You're listening to the Mind Over Murder podcast. My name is Bill Thomas.
I'm a writer, consulting, producer, and now podcaster. I am now
trying to use my experience as the brother of a murder victim to help other
victims of violent crime. I'm working on a book on the unsolved Colonial Parkway
murders and I'm the co administrator of the Colonial Parkway Murders Facebook group together with
Kristin Dilly. My name is Kristin Dilly. I'm a writer, a researcher,
a teacher, and a victim's advocate, as well as the social media
manager and co administrator for the Colonial Parkway Murders Facebook page with my partner in
crime, Bill Thomas. Welcome to Mind Ever Murder. I'm Kristin Dilly and
I'm Bill Thomas, and we're joined today by our podcast colleague, Jessica Bettencore
here to talk to us about her podcast DNA I d Jess, thank you
for joining us today. Hi guys, thanks for having me. You sound
so excited to be here that joy just bubbles over. I'm excited to be
here. We had so much fun at Crime Con we did. It was
wonderful to see you. We thought we'd pick up on some of the cool
things we were talking about at Crime Con in this conversation today. Absolutely,
and just for anybody who is new to your podcast or who hasn't had a
chance to listen to it yet, can you give us just a little bit
of background about what your podcast is all about. I started, dnaid The
idea was hatched at the end of twenty twenty now, right because I was
noticing in the papers all these cases being solved by what I call forensic genealogy.
Just because there's so many different names you can call it, it's evolved
into FIG, which is now the term that's being used for it a lot,
forensic investigative genetic genealogy FIG. I've always called it forensic genealogy, so
that's just what I'll call it. I noticed all these cases being solved,
and they were mainstream media covered them because it's all it's cutting edge stuff,
right. Golden State Killer kicked this off, and now the cases are being
solved rapid fire. But I wasn't satisfied with the level of detail I was
getting in the reporting because these are cold They had started out in any way
that for the first few years. This was all cold cases right decades ol.
I just needed more answers other than so and so was killed in nineteen
seventy six and her murderer was revealed to be John Smith and next at six.
I kept looking around at my people I was working with at the time,
who were Nick from Drue cron Garage and Mike Morford and saying, someone
should do a podcast about this, because it seems like it's a real virgeoning
niche a special area that is really up and coming, is going places.
Everyone's busy, and when you find yourself saying enough times someone should and then
you just you'd have to say, Okay, I guess it's me. And
COVID happened. So I had some time, and I was trying to avoid
my kids being home all the time, so started looking into the cases myself.
The topic is specifically the podcast, specifically cold cases and or now non
cold cases solved by forensic genealogy and including that. Just this year we added
a dough identification component. Let's back up for one step back. How did
you originally get into true crime podcasting? When you and I first met my
recollection, which may not be correct, is that I think We met when
you were working as a writer producer for True Crime Garage. So how did
you get into true crime podcasting? Do you start as a fan or how's
it all come together. I was a consumer, A heavy consumer. The
short backstory is that by age seven, I read all fifty three Nancy Drew's
Okay, I reached out into Trixie Belden, you name it, I read
it, so I've always had an affinity for it. It never occurred to
me to actually go into the field myself, which I don't really know why.
It just didn't happen that way. When I found myself a stay at
home mom with a legal background, and I was at the point that the
kids didn't need me anymore and I was looking for something to do. I
started listening to We all listened to Cereal right, and then I branched out
into more and more podcasts came out, and I started listening to Crime Lines.
But it wasn't Crimelines back then. It was Charlie's former show, which
she had with a female partner. I listened to them religiously, and I
got on their website one day and they said, we're looking for research help,
and I had just finished a project where I was working as a such
a typical gen X story, but I was working as a writer for a
website called quimby that helps law students prepare for the bar exam by doing little
tiny cartoon blurbs of cases because gen X doesn't actually read anything, sorry guys.
So it was like, let's ceb Ferguson and I was doing the writing
for that and that project ended, so I was looking around and Charlie and
her partner needed some help, so I started just doing some pro bono research
for them, and then I said I can write too. I think I
ended up writing four scripts for them, and Charlie scrambled to get me paid
was as much as she could, and it wasn't much back then. Of
course, one of the cases I covered for them, I asked permission,
and I took what I had done and sent it to Nick at True Crime
Garage, which I listened to and asked. And it was one of those
things that it was like a huge script with like bullet pointed footnotes and because
I can't help it, I'm a lawyer, that's the way I write.
See this C point A two seven below whatever, And I sent it to
him, and it was a case he had already covered. I didn't want
him to have any conflict with using someone else's work product. He was already
done with that case. I said, this is what I can do.
And I happened to catch him at the time that he was like the show
was starting to take off. His show. He needed help. You can't
do all that yourself. They put on two episodes a week on a separate
case every week. That's as soon as they're done recording an episode, they
launched right into the next one. It's an incredibly fast turnover. I aligned
with Nick and that was in February twenty eighteen, and through Nick, I
met a lot of people. I met Mike Morford, and I met Bill
Thomas and here we are. And so you mentioned that you're a lawyer by
training. So did you practice law for a period of time before you got
into writing and podcasting and all that good stuff. I sure did so.
I graduated from Georgetown Law School in ninety six. I'm sorry, I'm dating
myself. People are going to figure out how old I really am. And
I landed my dream job at a firm that I really loved in DC,
which is where I grew up. Literally two weeks later I met my house,
which is that's the way it goes, right when you're not I was
not interested in looking at no relationship. I was busy. I was going
to be a lawyer, and sure enough we met. So I ended up.
He could not move because of his job, but mine I worked.
I was a young associate for a law firm. I'm a down of desk,
right, I could just ladder all over to a firm where he was
did that, had to take a second bar exam, had taken Virginia,
had to take Rhode Island and moved up there. We got married, and
then I had to take another bar exam when we moved to again following his
job around. So that was three bar exams. Not my favorite activity,
but all in all, I practiced for six and a half years, and
then it was about that time where you're like, they're making noises about are
you going to try to make partner? And I'll be honest, I had
no interest in doing that. I was practicing corporate law like mergers, acquisitions,
securities. Not a ton of really happy, go lucky people in that
realm. There weren't a lot of happy people that I worked with. My
husband's job ladder of hit him again to Massachusetts. I was gonna have to
take a fourth bar and I moved up there with a ten day old baby.
And then once you know it, we had three kids in four years,
and I didn't have time to even think about the bar exam anymore.
I ended up stopping my legal career and did the mommy thing for quite a
few years. We moved again to Wisconsin. We moved back to Connecticut.
Bill I've been I've lived in Connecticut three times so and now we're back in
Massachusetts. We're done moving. I'm gonna be dragged out of here in a
casket for sure, and hopefully not anytime soon. No, no time soon.
So it was the last move to Connecticut where I started to want to
look for something to do, and as a stay at home mom with a
law degree, who I just missed the technology revolution. It's a little difficult,
right because I can do research and write and all that great stuff.
But by then they were hiring twenty two year old who are willing to work
around the clock and seven days a week. I almost past that point in
my life. That's where I happen to get into podcasting. Do you feel
like that legal background has helped you in all of the podcasting work that you're
doing, especially and maybe understanding the legal ramifications of cases. Absolutely one.
Yeah, it doesn't matter that I was a corporate lawyer. I know how
to contact the clerk's office and get the documents I'm looking for. I know
how to submit Foyer requests to till I'm blue in the face, and believe
me, they all hate me because I submit lots of them. I know
how to find the records i'm looking for. I can pretty much find anything
out, and I will. The researching skills have been absolutely paramount for me
with this podcast because it's so fact based, and I really take pride in
making sure that I get the facts correct, which means that I need to
see them on the paper, which again dating myself, but sometimes on the
screen, but on paper, laying it all out. There's a stack behind
me. You can't see it, but it's eight inches thick of documents I
got from Wisconsin like a couple of weeks ago, and it's the case file.
It took them two years to get it to me. That kind of
thing. I can look through that in a day and a half. I'm
a fast reader. I'm quick, and I think that's all just my law
background coming to the forefront to help. So yes, very useful. It
might take you two years to get the file, but once you finally have
the content, you're able to take it all in, absorb it, and
then you've got to put that out in a way that the rest of us
who were civilians can understand. And that's been a challenge. I think that's
one of the strengths of the podcast though. And I just listened to another
episode this afternoon, and you really do tell the story in a way that
I think most of us can grasp, those that aren't lawyers and aren't scientists.
Yeah, I do try to stay away from too much legal ease,
right or sometimes if I quote from a core document, I'll say okay in
English, that means because literally lawyers are taught to write in the most convoluted
manner possible, but it's like they can't figure out conciseness, but they want
to be very specific about what they're saying. So that's how it all works.
And what's been interesting about that bill in terms of trying to make it
understandable is the science component to the show True Confession. The last time I
took science was high school biology. I was an English major. I'm a
lawyer. I science is not my jam, So of course I have a
podcast about DNA. Like, how does that make any sense? I don't
know. But that's why I think trying to understand the material myself has helped
me explain it in a way that is easier for everyone else to understand as
well. Sometimes you're talking to somebody who's an expert in the field and they're
shooting off terms and no one can really grasp it if they're not in that
exact field. So hopefully I made it so that everyone can understand it.
We chatting just before we went on the air. The principle one of the
many differences between your podcast and ours is but you are a scripted podcast.
How long does it take you to get a script done for a podcast episode
like start to finish? Are you super super quick about it or are you
like me and you tinker and tinker? No, I tinker and tinker.
It's literally month. It's a process, right, So it's not just about
the writing, which for me that's my favorite part is when I sit down,
and I've got the case file here, and I've got newspapers dot com
articles from nineteen seventy six over here, which, by the way, the
reporting back then was just night and day, different from the stuff that's going
on now, right, Yeah, actual facts, interviews with neighbors, witnesses.
I digress. But there's nothing that I like better than sitting down and
starting that writing. However, I always find when i'm writing it that I
have more questions. There's the case file, like something's redacted, or it's
missing a page, or I don't understand why this guy did this here,
like why do the police follow this lead? Because the case files, some
of the ones I'm getting, they're from the seventies and they are literally detectives
writing things on napkins. I know that's a cliche, but I've actually seen
that, so it's you gotta keeps it together. So the way it works
is I put together my script, which is the sequence of the story,
and I use newspapers articles, I use the case file notes that I have,
and then I call the detective who closed the case, who is always
intimately familiar with the entire case file because they've had to be I have found
that to a man with one exception, to a man or a woman with
one exception, they have been willing to talk to me. The reason is
because these cases are the agencies have prioritized these cases for decades. These cases
are like for some reason, this case was like the I hate the expression
pet case. But so many detectives put their all into it and then they
retired and the next guy picked it up and they were all they didn't solve
it. I can't tell you how many times I've come across this case.
The detective had the victim's picture in his on his desk, and they really
they it's a case that really means a lot to the department as a whole.
So when they solve it, they're proud of it and they should be
right, and they want to talk about it because it's an absolute craft ton
of hard work that paid off. Everyone loves a resolution, so the detectives,
their input is really valuable, and that's my favorite part. Second favorite
part is talking to them and getting the insights, and they almost always tell
me some juicy story off the record, which I love too. For the
most part, these investigators are they on active duty or sometimes they are retired.
When they're talking to you, I would say, for the most part
their active duty, they retired. I have had plenty of interviews with retired
detectives. But sometimes they're retired. They go off the grid, like they
don't want to be found. They're done. They're off hunting somewhere or golfing.
They usually it's active duty. And if it's if a detective retired and
I can't get him, then I'll talk to his lieutenant or something, or
the captain who oversaw the case being solved, and they're again, they're almost
always willing to talk to me. I have had a couple exceptions, which
is strange in Florida, which is bizarre because Florida and the Sunshine laws there
are like literally everything's inn open book. They'll send you. I've got crime
scene photos that are undredacted, They'll send you everything. They often don't let
me talk to the detective, so I have to submit questions to the detectives.
Just a strange dichotomy. I'm like, you, guys know that doesn't
really add up, but whatever. And then in a case I covered in
Montana, those guys actually hung up on me. No, not interested in
talking. Yeah, how do you choose the cases that you're covering. This
is something Kristin and I were wondering because you've covered a lot of fascinating cases,
but a lot of cases that we were less familiar with or not familiar
with at all. How do you choose the cases? How do they move
on to your radar? They come onto my radar because I have like alerts
set all over the internet for any forensic genealogy or genetic genealogy. But like
I get emails every day all day about and I can look at it and
say, no, I know that case already, or I'm not. This
one doesn't fit the parameters. The main criteria for me is that I have
to have access to information. I've got probably six half scripts written or scripts
started. I realized I can't get the case file. Therefore, for me,
I can't I don't feel that I can really cover that case because I
don't know the real story. The agency won't talk to me, or the
detective is retired, and I can't do it, so I abandon it and
move on. I don't like to get to that point. Obviously, once
I've started writing, I want to plead it, but I usually evaluate the
case and see where it took place, whether I've got any contact there,
whether what their sunshine laws are like, whether they'll they'll it seems like they'll
work with me. How amenable the detective was to talking to the media is
a good clue, right. How open the agency was California is a It's
a problem because they lead the way by far in these cases. Absolutely hands
down the most number of forends of genealogy cases solved. But they will not
hand out their records, just will not do it. That's where I have
to go to the detectives and basically try to sweet talk them into talking to
me and giving me all the information I'm looking for, or use court documents
when applicable. Of everything that you've covered so far, do you have maybe
like a case that has really stuck with you and one that you're particularly fond
of, or one that you're particularly interested in continuing to explore a lot of
them, there's no continuing to explore them because they're resolved. And I do
have quite a few cases that I feel like the episode really I put my
all into it, and I really feel and I feel like that about most
of them, but some of them are just really they're special to me for
some reason. I'll give you one example, the Judy Nesbit case. I
covered it in season two. She was a mother for getting ready for Thanksgiving
with her family and she went to meet a customer who was interested in buying
the family boat and her family found or shot and killed on the boat.
And for some reason, that case I really just it really resonated with me.
I don't know if it's because I have kids or that age, and
she was just a mom. She was a normal person and doing nothing wrong,
no, not a risk of verse lifestyle. And the detective is also
a detective who worked that case is out of Newport Beach, California. Is
one of my absolute favorite one of the people who you would just sit back
and admire the level of dedication to his work and the pride he takes in
the detail that he comes up with, and somebody I really enjoyed talking to.
So that case is probably I usually send people to that one just as
a starter, because it really is a case that and by the way,
it is solved eventually by forensic genealogy. Turns out the police missed some stuff
there and probably would have been solved a long time ago, if they had
done good police work, which is not something that I see a lot of
these cases. Can you say not something you see a lot of you mean
bad police work? Yeah, most of these cases. The amount of their
cold cases from the seventies eighties generally right, because this is the era before
DNA that if they you know, once you get into the nineties, if
they can collect DNA the crime scene, go to codas use it as elimination
purposes, that sort of takes away the element of their just chasing their tails,
right, which is what happened in the seventies and eighties. Right,
They literally have nothing but erology to work with the blood types, and it's
almost useless. Most of the cases, I would say, the vast majority
these cases. The reason they weren't solved is because before DNA they were unsolvable
because there was no connection to the killer and the victim. This sounds like
the Colonial Park Ram murders, which start in nineteen eighty six and stretch to
eighty nine. And as we've explained, we both just did lengthy interviews about
the case. These are pre DNA cases. You're always praying that they've managed
to hang on to some of the evidence so that we can apply twenty twenty
three technology to case evidence from the seventies and eighties. Part of the thing
that's just almost impossible to wrap your brain around is that a large amount of
that is luck. It just so happened that they retained. One of the
cases I covered, it was a drop of semen on a boot because they
had thrown away the swabs from the rape kit. They detected sperm on them.
Okay, so she was raped and they'd throw them out because they didn't
know that they were going to be useful. How many cases did that happen
in? Right? And can those cases can't be solved anymore. So much
of it is luck that there's like a tiny little bit left or now we
have the impact right, which can get DNA off. Thing like clothing that
we was never anticipated, but that clothing has to still be in evidence,
right. And I've talked to so many police agencies as well, where they're
like, there was a flood in our property room or a fire, or
we moved and all that stuff got lost, Yeah, thrown out. Yeah,
it's been decades. But yet if you get lucky, and for example,
the clothing is still somewhere in a paper bag or a cardboard box or
something thing you can get Jared Bradley and the MBAC folks in there. He'll
train your people and the next thing you know, you're extracting evidence you didn't
even know existed exactly. And I know there's some federal grants that have been
handed out to some different agencies to start doing testing on a bunch of cases.
I know. I think it's a jurisdiction of Maryland, for Georgie's County
has twenty five cases in the works that they're working on, and I know
there's also some in Virginia. So there. I feel like behind the scenes
there's like mad testing going on, you know what I mean, because now
it's the heyday of testing, because we could do things now with stuff that's
been sitting there, abandoned forever, but thank god it's not thrown out and
they could actually test it and see what we can get to provide answers to
these families. Have you ever started working on a case and you're doing your
research, you're getting into it, and then someone asks you, hey,
can you not cover this. We're in the middle of testing, we're doing
something. Have you ever, basically just been told please put the brakes on
for a little bit. No, because I won't cover a case, and
I publish to mention that in the criteria section. I won't cover a case
until it's resolved. Now there are cases where they are resolved and I don't
cover them because they're the agency tells me they're looking at the guy for other
things and those are still in the works. But once the forensic genealogy is
done and we've identified the suspect and he's dead or it's wound through the court
system, I consider a fair game to cover it, right because I can
get access to the materials if he's under if it's under appeal. Sometimes I
wait for that. No, that's my worst nightmare is actually to get that
far and be told please don't cover that. I really I have back burner
things for a while. When the detective says, I can't talk to you
right now, but in a couple of months I will. But that's as
far as it's gotten. You're listening to Mind over Murder. We'll be right
back after this word from our sponsors. We're back here at my murder.
So do you have a whiteboard somewhere with all of these cases, or how
do you organize this stuff when you're moving forward on so many different potential cases
to cover? As my husband will tell you, I am a list person.
Uh huh. I love lists. I have lists everywhere. So I
have multiple legal pads with lists on them of cases to cover, and I'll
have a no asterisk if I foil them, and I have a highlighter if
the guy's dead or if the case is in the legal process, I note
it. I've got answers to your question bill lists upon lists, and by
the way, they're all actually written in henwriting. I don't use the computer
for that. The next logical question I think was going to be do you
have one of the corkboards with red string all over it? No? But
I do have multiple legal pads, and I'm one of those people who I
process information by writing it. I don't know if there's different ways of that
people process information. And I remember this guy in law school with me who
would sit next to me in class and he would just sit there with his
arms crossed, didn't even bring up pen Okay, oh I hate that.
I hate just sat there and was like brilliant, I'm like somehow osmosis to
all the information into his brain. Okay, that is not the way I
operate. I'm the person who raised their hand like, can you repeat that
to the professor seventy times? Then I would take thing and digest them down
into little blurbs, and then I would make an outline. And I have
a little tiny sheet of paper that's six by six with all my cases until
the end of the year and what's happening on them. I like to just
dial it down to a little tiny bullet point thing. But yeah, no,
it's all very old. I get you. Yeah, I laughed the
other day. Though you're clearly a visual learner, which I am too.
Even though I love music and I like listening to the radio, I'm a
big NPR fan, and I love an intelligent talk show, which is a
little bit about what we're shooting for, a mind of our murder. I'm
not saying we're a talk show, but I find if I really want to
grasp something, I need to see, even if it's just me. Kristen
was teasing me the other day. She said, I've never seen anybody take
more notes than you, because I've got like pieces of paper and one after
another, just writing things down. I'm doing it even here listening to your
answers, which are yes, Sam, I was the person with the textbook
in school would like highlighter, and then I would write in a little more
and the next to the like this, just this quick synopsis of that paragraph,
because that's just the way I learned. So it's very paper intensive.
I am killing many trees. I apologize for that, but I don't learn
as well. Just I can't just scan things on the computer and process it
that way. I have to actually write things down. No, I'm with
you same way. It's interesting because more and more kids are moving away from
I'm going to sit here and take notes. A lot of them will sit
there and try to do it basmoss, and I'm like, I don't know
how you guys do this. I'm giving you so much information. I don't
know how you're not writing this down right now. I know I'm one hundred
percent with you on that. I want to take notes. It's some mus
my jaw dropped a moment ago when you started to tell us about your fellow
law school. Didn't you just sit there with it absorbing. I can't do
that. It's just stressful work for me. If I remember correctly, I
think he graduated like super Culoudy or something. I mean, it's just more
people like that. That's not me. I always have to be I never
missed class, very prepared and always making sure I write everything down, get
the notes from somebody else if God forbid I was sick. That's just the
way I am. So to understand the science of it all, do you
have a go to book or text or do you have science reference books anywhere
on your bookshelf? I know you've have bookshelves right above your head. Is
there anything that you use is just reference so that if you need to take
a look at the science, it's right there available Or do you just go
to the world Wide Web for that? No? I do go to the
world Wide Web quite a bit. I also, I've taken notes throughout as
I've gone. But I have my own little like Bible here now that I'm
like notus twenty low side. Oh, I love that. Okay, So
it's multiple pages as long as you can see, and it's got like the
history of when forensic genealogy started, types of DNA. But I google things
like everyone else obviously. Now I don't need to look up the difference between
str and snips. That's all part of the regular language now for a show
like mine. But like I said, there's still plenty of stuff that I
don't know that I have to look up. And again, I try not
to make it too complicated. Try I really try to simplify it so that
everyone can understand it, which means I have to understand it myself. I
was reading about your podcast today preparing for this discussion. A lot of people
love it, but then there are still people that say, I need more
facts, I need more science. I know you're trying to hit this at
a level so that I like to refer to myself as a civilian that I
can understand. I'm not a scientist. I'm more like you. I'm an
English history sort of side of my brain. I couldn't run a DNA lab
to save my life, but I really admire the people that do, and
every time I talk to these scientists, I just I'm so blown away.
Like you were saying a moment ago, Jess, there are times when I
think to myself, I'm sorry, could you repeat that again? Because I'm
not completely grasping the science of it. All to use Christians point. Yeah,
I have found that. I really haven't found that so much. I've
a lot of people who listen to my show are the lab workers. I've
found a lot of them to come up and said thank you so much,
because no one ever talks about us, and that's true. They're the ones
that are doing this day in and day out, and thank goodness for their
processes and their adherence to protocols and proper procedures, because that is what is
making and breaking these cases the way they do things according by the book.
No. I find the biggest complaint about my podcast is A that I talked
too fast and b and I'm like, you can slow it down. I'm
the listening to guys who just do the points whatever, but I don't is
that. And the other thing is people want more, people want more episodes
and I'm already doing is I'm doing as much as I can do and feeling
like I'm putting out a product that I am proud of. And I don't
think people really realize, Quinte, how much work goes into each episode,
Like I said, months, because my scripts for some of these cases are
twenty five thousand words. Wow, way to a look. Yeah, my
script for the Colonial Parkway for Nick was twenty six thousand words, and I
know for a fact when I sent him that, he was like, oh
shit, because that's just too much information. It's too much. But that's
what generally happens, is that I write that much. In every case,
I just can't do I can't do it any more than I am at a
certain point. You just have to decide, you know what. I am
happy with the product I'm putting out, and listeners who have no idea about
what the process is, they're just going to have to take a seat and
deal with it. You're gonna have to take several seats and deal with it.
Yeah. And I also I don't use a research assistant. I don't
use anybody. The person going through newspapers, dot Com and ancestry and trying
to put together is meat. That's all meat. And I'm not tooting my
own horn. I'm just saying I'm also a terrible delegator. I don't know
that I would even be comfortable having somebody else do it for me, because
I have to go through the information myself in order to process it. Here
we are, yeah, yeah, we're testing out a potential research assistant,
and I am having the hardest time telling people, Okay, this is what
we need. Can you get us this? It's I'm having such a hard
time letting No. I don't kudos to you. I'm trying very hard because
we both need help. We have very busy, active lives, as to
you, and this is a ton of work, and I don't think people
realize how much to your point, yeah, no, I really, in
all seriousness, I would love to clone myself. If I could do that
and then have my oneself doing all this work on this side and my other
self dealing with my three kids and everything else, that would work out great.
Unfortunately if they haven't done that yet, but maybe meaning of the technology,
so we'll see. Hey, they did it with a sheep, because
they can. They can take into it. Yeah, one of these days.
So what is your thinking regarding the future of I'm going to go ahead
and keep killing it investigative genetic genealogy. I hadn't heard FIG before. Yeh
vegas taking over all the pocaters and everyone are calling it FIG. Yeah big
okay, So what is your thinking regarding the future of forensic genealogy? Invest
give genetic genealogy. It's all the same thing. Is this the wave of
the future, Yeah, it is. We are seeing the beginnings of a
pushback with states starting to create legislation to set some parameters for what is and
isn't acceptable to the people of that state, the legislators. We've just got
a law in Maryland. We've got a law in Utah, we got a
law in Montana. I know they're working on one in California, various other
places. I think Florida. In fact, i'd bet most states are going
to pass legislation addressing the issue because it's not going away. It is the
most efficient way to solve a case by a factor of a team. I've
heard so many detectives speak about this at various conferences I've been to. Now,
the number of man hours put into a forty year investigation, right,
just think about that, mind Bob, versus giving ccmore taking ten hours to
solve it. It's not culpable, it's inefficient, it's a waste of resources
not to use it, and there is starting to be a movement to use
it in cases that are not full cases to use it. Why does it
have to be a last resort when it is the most efficient, quick way
to get a guy off the streets who might still be operating, by the
way. But I feel like I've been having this argument with the FBI in
particular over the last five six years. It just there's been a tremendous amount
of foot dragging. When I first heard about this, which is I guess
it's about six years ago now, my first goal was I want to track
these people down that I'm reading about in all these articles, and I want
to introduce myself, and I want to ask them how this thing work,
and do you think this could work in the Colonial Parkway murders, for example?
These people who are all the ogs of the of the space were all
incredibly generous with their time and explain this to me in a way that I
think I could understand. And I began to see that there was an opportunity.
And it's not like I'm time sort of rocket scientist. I just realized
if this worked in the bear Brook case, the Golden State killer case,
I could see how this could work for potentially tens of thousands of other cases.
Here we are several years later, and they're solving and hundreds of cases
seeking of the proof is in the pudding co worker. Here we are with
the Idaho four, so not a cold case. They use forensic genealogy.
Within months of that case. A lot of people are really interested in that
case. People are following it. There's a massive chain on redd out of
people who are our dedicated to everything that comes out of there because they are
challenging the forensic genealogy in that case very publicly, because a lot of people
don't understand it. This is the problem that I've been hearing about, is
that a lot of the judges don't even understand it. Some of the lawyers
don't understand it. They're trying to figure out how to educate the powers that
be about this process and still maintain the privacy and integrity of it while doing
so. So it's a coburger case. The defense lawyer has asked to see
all the forensic genealogy materials, which the general consensus is that none of that
has any business being in the courtroom. It's literally irrelevant whether there was a
match to Aunt Dora in Kansas. No arrests happened without an str confirmation,
So it would be a little like saying I want to see every fingerprint in
the APHIS fingerprint file. Actually, I'm infuriated by some of this stuff.
I understand that a defense attorney's job is to zealously defend their client. Some
of this is ludicrous. I feel like the defense, I think they're probably
representing a guilty client and that can be a tough spot to be in.
That would imagine. And yeah, I referred to it as smoking mirrors.
There, it's smoking mars. They're trying to throw whatever where you throw spaghetti
at the wall to see af it'll stick. Whatever they can do to cause
chaos and mayhem and distract and take everyone's eye off the ball. That coburger.
His DNA was on that knife sheet, and there is no explanation for
that other than he was in that room and stabbed those girls. Innocentil proven,
guilty, find But there there was another case, and in fact,
I'm sure there's more that I have unaware of. A lot of this stuff
goes on behind the scenes pre trial hearings. Aware this is all hashed out,
and the defense demands the forensic genealogy information, and the state resists,
and the judge says, let me hear your arguments, And in one of
the cases, the defense actually demanded Para Bond's proprietary work product. Alan Graytock
had to get involved, and it went back and forth and back and forth,
and guess what, at the trial, absolutely none of that came in
because it doesn't matter. It is an investigative lead and the arrest has to
be based on tangible, scientific measurable DNA. So if Parabond or any of
the labs come back with we think you should be looking at this individual or
this family group, none of this moves forward in terms of an arrest until
there actually is a scientific match. All this is, and maybe TIP is
a bit of a maybe not the best fit, but it's the only one
I can come up with at the moment, and it seems to be the
one more all you're using. All that says is you should take a look
at this individual. It doesn't say he or she is guilty of murder.
Far from it. There's still a ton of additional confirming work and solid investigative
work that has to be done before you're moving towards an arrest. Some of
the legislation we've seen come out now it requires, for example, that they
do a code of search before they do forensic geology. Duh who was of
course, that would be just the worst police work on the planet. If
they didn't do that, then the requiring them to destroy the samples that they
take after they put them in the database. Fine, if the guy's in
a scent, we can work. There's some stuff in the legislation that is
making sense, but a lot of them are requiring that there is no arrest
on forends of genealogy alone. It's common sense, of course, there's not
an arrest on forensic genealogy alone. You would still need to be able to
build a case even if you get the DNA match, like you need to
be able to put the guy at the location. You need to be able
to show some kind of nexus with the victim. Otherwise your case isn't going
to hold up in court, no matter if there's DNA or not. Again,
it's all growing pains for this burgeoning field that has been a complete game
changer and will continue to solve cases at a rapid rate. And I think
cases that are not just cold but are the quickest, easiest way to solve
them is through this methodology. Other than our case, which we would love
to see FPD used in the coin of Parkway murders. Is there a case
that you're aware of that you would really like to see see FGG used just
to see if they can close the books on it. There are so many
unsold. I think I have a list in my phone, A list,
another, a list. We hear you like lists, I do, so
here's my list. So it used to be Delphi, right, and here
we are. I guess I'm because I'm in Massachusetts. I'm hertial to the
Molly Bush case where she was a lifeguard at a local pond and was literally
dragged into the woods in her bathing suit and raped and killed. And her
family's been fighting to get that case sallved for years and years. The Katie
Jenness case in Atlanta. Have you ever even heard of that case? No?
I don't think this is shocking to me that people haven't heard of this
case. It was a twenty twenty one case a woman who her romantic partner
and woman was at work that night, and this woman was a bartender,
and she finished work and went to walk their dog in a very public park
in downtown Atlanta at night. There were video cameras showing her looking into the
park, and like joggers and people around, she and the dog were both
found slaughtered. Oh I'm looking at it right now. Wow. Her autopsy
report, which Joseph Scott Morgan did for body bags in great detail, is
shocking. Someone took very much time to carve her up, including carving letters
into her Torso, oh my god. And this is in a public park
and it's unsolved that one. There has got to be because it's almost impossible
that the guy didn't leave something behind and he killed the dog, which was
a pit bull. So that one is a strangely unknown case which I've been
following. And then I really would like to know about Amy Mahalovic. You
know, Okay, I'm writing down this Katie Jenas case. This is very
interesting. There's so many your head kind of spins. It's it's hard with
the you asked me because some of the cases I have on this list or
which are like like my cases, I'd most like to see Russell and Shirley
Durman. That's a high on my list, the Lake o'coney murders where he
was beheaded and his head was never found. Some of the missing people ones.
That's harder because then you don't have the forensic genealogy aspect a lot of
the time, right Brandon Maitland, were all hoping the DNA that they found
on that necklace would turn out to be something, but it wasn't. Ryan
Shape, Where the hell is Brian Shafer and Jennifer Kessey? She is my
again. I hate the term red pet case. Some people use red light
case. Jennifer Kessey is mine. I must know what happened to her in
my lifetime, and her parents have set the absolute standard. They shouldn't have
had to go to the links they did and actually sue to get the case
files and get the case away from the police department in Orlando, but they
did. They are working her case now very hard, raising money on a
gofund need to do that. I really want to know what happened to her.
There's so much more. Can listeners suggest a case for you to cover
on DNA? I of course, Yeah, I've got suggestions flowing in my
inbox. Yeah. So there's multiple ways they can get in touch with us.
The Facebook page is very active. People message me all the time with
links for cases, Instagram, Patreon, and then the regular the show website.
We are happy to take suggestions. Again, the case does have to
be resolved in order to allow me to cover it. And the other thing
is I do get some suggestions for cases from other countries. The problem with
those Canada has got a few of these cases. Now. The problem with
those is obtaining the case materials. Because I'm not a citizen of those countries,
their sunshine laws don't operate the same way for me. So you know,
there might be a time when I find somebody I can access to get
materials that I need, but generally my cases have to be US based.
So then justs what's next for you other than continuing the process of trying to
clone yourself? Are we going to see you at crime cut again? And
let's help. And by the ways, I did clone myself, I make
myself twenty years younger. I'm sure you can do that. I would hop
yeah, yeah, I'm waiting to hear about it to see if I'm invited
back to crime Con. I wouldn't presume that I would be. It was
my first year there on podcast row. This year I had a ball.
I felt like quite a few listeners came up and said that they had never
heard of crime Con until I talked about it on my show, which was
surprising. I thought people absolutely. I thought it was for me, the
best crime con crowd ever. People seem to be there for really the right
reasons. I like the gravitas that has been brought to it a little bit
with Bill the program that you were invited to participate in. It's not quite
I know some people were a little offended because it is a crowd event of
true crime consumers, but I didn't see the like blood spattered t shirts as
much as we used to. It really is seems like everyone is there for
the right reason. I really enjoyed it. I had a ball. I
loved being near you guys on podcast row. I'm crossing my fingers that I
get invited back. We very much want you to be the We want you
to be our neighbor again, because that was a lot of fun. That
is going to do it for this episode of Mind Over Murdered. Jess,
thank you so much for joining us. And if everybody wants to listen to
your podcast, what network can they find you on? We are on every
podcast platform and the show is produced by Abject Entertainment, which is Mike Morford's
cast network. As an in house one. He and I also share Missing
Persons, which is an interview based podcast about missing persons. And there's a
bunch of other really good shows on there, but the show itself is available
anywhere you find your podcasts. Thanks so much for joining us today, Jess.
We appreciate your time. Thank you. That is going to do it
for this episode of mind Over Murder. Thank you so much for listening.
We'll see you next time. Mind Over Murder is a production of Absolute Zero
and Another Dog Productions. Our executive producers are Bill Thomas and Kristin Dilley.
Our logo art is by Pamela Arnois. Our theme music is by Kevin McLeod.
Mind Over Murder is distributed in partnership with Coral Space Media. You can
follow us on Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram. You can also follow our
page on the Colonial Parkway Murders on Facebook, and finally, you can follow
Bill Thomas on Twitter at Bill Thomas five six. Thank you for listening to
mind Over Murder.