family.

Nester showed jurors a family photo of Eric and Kouri with their three sons — seemingly happy — and spoke about the love they shared for their boys.

KATHRYN NESTER: … And what’s more important is that the boys adored their father. … And Kouri knew that about her sons and about her family.

Nester asked jurors to consider why Kouri would poison Eric, knowing the impact it would have on their three sons.

KATHRYN NESTER: Now after you’ve listened to all the evidence in this case …You’re gonna have to decide if Kouri Richins intentionally and knowingly poisoned … the father of her kids, knowing that she was gonna cause those little boys to feel pain every day for the rest of their life for the loss of their father.

Kouri’s friend Greg Hall says Kouri would never do that.

Greg Hall: She was loving. She was kind. She was giving. … A wonderful mother.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): Eric suffered from pain, a lot.

Nester told jurors Eric Richins lived with chronic pain —

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): … he suffered from knee and back pain related to his work. … He did hard work.

— and used drugs recreationally often taking marijuana gummies.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): … these are all gummies that the police found in Eric’s things.

Nester said Eric also used pain medication.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): You’re also going to hear … that there was an empty pill bottle right next to him.

The label on that pill bottle was for the painkiller hydrocodone and it had expired in 2020. Nester suggested it was Eric who may have come into contact with fentanyl.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): …You’re gonna hear that just a few weeks before Eric died, guess where he was, Mexico. Guess where the fentanyl comes into this country from, Mexico.

One by one, the defense challenged the state’s witnesses, beginning with Eric’s sister Katie Richins Benson, and her account of Kouri’s behavior the night Eric died.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): And you also said that … she just stood there and did not comfort you in any way?

KATIE RICHINS-BENSON: Not that I recall.

KATHRYN NESTER: OK.

KATHRYN NESTER: … Your Honor, we’d like to play a clip. This is State’s Exhibit 1-4.

KATHRYN NESTER : OK, so that’s Kouri. Freeze it right there.

KATHRYN NESTER: … And that’s her squatting down to comfort you while you’re on the ground and that’s, y’all hugging, right

KATIE RICHINS BENSON: Correct. 

KATHRYN NESTER: So your memory about that was clearly wrong.

KATIE RICHINS BENSON: To be fair, it was four years ago. 

KATHRYN NESTER: OK.

When it came to state’s key witness Carmen Lauber, the defense pointed out that she made a deal with police in order to stay out of prison. Defense attorney Wendy Lewis played a portion of one of Carmen’s interviews with investigators.

INVESTIGATOR #1: They’re looking to pull your drug court deal and ask for seven years on your two firsts …

INVESTIGATOR #1: … The only exception to that and the only thing that they’re willing to kind of help you out with is if you can help us out with this. 

INVESTIGATOR #2: And by — so he means like give us the details that will ensure Kouri gets convicted of murder. 

WENDY LEWIS (in court): So that’s what they said to you. 

CARMEN LAUBER: Yes.

WENDY LEWIS: … you may be getting seven years in prison on your state case. 

CARMEN LAUBER: Correct.

WENDY LEWIS: But if you help them out, that’s not gonna happen.

CARMEN LAUBER: Correct.

Skye Lazaro: … the investigators keep pushin’ on her. “… We need more. That’s not enough.” … And finally in the last interview, they basically just spell it out.

CARMEN LAUBER: I love Eric. … If it was done, intentionally, he did not deserve it.

INVESTIGATOR: … we believe you and that’s why we are here working on what your get out of jail free card looks like …

Skye Lazaro: You know, it’s, “this is your one get out of jail free card. You have to basically say it’s fentanyl.”

WENDY LEWIS (in court): And you are willing to do whatever it takes to save yourself from drug — getting kicked outta drug court and going to prison, correct?

CARMEN LAUBER: I’m going to go forward with the truth. Yes.

Laura | Juror: … I think the defense was really hammering her. … And I don’t think it went over that well.

CARMEN LAUBER (in court): She said, “OK, go ahead and get the fentanyl.”

WENDY LEWIS: That’s your testimony today?

CARMEN LAUBER: When I told her what I had that’s what she said, yes.

Even if Carmen bought fentanyl for Kouri, the defense said there was no proof that Kouri used the drug to poison her husband. Kathryn Nester told the jury the cups Kouri served the drinks in were never tested that night. 

KATHRYN NESTER : … The nanny ended up putting them in the dishwasher the next morning.

Eric | Juror: I think the most powerful point … the defense made is that we don’t know exactly how the fentanyl got into Eric Richins’ stomach.

Skye Lazaro: … when you have to prove murder — uh, you have to prove … that she’s the one that administered — the fentanyl to him.

The defense pushed back on the state’s claim that Kouri had tried to poison Eric weeks earlier with that Valentine’s Day sandwich. Kouri’s friend Aly Staking said the couple downplayed that episode as Eric having an allergic reaction.

ALEMITU STAKING (in court): He took a bite of the sandwich and got an allergic reaction and had to shoot himself with an EpiPen.

WENDY LEWIS: Was everyone laughing?

ALEMITU STAKING: Yes, we were all laughing and we jokingly said, don’t eat what Kouri feeds you.

WENDY LEWIS: OK. And did Eric appear upset about what had happened prior with the sandwich?

ALEMITU STAKING: No. 

And as for the financial motive that Kouri was broke? Skye Lazaro says Kouri Richins’ multimillion-dollar debt was typical in the house flipping business.

Skye Lazaro: That’s what they do for a living, is they invest in homes to flip.

Natalie Morales: So you’re saying it’s part of the business?

Skye Lazaro: Right.

Natalie Morales: That you’d get in — in debt, and then you flip the house, you sell it, and then you make your money back.

Skye Lazaro: Absolutely.

And that $100,000 life insurance policy the state claimed wasn’t signed by Eric? Nester said there is an innocent explanation.

KATHRYN NESTER: I’m telling you right now, wives everywhere sign their husband’s names on a lot of things. You’ve gotta find that she did it without his knowledge. And I don’t know how they’re gonna prove that.

The defense also downplayed Kouri’s affair with Josh Grossman, who testified they never went on that romantic getaway Kouri had booked for them.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): … then Kouri ended the relationship, correct? 

JOSH GROSSMAN: Right.

Eric |Juror: It was a little bit difficult to understand what the situation was … with Josh Grossman, because she did seem to drop him pretty quickly …

Natalie Morales: … do you think that Josh Grossman’s relationship with Kouri had anything to do with Eric’s death —

Greg Hall: No, no.

Greg Hall: … if that were the case, after Eric passed away, that relationship would have continued, not been tapered off. It doesn’t make any logical sense. …

On March 12, 2026, after three weeks and 40 witnesses from the state, the prosecution rested its case.

The jurors say they were expecting to see defense evidence and hear from their witnesses.

Laura | Juror: I’m like, “OK. Now, we can hear the rest of the story.”

But what happened next caught everyone off guard.

“Now we’ve seen just about everything in this trial,” says surprised juror

Laura | Juror: … my mouth just dropped open. … I was just like, “What?” I was so shocked and I was actually really disappointed.

Thirteen days into the trial, Judge Richard Mrazik asked Kouri Richins’ defense team about their first witness.

Eric | Juror: … I was totally prepared for however many days or weeks of vigorous defense.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK (in court): … Who is, uh, defense counsel’s first witness?

WENDY LEWIS: Um… can we have just a minute? We have — we have a couple of options …

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK: Understood.

But the option defense attorneys Wendy Lewis and Kathryn Nester chose was one these jurors were not expecting.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): Your Honor, actually at this time the defense intends to rest.

Eric | Juror: … I was like, “Seriously?” …Now we’ve seen just about everything in this trial.

Laura | Juror: I was disappointed … because I’m like, you know, I felt like there was more to the story. And they denied us access to that.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK (in court): I just want to make sure you’ve consulted with your client about this.

WENDY LEWIS: Absolutely.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK: Ms. Richins, may I ask you two direct questions?

KOURI RICHINS: Yes.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK: Do you understand that you have the right to testify at trial?

KOURI RICHINS: Yes. I do.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK: … are you following your attorney’s advice in waiving your right to testify at trial?

KOURI RICHINS: Yes, I am.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK: I accept your waiver, I find it is knowing and voluntary.

Laura says she at least expected the defense to present testimony about Eric’s alleged drug use and what role, if any, it played in his death.

Laura | Juror: … they were just hinting, ever so slightly, at these things, without backing it up. So I was really hoping for some testimony, if that’s really true or you just trying to confuse, everything.

Greg Skordas, who happens to be an attorney himself, says perhaps the defense saw no need to call witnesses because it felt there was enough reasonable doubt.

Greg Skordas: … if you think you’re winning after the prosecution puts on its case, then there’s no reason to put on a case, because you could only hurt yourself. … And so why—why even risk putting on a witness that could hurt you.

Laura says throughout the trial she would sometimes look over at the defense table.

Laura | Juror: … there was really no vibe coming from her. Like, I couldn’t sense whether she was upset, or angry, or sad. She had a very flat affect.

Natalie Morales: Was that part of it, the likability of Kouri Richins at that point? Do you think they saw a woman who was having an affair, who was in debt.

Skye Lazaro: I think that’s how it certainly could be taken. … There never was a real opportunity … to humanize her, to make her likable, to make her seem like a person who wouldn’t do that.                                                     

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK (in court): Mr. Bloodworth, would you like to proceed?

In its closing, the prosecution portrayed Kouri Richins as a ruthless social climber, chasing a life beyond what she had, at her family’s expense.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): … Behind the facade however, Kouri Richins was incompetent. … Her business was imploding. … All the while, Kouri Richins was more interested in spending time with Josh Grossman than Eric. … but she did not have the money to leave Eric or the money to salvage her business.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): She is a risk taker. There was a way forward. Eric had to die.

The defense used its closing argument to lay out its entire case —

WENDY LEWIS (in court): They want you to look at a woman in the worst moment of her life.

–citing several reasons why there was reasonable doubt.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): The investigation in this matter was nothing but sloppy. It was driven by bias.

Wendy Lewis told jurors the investigators developed tunnel vision early on, driven by Eric’s family’s belief that Kouri was guilty.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): Everything about this investigation was led by the Richins family.

Laura | Juror: … it did give me pause whether there was this bias in the entire investigation that started with the Richins family.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): What else do we find on that first day that Eric died?

Lewis pointed to that trip Eric took to Mexico shortly before his death, and that empty pill bottle on his nightstand.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): … The hydrocodone bottle. … What was kept in that bottle? … What might be the best way to bring illegal pills back from Mexico? Put them in a prescription bottle?

WENDY LEWIS (in court): So what’s another explanation? What could have happened? … Maybe he thought it was something else, and he accidentally got fent — fentanyl. Maybe had they tested that bottle, we would know, but they didn’t.

She urged the jurors to stand with Kouri Richins.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): Kouri Richins did not kill Eric Richins. The state did not prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt, and you have the courage. Have the courage to tell them this and find Kouri Richins not guilty.

Natalie Morales: … how was Kouri feeling … did she ever feel like this may not go her way?

Greg Hall: No. Absolutely not, honestly. Not at all. She was upbeat, hopeful, enthused … She was absolutely convinced … that she would be found not guilty.

The Richins children speak out

After sitting through the three-week trial, jurors Eric and Laura had no way of knowing what other jurors were thinking — nor how long reaching a verdict could take.

Laura | Juror: I was thinking this is gonna be a very long week.

But in the end, deliberations would only last about three hours. Laura, one of the two women on the eight-person jury, was selected as foreperson.

Laura | Juror: When we got back there, I think everyone was bursting. I felt like I was bursting at the seams.

For the jurors, Kouri’s money trouble proved to be a motive for Eric’s murder.

Eric | Juror: She was in such a position that she had to take drastic action to dig out of the financial hole that she was in. 

Eric | Juror: I shared that I thought the evidence was devastating against Kouri and that she was guilty. … I think that … opened the door, to other people to share exactly where they stood.

And when the decision was made to vote, the rest of the jury agreed—not just that Kouri murdered Eric — but that she previously attempted to kill him with that poison laced Valentine’s Day sandwich, and, that she committed two counts of insurance fraud, and forgery.

On March 16, 2026, Judge Richard Mrazik read the verdict:

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK (in court): “Count one aggravated murder, we the jury unanimously find that the defendant Kouri Richins is guilty of aggravated murder.”

Kouri Richins was stunned as she learned she was found guilty of all five counts related to Eric’s death, says her friend Greg Hall.

Greg Hall: Totally unexpected. She was absolutely crushed and heartbroken.

Kouri Richins declined our request for an interview.

Two months later, on what would have been Eric Richins’ 44th birthday, Kouri Richins – now wearing a prison uniform – was back in court to receive her sentence.

Eric’s family gave heartfelt statements. His sister Amy emphasized the impact his loss has had on his three sons.

AMY RICHINS (in court): This crime didn’t just happen once. It happens every single morning when those boys wake up and realize their father’s still gone.

The boys were 5, 7 and 9 when their world was shattered. Today they are 9, 11 and 13, and through written statements read by each of their counselors, for the first time, the world got to hear from them.

The first statement read aloud was written by the youngest, Weston.

WESTON’S STATEMENT | Read by counselor #1:  “When someone talks about Kouri, it makes me feel hateful and ashamed. She took away my dad. It’s made me have a hard time trusting people.”

The middle child, Ashton, called Kouri greedy and said she did not properly care for him and his brothers.

ASHTON’S STATEMENT | Read by counselor #2: ” … when we got hurt, you didn’t even care.”

He accused her of harming the family pets.

ASHTON’S STATEMENT | Read by counselor #2: You wouldn’t let me put my kitten in the garage for safety at night. And we found it eaten by raccoons the next day. You wouldn’t let us turn on and use the heater lamp for the chickens and bunnies, and they froze to death.

Carter, the oldest, said Kouri was often drunk and would lock him in his room.

CARTER’S STATEMENT | Read by counselor #3: “This happened pretty much daily. I feel angry that she locked me in my room. … I miss my dad, but I do not miss how my life used to be. I don’t miss Kouri. I will tell you that.”

All three boys asked the judge to give their mother, whom they only referred to as Kouri, the harshest possible sentence.

CARTER’S STATEMENT | Read by counselor #3 “… what she did is very sick …”

When it was their turn, Kouri’s friends and family pleaded for leniency. Her brother Ronnie.

RONNIE DARDEN (in court): … the injustice that’s occurred here in this courtroom, it’ll be righted in time. … And until then, little sister, just know … that I’m right by your side and I’ll always be right here for you. I love you.

Then Kouri Richins was allowed to speak. She did not testify at trial but now she approached the podium and used her time to address her kids.

KOURI RICHINS (in court): I will use any opportunity I can to get a message to you.

She says she has been cut off from them for the past two years.

KOURI RICHINS (in court): As much as you’ve been influenced into thinking that dad was murdered, that I took your dad from you, that is completely wrong and an absolute lie. … And just because someone may not be perfect, that’s a far reach for them to be capable of murder

Judge Mrazik had two options when considering Kouri Richins’ sentence — either 25 year-to-life with the possibility of parole or life in prison without parole — and he made it known he carefully considered each.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK (in court): The Court’s duty is to make a decision, a weighty, long-lasting decision based on the best information available today. … Accordingly, Miss Richins … the Court hereby sentences you to life without parole. 

For Eric’s family it was the end to a yearslong nightmare. Greg Skordas, the family spokesperson, says the true heartbreak is for the kids, who are now living with Eric’s sister Katie.

Greg Skordas: I can’t think of anything worse as a child to lose your father, except to know that it was because of your mother. I mean, think about that.

---

Produced by Ruth Chenetz, Asena Basak and Betsy Shuller. Elena DiFiore and Ryan Smith are the development producers. Emma Steele is the field producer. Alicia Tejada is the coordinating producer. Megan Kelly Brown is the associate producer. Michael Vele, Richard Barber, Marcus Balsam, Marlon Disla and Greg Kaplan are the editors. Anthony Batson is the senior producer. Nancy Kramer is the executive story editor. Judy Tygard is the executive producer.

In:

When Liahona Olayan thinks about her time on “American Idol” five years ago, the first thing that comes to mind isn’t how far she made it in the competition (all the way to the top 24) — or even the fact that millions of viewers watched her get scolded by “Idol” judge and pop star Katy Perry.

The 22-year-old singer still occasionally looks back on her “Idol” episodes, including Perry’s talking-to. As she watches it all unfold — everything from the successful audition with her older brother, Ammon, that had country star Luke Bryan “freaking out” to her elimination — the first thing that comes to mind is gratitude.

“To be on national TV and global stages as a 16-year-old is actually really difficult, and it’s a lot of pressure on a child, but I am so grateful for it,” Olayan said. “It needed to happen. Like the Lord, that was the only way he could shape me and show me what I’m capable of, and what I needed to learn and what I still have to develop, and how far I can go. And so I am really grateful for that experience.”

As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Olayan relied on her faith to navigate the ups and downs of a reality competition show like “American Idol.”

Her faith continues to be an anchor in her life as she pursues a career post-“Idol.”

In a recent interview with the Deseret News, the singer, who lives in Spanish Fork, Utah, reflected on “American Idol,” how serving a Latter-day Saint mission has made her a better artist, and her new music.

Getting scolded by Katy Perry

Family photos hang all throughout the home in Utah County where Olayan lives with her parents and younger siblings.

The singer is the second oldest of nine, and the oldest daughter in the family. She speaks with pride about being a role model for her younger siblings, especially her sisters, and laughs when she talks about how she hides away in her bedroom closet to record her music — usually with a blanket over her head to help mute the noise that is a given in her home.

“It gets so loud,” she said.

But she wouldn’t have it any other way.

Olayan has a close bond with her siblings. So when she was on Season 19 of “American Idol,” competing alongside her older brother, Ammon, it hit her hard when he was eliminated.

It was Ammon who had inspired her to pursue music and songwriting in the first place. The two siblings, who are just a year apart in age, had previously collaborated on an EP in 2019 and were featured together on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ 2020 youth theme album.

Olayan was emotional as she moved forward on “Idol” without her brother — and Perry didn’t hesitate to call her out for it.

“You’re wasting everybody’s time,” Perry told Olayan when the then-teenager appeared glum during a duet with a fellow “Idol” contestant. “You were being defeated the whole time. … You took this whole ship down.”

Despite that harsh lecture, Perry and the other “Idol” judges ended up advancing Olayan to the next round of the competition. Perry would later tell the teenager she shouldn’t think she’s nothing without her brother, which Olayan said motivated her to keep moving forward.

“It may have hurt in those moments, but honestly, I’m so grateful for it,” Olayan said, reflecting on Perry’s criticism. “Katy Perry believed in me in a lot of ways. … She wouldn’t have said those things if she didn’t see the potential I had.”

After reaching the top 24 on “Idol,” Olayan continued to perform with Ammon. The siblings released another EP in 2022, but then put their careers on pause to serve missions for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — Ammon in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and Liahona in Puebla, Mexico.

Liahona Olayan believed from an early age she would serve a mission — but she never could have anticipated how her mission would point her toward a solo career that is gaining momentum.

Going on a mission

When she was getting ready to leave for Mexico in 2023, Olayan found herself surrounded by exciting career opportunities — including auditioning for the lead role in Disney’s live-action “Moana.”

But going on her mission wound up setting her up for even more success, she said.

In Mexico, Olayan wasn’t really recognized for her time on “American Idol.” She was, however, recognized for her church performances — including the song “Good Day” from the Strive to Be 2020 youth album, which has over 16 million streams on Spotify.

That helped open doors to sharing the gospel, Olayan said. Often with a ukulele in hand, she was able to testify of her love of Christ through singing on the streets and buses, and during missionary meetings and baptisms.

“I have so many experiences there that I would never trade for the world,” she said. “That was the first time in my life that I realized how profound music is. … I didn’t know how much it could change someone’s life until I went on the mission and was able to share it and see it for myself, with my own eyes.”

Three weeks after returning home to Utah, to her large, close-knit family, Olayan was in Los Angeles working on her debut solo album. She said the transition was so smooth, in part, because her mission helped her to learn things more quickly.

“The mission has made me a way better singer, a way better performer,” she said. “It’s helped me to develop my talents way quicker, way faster.”

Roughly eight months after her return, Olayan released “Just Me, Liahona,” a multigenre album that showcases her fluent Spanish and features everything from Latin pop to hip-hop and funk.

That music, and her newer music on the horizon, she said, is an extension of her missionary work.

“Anything and everything I do, I always want to help people, and if I can’t do that as a singer, then I’m failing, and I’m failing with my gift the Lord has given to me,” she said.

Liahona’s mission as an artist

Olayan describes herself as a clean pop artist. She writes and performs music that her seven younger siblings would feel comfortable listening to and seeing in concert.

That includes one of her newest songs, “Elegance,” which came out in late April.

On April 24, the day she released the song, Olayan said she was on an “all-time high” as she watched the message behind it gain traction online.

“Elegance,” she said, is a song about the empowerment she feels in dressing modestly — a message that has been on her mind since her teenage years.

“My standards have been put to the test anywhere and everywhere I go. And especially in the music industry … it’s tested every day,” she said. “I remember many times on ‘American Idol’ they would try to dress me certain ways.

“As a 16-year-old being there by myself … me being able to stand my ground and say ‘no’ was very shocking to a lot of (people). … But at the end of the day, I realized, like, I don’t care. I live to please the creator, not the created.”

Olayan said she’s received some pushback online for her new music and this direction in her career. But it pales in comparison, she said, to the support she has from her family, faith and fans.

“My mom always taught me there is no excuse to compromise your standards ever. There is no amount of fame, money, fashion, status that is worth giving up who you are,” she said. “Because once you give that up, who are you anyways? What do you have left?”

On a reality competition show like “American Idol,” Olayan couldn’t always perform the music she wanted. Each round had specific requirements and sometimes, the singer said, it felt confining.

Now, she’s releasing music and performing on her own terms.

She’s thinking of working on another solo album later this year, but in the meantime, she’ll be releasing singles throughout the summer.

“Every song I release from here on out is by my own doing,” she said. “I feel freer than ever, and like, this is who I am. I’m sure I’m going to grow from here, but at this moment, this is me. … I’m just very grateful to finally be able to be who I am.”

Two Utah political strategists say they were inundated with texts from concerned friends after Kevin O’Leary publicly accused critics of his massive Utah data center project of having ties to the Chinese Communist Party (1).

Gabi Finlayson and Jackie Morgan, co-founders of Elevate Strategies (2), found themselves at the center of a firestorm after O’Leary made the remarks during a segment on Fox Business. The pair, who have worked on Democratic campaigns and run Elevate Utah — a political content platform where they’ve publicly opposed the proposed Stratos Project — said they were blindsided by the allegations.

Must Read

• Robert Kiyosaki issues grim warning for baby boomers. Many could be ‘wiped out’ and homeless ‘all over’ the country. How to protect yourself now

“These are proxies for the Chinese government, is my argument, and if they’re not — because I want them to be able to defend their names,” O’Leary said. “Come out, come out wherever you are.”

The debate stems from a proposed 40,000-acre artificial intelligence data center development in Box Elder County’s Hansel Valley that is projected to be more than twice as large as Manhattan (3).

Why communities are pushing back

Rather than backing down after being called out, Finlayson and Morgan responded to O’Leary with a sense of humor. The two took to social media and turned O’Leary into the punchline, teasing his recognizable habit of wearing flip-flops with a suit during television appearances (4).

“The only foreign operative here is a Canadian wealthy person trying to ruin our state,” Finlayson told Business Insider (1).

Still, the exchange points to a much larger issue playing out in communities across the country. Public skepticism around AI data centers is mounting, with seven in 10 Americans saying they oppose having artificial intelligence facilities built in their local area, according to Gallup (5).

Similar to Finlayson and Morgan, residents have voiced concerns over how these projects could affect water resources, raise utility costs and change the character of their communities.

Those concerns may feel especially relevant in Utah, where electricity prices have already risen. Residential power costs in the state increased 15.2% between May 2024 and May 2025 — the third-largest jump nationwide, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (6). Across the U.S., electricity prices increased by about 6.5% during the same period.

Concerns around resource use have also drawn attention from state leaders. Utah Governor Spencer Cox said in a post on X that he requested the project developer release a public water plan showing the development would not harm the Great Salt Lake (7) . He added that water use should be publicly reported and said the project should not reduce water flowing into the lake.

O’Leary’s team pushes back on criticism

O’Leary did not respond to Business Insider’s request for comment, but Paul Palandjian, CEO of O’Leary Ventures, clarified the company’s position.

According to Palandjian, the firm is not alleging that any particular individual is acting as a foreign operative and instead wants more transparency around who is financially backing opposition efforts tied to the project.

Read More: Millionaires under 43 hold just 25% of their wealth in stocks — here’s where their money is going instead

“To be clear about Elevate: We accept that Elevate’s principals are American political strategists. We are not contesting that,” Palandjian told Business Insider (1). “What we have asked, and continue to ask, is for full donor transparency from the organizations that are funding the opposition to this project.”

Palandjian said the company recognizes the concerns being raised by residents and emphasized what O’Leary Ventures sees as the project’s economic upside. He estimates the development may generate roughly 4,000 construction jobs during its 10- to 15-year buildout.

O’Leary has also suggested that some of the pushback surrounding data centers stems from perceptions that no longer reflect how the industry has changed (8). He argued that the technology and energy systems supporting these facilities have progressed considerably and said he hopes the Utah project can serve as an example of responsible development.

Even as companies highlight the potential benefits of data center projects, questions around their environmental footprint have become more common as AI infrastructure rapidly expands. Some large facilities can use up to five-million gallons of water daily — an amount comparable to the needs of a town of roughly 10,000 to 50,000 residents (9).

The bigger question around AI’s growth

According to a Brookings analysis, the rise of AI is leading to a boom in data center construction (10), with tech companies saying these projects can bring jobs and more tax revenue to communities.

But researchers say many residents and policymakers are becoming worried about the strain large facilities could put on local power grids and electricity costs. With many households already feeling squeezed by rising expenses, Brookings noted that growing energy demand from data centers could add even more pressure and raise questions about who ends up paying the price.

Still, O’Leary argues his Utah project will be different. In a video posted on Facebook, he said his background gives him a unique perspective (11), describing himself as the only data-center developer with a degree in environmental studies.

“We want it to be the shining example of how you do this,” he said. Whether residents buy into that vision remains an open question.

What To Read Next

Join 250,000+ readers and get Moneywise’s best stories and exclusive interviews first — clear insights curated and delivered weekly. Subscribe now.

Article Sources

We rely only on vetted sources and credible third-party reporting. For details, see ourethics and guidelines.

Business Insider (1), (8); TikTok (2); The Verge (3); Google (4); Gallup (5); Axios (6); X (7); Environmental and Energy Study Institute (9); Brookings Institution (10); Facebook (11).

This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.