Speaker 1: Welcome back to part two of our series about the
Speaker 1: disappearance of Nileen K. Marshall. Let's dive right back into it. So,
Speaker 1: over the course of the next few months, Child find
Speaker 1: of America received two more anonymous letters which were postmarked
Speaker 1: from Madison, Wisconsin, as well as two more anonymous phone
Speaker 1: calls from a man claiming to be the author of
Speaker 1: the letters, and he apparently shared enough details to indicate
Speaker 1: that this was the same person who wrote the original letter,
Speaker 1: but they have not disclosed any information about what was
Speaker 1: revealed during these additional phone calls or additional letters. The
Speaker 1: FBI got involved and trace these calls to a booth
Speaker 1: in the town of Edgerton, which is nearly thirty miles
Speaker 1: southeast of Madison, but all communication from the man seized
Speaker 1: after May of nineteen eighty six, and like I mentioned earlier,
Speaker 1: a lot of the information from these letters has continued
Speaker 1: to be withheld from the public to this day. But
Speaker 1: one detail which they did later release is that the
Speaker 1: author claimed that his parents and his nine year old
Speaker 1: sister were once killed in a car accident.
Speaker 2: Well that's interesting, So it feels like, Okay, is this
Speaker 2: a detail that you're giving in order to make it
Speaker 2: appear like you're sharing something about yourself or is this
Speaker 2: completely fabricated and a red herring, And that your objective
Speaker 2: as the letter writer, as the potential abductor of Nileen,
Speaker 2: is to put out a scenario or put out a
Speaker 2: narrative that is most palatable to you, and you truly
Speaker 2: don't want to get caught. You just want people to
Speaker 2: believe that she's still alive and being cared for. And
Speaker 2: in doing that, you are going to give background information.
Speaker 2: Are you going to choose to give accurate background information? Well,
Speaker 2: if you want to get caught, yeah, But if your
Speaker 2: objective is to fool law enforcement and to make them
Speaker 2: just go along on this journey with you, then you're
Speaker 2: going to concoct details that are false.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Like I have to assume law enforcement looked into
Speaker 1: this angle and look for people from Madison who may
Speaker 1: have lost their parents and their nine year old sister
Speaker 1: in a car accident. But presumably this came up empty.
Speaker 1: And it makes me wonder if he is making up
Speaker 1: this story. It's just a way to justify his actions,
Speaker 1: saying I've had a tough life. I lost my entire
Speaker 1: family in an accident when I was young, and I'm
Speaker 1: all alone, so therefore it's okay for me to just
Speaker 1: pick up this random girl walking down the road and
Speaker 1: raise her as my own, even though I stole her
Speaker 1: from her own parents.
Speaker 2: And like, even if those details were true, given the
Speaker 2: time period, I'm thinking, like, oh, it'd be easy to
Speaker 2: do database searches and to like figure out this information.
Speaker 2: But I just don't think it would be very easy.
Speaker 2: During that time period, law enforcement agencies weren't very good
Speaker 2: at speaking to each other, and a lot of times
Speaker 2: today they're not that great at speaking to each other,
Speaker 2: and if they put all the information into a database
Speaker 2: is like TBD. So to assume that just because he
Speaker 2: put that information out there that they would be able
Speaker 2: to find that, I guess is maybe overstating their abilities
Speaker 2: based on the technology of the time. But I also
Speaker 2: think it's more when you put information out there, somebody
Speaker 2: is going to be triggered by that if you put
Speaker 2: it out to the public, more so than law enforcement, right, Like,
Speaker 2: because if it would have been his sister and his
Speaker 2: parents many many years ago, who knows how well that
Speaker 2: was documented or put into any database, But yet there
Speaker 2: would have been people that would have known this family
Speaker 2: and something would go, oh, I know, like that was
Speaker 2: the Joneses or whomever.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's what I'm thinking is that they didn't release
Speaker 1: this initially, but they probably thinking that, hey, this might
Speaker 1: ring a bell, like someone will remember growing up with
Speaker 1: someone who lost their parents a nine year old sister
Speaker 1: in an accident, and may be it will compel someone
Speaker 1: to come forward. But unfortunately it doesn't look like this
Speaker 1: lad anywhere, So, like I said, it was featured on
Speaker 1: Unsolved Mysteries in November of nineteen ninety and contained a
Speaker 1: heartbreaking interview with Nileen's mother Nancy, where she made this
Speaker 1: statement quote, I still look for I always will every
Speaker 1: time I'm at an airport, every time I'm at a resort,
Speaker 1: every time I'm at an amusement park. Sure I look
Speaker 1: like I'm having a good time, but I'm looking for
Speaker 1: my child every minute that i'm out end quote. And
Speaker 1: that's so sad because this is one case where, like
Speaker 1: I'm sure many parents of missing children come to terms
Speaker 1: with the fact that they're probably dead, but this involves
Speaker 1: a perpetrator who claims that he has her and is
Speaker 1: still raising her out there somewhere under a new identity.
Speaker 1: So you can understand Nancy's feeling that every time she
Speaker 1: goes out, I'm going to look for all the children
Speaker 1: and just kind of pray that maybe I'll see Nileen
Speaker 1: out there somewhere being raised by a different person.
Speaker 2: That's so sad, and I don't know what is the
Speaker 2: right answer. I think it would vary from parent to
Speaker 2: parent and situation. But to have that hope and to
Speaker 2: hold on to that hope is one thing. But to
Speaker 2: know the reality of what actually happened to your child,
Speaker 2: I know, would be incredibly deflating. And some people would
Speaker 2: prefer that, but other people would likely choose to hold
Speaker 2: on to hope just because it gives them something to
Speaker 2: keep going and to keep trucking forward even though there
Speaker 2: isn't a resolution. And I wouldn't judge either decision, because obviously,
Speaker 2: to lose a child and to have to contend with
Speaker 2: the potential outcomes whether your child is alive or dead
Speaker 2: and what may have happened to them is such a
Speaker 2: weighty endeavor and any parent that has to go through this,
Speaker 2: and we've covered so many of these cases, it's monumental
Speaker 2: the amount of impact, and it can't be overstated that
Speaker 2: it has both on mental and physical health. There is
Speaker 2: something where when hope is gone and the reality sets in,
Speaker 2: it's a whole other kind of trauma that you have
Speaker 2: to deal with.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, exactly. And we've heard other cases where the
Speaker 1: parents of missing children die at young ages just because
Speaker 1: of all the stress and the grief. And she lost
Speaker 1: Nileen at the age of four, and Nilen, if she
Speaker 1: had still been alive at the time Nancy gave that interview,
Speaker 1: would have been twelve years old at the time, So
Speaker 1: you got to understand, like, what a weird situation to be.
Speaker 1: She's out in public and she's looking for like twelve
Speaker 1: year old girls who were older than Nileen and thinking,
Speaker 1: wow that she kind of has a resemblance to her.
Speaker 1: Could that be Nileen? And it's just so hard to
Speaker 1: have any peace when you have to live like that.
Speaker 1: So one of the strangest elements of the Unsolved Mystery
Speaker 1: section is that they mentioned that a couple months before
Speaker 1: the segment was filmed on Nileen's uncle learned about another
Speaker 1: unsolved child abduction in a different part of the country
Speaker 1: where the child had been abducted by a couple, an
Speaker 1: unidentified man and woman, and when he saw the two
Speaker 1: composite sketches of this couple he who were wanted for questioning.
Speaker 1: In that case, the uncle became convinced that he had
Speaker 1: seen them and Helen a National four during the first
Speaker 1: day of the original search effort for an Eyleen. So
Speaker 1: they released the composite sketches during the Unsolved Mystery segment.
Speaker 1: Yet they did not release the composite sketch of the
Speaker 1: man in the purple jogging suit. And I find that
Speaker 1: kind of odd because when you look at those sketches,
Speaker 1: they look like a generic man and woman, and I
Speaker 1: have a feeling the uncle might have just been trying
Speaker 1: to hold on to hope, because I don't know how
Speaker 1: we could look at these sketches seven years later and
Speaker 1: then just think, oh, yeah, I remember seeing them in
Speaker 1: the forest during the search effort for an Eileen. Yeah.
Speaker 1: It's kind of weird that they would lease this pretty
Speaker 1: thid lead and show these sketches on TV, yet not
Speaker 1: the sketch of the man in the jogging suit.
Speaker 2: Maybe it was more of the attitude that information from
Speaker 2: an adult is more credible than information from children. But
Speaker 2: in this specific case, I would take the information from children,
Speaker 2: and like we've talked about how that was a product
Speaker 2: of the time. I think that view that maybe children
Speaker 2: weren't there to provide accurate information was largely a product
Speaker 2: of its time. That we know that yes, children can
Speaker 2: make things up, but oftentimes they have accurate memories of
Speaker 2: things that happened if you can piece it together. And
Speaker 2: like in this case specifically, I think it's incredibly pertinent
Speaker 2: information because we have multiple children who don't know each
Speaker 2: other sharing the same stuff. And I find it wild
Speaker 2: that they did not put that composite sketch of the
Speaker 2: purple jogging suit guy out there that they gained through
Speaker 2: the hypnosis sessions with the children, But seven years later
Speaker 2: the uncle thinks that he saw this couple. We now
Speaker 2: know there's been so many studies on eyewitness identification. There's
Speaker 2: been there's a lot of videos out there. You could
Speaker 2: just go and watch them. How people miss key details
Speaker 2: and it's just the way that our mind works. We
Speaker 2: think that it's infallible and that we remember everything accurately,
Speaker 2: but the reality is we just we don't. And so,
Speaker 2: like Robin just said, the uncle is trying to hold
Speaker 2: on to some kind of hope, and I cannot fault
Speaker 2: him for that. I think it's sort of like the
Speaker 2: mom seeing Nileen everywhere, seeing her where she is, because
Speaker 2: you truly hope that this is something that is going
Speaker 2: to lead to your daughter or in this case, to
Speaker 2: your niece.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. And just the fact that the uncle said
Speaker 1: he saw them during the search effort and not the
Speaker 1: actual day that Nileen went missing, and he didn't see
Speaker 1: her anywhere near the Nileen And like maybe a couple
Speaker 1: who looked like that showed up for the search effort,
Speaker 1: but that doesn't mean they were involved. They could have
Speaker 1: just been volunteers who were trying to help. But after
Speaker 1: so much time, I can understand why he would want
Speaker 1: to grasp to any lead that he can. So after
Speaker 1: the episode aired, the show's telecenter received a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of new tips, but the most promising one was an
Speaker 1: official from a school in Sawassin, which is a suburban
Speaker 1: community located just south of Vancouver, British Columbia, your Neck
Speaker 1: of the Woods. He saw the age progress photo of
Speaker 1: Nileen and became convinced that she was a thirteen year
Speaker 1: old student at his school named Mary Ann Kelly. For
Speaker 1: the past six years, Mary and her father, Robert William Kelly,
Speaker 1: who was raising her alone as a single father. Have
Speaker 1: been living just across the US border in the communit
Speaker 1: unity of Port Robert's, Washington, and would cross the border
Speaker 1: to attend this school in Sawassen.
Speaker 2: It's Towahson, Oh, Towason.
Speaker 1: Sorry, yeah, I figured you would know because you're from
Speaker 1: the area. But the school staff always had their suspicions
Speaker 1: about Robert because he never provided them with a phone number,
Speaker 1: and whenever they asked for an address, he always told
Speaker 1: them that they were between addresses. And whenever Robert dropped
Speaker 1: Mary off at school every morning, he would always go
Speaker 1: to her classroom and look through the windows to make
Speaker 1: sure she was there. So they started wondering could this
Speaker 1: be an abducted child being raised by her kidnapper? And
Speaker 1: because they thought that Mary had a resemblance to Nileen,
Speaker 1: the agent hands composite sketch. That's why they decided to
Speaker 1: call the Unsolved Mysteries Telecenter. Though in retrospect, it seems
Speaker 1: pretty wild that like someone who kidnapped a child would
Speaker 1: be living in Washington State and crossing over the border
Speaker 1: every day to take their child to a school in
Speaker 1: British Columbia. I mean, I know it was nineteen ninety
Speaker 1: when you didn't have to have a passport to go
Speaker 1: over the border. But that just seems incredibly risky.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're taking your life into your hands literally every day,
Speaker 2: crossing the border, being questioned, having this child with you,
Speaker 2: and so these two things they seem incongruous to me.
Speaker 2: So he's so concerned that he's going to be like
Speaker 2: looking through the window and almost seeming sketchy about it.
Speaker 2: But yet he's willing to cross a border and be
Speaker 2: questioned by border agents or border guards, and they are
Speaker 2: notoriously stringent for details. So if he didn't have the
Speaker 2: right documentation or paperwork or they got a weird vibe,
Speaker 2: he's going to have his butt hauled in there, and
Speaker 2: more questions are going to be asked. So it leads
Speaker 2: me to believe that if you've abducted a child, why
Speaker 2: take that risk every single day that you've got to
Speaker 2: take that child to school. It just doesn't add up
Speaker 2: for me.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they never explained why he did that. I don't
Speaker 1: know if maybe there just weren't any schools available in
Speaker 1: Port Roberts on the US side of the border, so
Speaker 1: he was forced to take her to this one in
Speaker 1: British Columbia. But regardless, the FBI took this lead seriously
Speaker 1: and decided to performed surveillance on the Kellys, and after
Speaker 1: looking at Mari Anne's school records, the FBI was able
Speaker 1: to confirm that yes, they were false and that even
Speaker 1: if this girl wasn't Nileen, she may be another abducted child.
Speaker 1: They managed to obtain a search warrant for the Kelly
Speaker 1: family and it turned out that yes, Mary was not
Speaker 1: actually Nileen, but she was a completely different missing child
Speaker 1: who had been abducted by her non custodial father and
Speaker 1: they had been on the run for the past eight years.
Speaker 1: So during a search of the Kelly residents, the FBI
Speaker 1: uncovered a box containing a number of personal items, including
Speaker 1: a birth certificate with the name Monica Bania. The box
Speaker 1: also contained a number of photographs which had been taken
Speaker 1: years earlier and featured Robert and Mary alongside a woman
Speaker 1: named Rosemary Banilla Levi, and it turned out that Rosemary
Speaker 1: had once been married to this Robert William Kelly, but
Speaker 1: that was not his real name. He was actually a
Speaker 1: guy named Guillermo Ruiz Bania, and that to this child,
Speaker 1: Mary Anne Kelly was actually his daughter Monica, whom Guillermo
Speaker 1: had abducted from his mother in California years earlier.
Speaker 2: Okay, wow, so did she get reunited with her mother?
Speaker 1: She did, yes, like thankfully, this was like a non
Speaker 1: custodial abductions by her own father, so it wasn't one
Speaker 1: where she was being kidnapped and abused or anything like that.
Speaker 1: It turned out that he originally lived in Burbank, California.
Speaker 1: Guillermo and Rosemary were married and Monica was about four
Speaker 1: years old at the time, but apparently things fell apart
Speaker 1: when Guillermo developed a very bizarre obsession with John Lennon.
Speaker 1: After Lennon was assassinated in December of nineteen eighty, Guillermo
Speaker 1: apparently cried NonStop for two weeks and became convinced that
Speaker 1: he was the reincarnation of John Lennin, so he started
Speaker 1: altering his appearance to look as much like him as possible.
Speaker 1: He was growing out his hair, growing a beard, putting
Speaker 1: on glasses like Lenin even though he didn't actually need them,
Speaker 1: and he told Rosemary that he wanted her to become
Speaker 1: just like John Lennon's wife, Yoko Ono, and this was
Speaker 1: pretty much the breaking point where Rosemary told Guillermo, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think I want to divorce you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this sounds really bizarre. It sounds like Guillermo is
Speaker 2: having a bit of a break with reality and there's
Speaker 2: potentially some mental illness at play here. So to be
Speaker 2: the reincarnation of somebody, wouldn't they have had to have
Speaker 2: been dead at the same time, around when you were
Speaker 2: being born? Or did John Lennon's soul just like jump
Speaker 2: into his body?
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's on the Unsolved Mystery segment. They show like
Speaker 1: a couple of old photos of Guerimo from nineteen eighty
Speaker 1: and it's just so creepy. He seems to think that
Speaker 1: Glennon just jumped into his body after he was assassinated,
Speaker 1: and he's trying as much as possible to look like him.
Speaker 1: And I know that they were planning a divorce. But
Speaker 1: in September of nineteen eighty two, Rosemary returned home from
Speaker 1: work and was shocked to discover that Guillermo had emptied
Speaker 1: the house of all of their personal possessions and ran
Speaker 1: off with Monica. And the following day, Rosemay received a
Speaker 1: call from one of Gierimo's family members, who told her
Speaker 1: that she would never see Monica again, and that Monica
Speaker 1: had been told that her mother was dead, and because
Speaker 1: at that time Guillermo was technically still a legal guardian
Speaker 1: of Monica, the police would not be able to launch
Speaker 1: an official missing person's investigation until the courts illegally awarded
Speaker 1: Rosemary full custody of her daughter two months later. But
Speaker 1: by that point so much time had passed that Guiamo
Speaker 1: and Monica were long gone and it seems like they
Speaker 1: arrived in Port Roberts, Washington and started a new life
Speaker 1: under a new identity under the names Robert and Mary Kelly,
Speaker 1: and that Guillermo was going across the border every day
Speaker 1: and taking Monica to this school in British Columbia, and
Speaker 1: that the police had no idea where they were even
Speaker 1: though she was reported missing, and the investigation was at
Speaker 1: a dead end when by pure chance they were found
Speaker 1: because of unsolved mysteries, because a tipster believed that Monica
Speaker 1: was Nileen K. Marshall.
Speaker 2: This is such a bizarre element of this case, adding
Speaker 2: in Guillermo crossing the border from Port Roberts into Tawawson
Speaker 2: to take his daughter to school, like you're opening yourself
Speaker 2: up to so much risk. I wonder what the school
Speaker 2: situation Roberts was and why he felt like he needed
Speaker 2: to cross the border. Because if you're going so far
Speaker 2: as to change the name of your child, you're changing
Speaker 2: your name. You're doing everything you can to try to
Speaker 2: evade Rosemary and to keep your daughter. And like, my
Speaker 2: heart goes out to Rosemary. I cannot imagine what it
Speaker 2: would feel like to come home and to look around
Speaker 2: and your belongings are gone. Your husband is gone, which
Speaker 2: maybe you don't care so much about that part, because
Speaker 2: things were fractured or falling apart with respect to your marriage,
Speaker 2: but your daughter, and I'm sure that broke her heart.
Speaker 2: Not having any proper recourse, these non custodial parental abductions,
Speaker 2: they're mind boggling to me because it happens so often,
Speaker 2: and it becomes really difficult when that parent is from
Speaker 2: a different country and then they take the child there
Speaker 2: any kind of legal recourse trying to get that child
Speaker 2: back is so so difficult. So my heart breaks for
Speaker 2: what she had to endure here. I can't even imagine.
Speaker 2: So at the very least, at least we saw mother
Speaker 2: and child reunited in this specific case.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's just such a crazy twist of this whole
Speaker 1: story because after Monica's identity was confirmed, she was finally
Speaker 1: brought back to her mother in Burbank, and it was
Speaker 1: just in time for Christmas that year, so unsolved mysteries
Speaker 1: filmed and emotional reunion where Monica got to meet her
Speaker 1: half brother Dorian for the first time because Rosemary had
Speaker 1: gone on to have another child, and Guillermo was finally
Speaker 1: arrested in charge with parental kidnapping. So even though the
Speaker 1: Nileen K. Marshall case has remained unsolved that it is
Speaker 1: incredibly sad story. The silver lining is just by pure coincidence.
Speaker 1: It paved the way to a happy ending in another case,
Speaker 1: and a missing children's case which had not gotten any
Speaker 1: publicity at all, just wound up being solved purely by
Speaker 1: accident because of a case mistaken identity.
Speaker 2: And maybe you share this detail, but I'm just cure
Speaker 2: how many years was Guillermo on the run with Monica?
Speaker 1: Eight years like they had successfully gotten away with it,
Speaker 1: and who knows how much longer they would have been
Speaker 1: able to remain hidden out. It's possible she never would
Speaker 1: have been found in returned to her mother if Nileen's
Speaker 1: case enopen featured on Unsow Mysteries, and the school official
Speaker 1: confused Monica for Nileen K. Marshall.
Speaker 2: I wonder how Guillermo got Monica to keep quiet during
Speaker 2: that whole time period and not say anything about her
Speaker 2: mother or the situation. Like I wonder if he was
Speaker 2: encouraging her not to make any friends or not to
Speaker 2: make any connections. I would be interested in what her
Speaker 2: interpersonal dynamics were like with her classmates.
Speaker 1: Well, I know that Giermo's family told Rosemary that Guillermo
Speaker 1: had actually told Monica that her mother was dead as
Speaker 1: kind of logic for running off, So she probably believed
Speaker 1: him because she was only like five years old when
Speaker 1: she went missing and was very impressionable. But at least
Speaker 1: the silver lining is that Monica did say that Guillermo
Speaker 1: was not abusive or anything that even though he kept
Speaker 1: a close eye on or, he did treat her fairly
Speaker 1: well while they were on the run. But thankfully she
Speaker 1: did finally get to return to her mother. So several
Speaker 1: months after the Unsolved Mystery segment air, there would be
Speaker 1: another bizarre turn of events when a forty two year
Speaker 1: old sex offender named Richard James Wilson turned himself into
Speaker 1: the police in the town of Livingston, Montana. Seven years earlier,
Speaker 1: Wilson had been charged for the sexual assault of a
Speaker 1: minor and received a sense of probation, but now told
Speaker 1: police that he was responsible for the murder of Nileen K. Marshall,
Speaker 1: as well as another woman from the town of Great Falls, Montana,
Speaker 1: though none of the sources say who this other woman
Speaker 1: was supposed to be. Wilson even revealed a location the
Speaker 1: Elkhorn Mountains where he claimed that he disposed of Nyelen's remains,
Speaker 1: and they performed a search of the area but turned
Speaker 1: up nothing. He was held in jail for six days,
Speaker 1: but released after investigators determined that there was no evidence
Speaker 1: to substantiate his confession and charge him with murder. And
Speaker 1: it turned out that Wilson had a documented history of
Speaker 1: mental illness and made a bunch of inconsistent statements when
Speaker 1: he talked about we abducted Nileen. So it seems like
Speaker 1: I don't think they completely ruled them out as a suspect,
Speaker 1: but they are inclined to believe that you just kind
Speaker 1: of made a false confession for reasons we don't know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I always wonder like why people what motivates them,
Speaker 2: And I know it's highly individual what people are going through,
Speaker 2: their personal stressors, what their relationship with reality is at
Speaker 2: the time, But false confessions are so befuddling, and I
Speaker 2: think even more so during that time period because people
Speaker 2: were less likely to believe that individuals would give false confessions,
Speaker 2: So that resulted in a lot of wrongful incarcerations. So
Speaker 2: it's good when you actually hear that law enforcement is
Speaker 2: able to suss out when somebody is giving a false
Speaker 2: confession during this time period.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I am glad that they didn't just take him
Speaker 1: out his word and say, Yay, we've solved the case.
Speaker 1: We can keep this guy in custody. But it always
Speaker 1: blows my mind when people falsely confess to murdering a child,
Speaker 1: Like I can see them confessing to crimes if they
Speaker 1: wanted maybe to go to prison, or they wanted the attention.
Speaker 1: But if you're charged with this and sent to prison,
Speaker 1: you were going to be treated as the absolute lowest
Speaker 1: scum of humanity there if they believe you're a child killer.
Speaker 1: So it just seems crazy that he thought, well, I'm
Speaker 1: going to turn myself into the police and say that
Speaker 1: I killed a four year old.
Speaker 2: It always reminds me of the John beIN a Ramsey
Speaker 2: case and John Mark Carr.
Speaker 1: Oh yes, yes, another guy who confessed to murdering her,
Speaker 1: even though the confession didn't check out. So believe it
Speaker 1: or not. This story gets even crazier because by nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety five, the Marshall family had relocated to Japan after
Speaker 1: Kim was transferred there for his job, but he was
Speaker 1: informed that he was going to receive a new transfer
Speaker 1: to a Mexico so while Kim remained in Japan with
Speaker 1: the kids, Nancy traveled to Mexico City in order to
Speaker 1: look for new houses for the family and was staying
Speaker 1: at the Radison Praiseo Hotel. But on July to twenty fourth,
Speaker 1: she was found dead inside her hotel room at the
Speaker 1: age of forty two. She was hanging from a shower
Speaker 1: rod in the bathroom, and Kim was actually at an
Speaker 1: airport check in desk in Tokyo preparing to fly to
Speaker 1: Mexico City to join Nancy when he was informed about
Speaker 1: her death. And believe it or not, even though Nancy
Speaker 1: was found hanging with her hands tied behind her back
Speaker 1: and had been bruised, beaten, and sexually assaulted. The Mexican
Speaker 1: authorities ruled her death to be a suicide.
Speaker 2: Mexico does not have a very good history with regards
Speaker 2: to murders of women. Femicide in Mexico is a huge problem,
Speaker 2: and with all of the drug wars and everything, it's
Speaker 2: just becomes this peripheral storyline that is secondary to all
Speaker 2: of the violence inflicted because of drugs, and it is
Speaker 2: really sad. There's been a number of podcasts on it
Speaker 2: and all these murders of women and how it seems
Speaker 2: to be that there's these serial killers that are getting
Speaker 2: away with murdering women across the border, and it's heartbreaking.
Speaker 2: I'm wondering if this was targeted or if this was
Speaker 2: just a predator that happened upon her, and it was
Speaker 2: just convenient for the police to just write it off
Speaker 2: as a suicide, even though we rarely see it does happen.
Speaker 2: People do buind their own hands and end their own lives,
Speaker 2: but it's a very complicated thing. We saw that in
Speaker 2: the case of Rebecca's how whether or not she was
Speaker 2: murdered or whether or not it was indeed suicide. So
Speaker 2: people will debate that back and forth, and I think
Speaker 2: this is not similar in the way that there is
Speaker 2: evidence that she was sexually assaulted and that she was beaten,
Speaker 2: So you're adding a whole other layer there where it's
Speaker 2: like she didn't sexually assault herself and she didn't beat herself.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. I think like Nancy was probably just targeted
Speaker 1: at random by someone who wanted to rob her, and
Speaker 1: that the police were just incredibly lazy and didn't want
Speaker 1: to perform a proper homicide investigation. I know that when
Speaker 1: Kim spoke to Nancy's friends whom she had met up
Speaker 1: with on the night before her body was found, they
Speaker 1: all said that yet she seemed happy, nothing was out
Speaker 1: of the ordinary. She was definitely not suicidal. And it
Speaker 1: also turned out that our hotel room door had been
Speaker 1: kicked in, number of her valuables, including her wedding ring,
Speaker 1: were missing. So yeah, it really seems like she was
Speaker 1: targeted for a robbery, but investigators, because they were lazy,
Speaker 1: just stood by their suicide ruling and wouldn't perform a
Speaker 1: proper investigation. So Kim got absolutely outraged by this. He
Speaker 1: hired his own private investigator, and he actually got the
Speaker 1: state department involved and after this caused some controversy, the
Speaker 1: Mexican authorities have reluctantly agreed to change the status of
Speaker 1: Nancy's case to undetermined and under investigation, though they didn't
Speaker 1: officially reclassify it as a homicide. But unfortunately, the state
Speaker 1: department advised Kim that if he continued to push for
Speaker 1: a homicide investigation, the police would just hold onto her
Speaker 1: body until it was solved, which might never happen, and
Speaker 1: would not release Nancy's body for burial. So Kim ultimately
Speaker 1: decided to relent and call off as private investigator. So
Speaker 1: Nancy's body was finally returned to her family and brought
Speaker 1: back to the United States, and she was buried in
Speaker 1: her hometown of Allen, Texas. Nancy's murderer is technically still
Speaker 1: consider to be unsolved, but her death is not believed
Speaker 1: to have any connection to dye Leen's disappearance. It just
Speaker 1: shows that this poor family has just had so much
Speaker 1: tragedy inflicted on them.
Speaker 2: We see this time and time again where it feels
Speaker 2: like the probability is so low that tragedy would strike
Speaker 2: in the same capacity. I mean, this appears like it
Speaker 2: was at random and somebody was going to rob her,
Speaker 2: and so they decided to sexually assault and kill her
Speaker 2: at the same time. But you think of families like
Speaker 2: the Kennedy's where there's tragedy after tragedy after tragedy, and
Speaker 2: it's almost like tragedy begets more tragedy that wouldn't have happened.
Speaker 2: If you look at like the movie Sliding Doors, had
Speaker 2: Nileen not been abducted, then we wouldn't see Nancy being murdered,
Speaker 2: and we wouldn't see Kim being without his daughter and
Speaker 2: without his wife. So this is just incredibly heartbreaking to
Speaker 2: think that, just by chance, being in the wrong place
Speaker 2: at the wrong time, that this could happen to you.
Speaker 2: And so I truly truly feel for this family. I
Speaker 2: can't imagine what that type of loss would do. And
Speaker 2: to think you're still grappling with the death or not
Speaker 2: death what you might assume to be the death, but
Speaker 2: your daughter being missing, thinking maybe she's alive, maybe she's deceased,
Speaker 2: and then to have your wife be killed in such
Speaker 2: a capacity, and then you've got a whole other fight
Speaker 2: on your hands because you're fighting with the Mexican authorities
Speaker 2: who are essentially holding her body hostage. Saying, call off
Speaker 2: your dogs, stop investigating. We will put it as undetermined
Speaker 2: and under investigation, which, like, I'm sorry, but I find
Speaker 2: that to be a little bit laughable. Are you going
Speaker 2: to put it under investigation? Are you going to allocate
Speaker 2: any resources to investigating who did this? I don't personally believe.
Speaker 2: So I think the undetermined is just how you get
Speaker 2: the family off of your backs. And they are dealing
Speaker 2: in Mexico with a lot of murders and a lot
Speaker 2: of violence that a lot of it has to do
Speaker 2: with drug wars during that time period as well. So
Speaker 2: imagine that they have their hands full and that they're
Speaker 2: looking at the death of a foreigner and thinking it's
Speaker 2: so much easier to just write this off as a suicide.
Speaker 2: This man is being incredibly annoying, and so how can
Speaker 2: we get him to leave us alone? And so they
Speaker 2: acquiesce and say, Okay, I'm determined is what we're going
Speaker 2: to go with, and it's going to be under investigation,
Speaker 2: which I just don't believe the under investigation part.
Speaker 1: Of it, definitely, And I've heard horror stories that even
Speaker 1: if they say they're going to investigate and hold onto
Speaker 1: the body for evidence, that sometimes they just bury them
Speaker 1: in an unmarked grave somewhere to get rid of it.
Speaker 1: So I can to understand Kim's logic feeling that if
Speaker 1: I keep this investigation open, I may never see Nancy's
Speaker 1: body again. So that's why I have to back off
Speaker 1: to ensure that she receives a proper burial on American soil.
Speaker 1: But yeah, looking back at the Unsolved Mystery segment, it's
Speaker 1: so poignant to see Nancy's interview where she's talking about
Speaker 1: c Ni Leen in public places all the time knowing
Speaker 1: that she herself would be murdered just a couple of
Speaker 1: years after that was filmed. I remember finding out that
Speaker 1: Nancy had died, and initially assumed that she probably died
Speaker 1: of grief for health problems from losing her own child,
Speaker 1: and then was just blown away many years later when
Speaker 1: I found out that she herself had been murdered in Mexico.
Speaker 1: So there'd be another bizarre lead. In June of nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety eight, when they were looking into the possibility that
Speaker 1: Nileen was a young woman who had been seen in
Speaker 1: New Orleans, Louisiana, two years earlier. According to a nurse,
Speaker 1: a young pregnant woman had visited the hospital in New
Speaker 1: Orleans alongside an older man in hopes of being admitted
Speaker 1: to give birth. The woman said that her name was
Speaker 1: Helena and that she was nineteen years old. But while
Speaker 1: she said she did not remember much about her childhood,
Speaker 1: she thought her mother's name might have been Nileen. She
Speaker 1: also mentioned having grown up in another country, even though
Speaker 1: she did not speak with any trace of an accent,
Speaker 1: so the staff thought there was something odd about the
Speaker 1: man and the woman, but when they tried to ask
Speaker 1: them more questions about her identity and medical history, the
Speaker 1: couple left the hospital without even being admitted or giving birth,
Speaker 1: so naturally this raised some red flags. A couple weeks
Speaker 1: after this, one of the nurses saw a rerun of
Speaker 1: the Nileen ky Marshall's segment on Unsow Mysteries and became
Speaker 1: convinced that this young woman might be her, particularly since
Speaker 1: she said her name was Helena, which of course was
Speaker 1: the same name as Helena National Forest, the location where
Speaker 1: Nileen went missing. So by nineteen ninety eight, they finally
Speaker 1: found the mysterious Helena and her male companion in Oklahoma City,
Speaker 1: and when questioned, Helena agreed to provide a sample of
Speaker 1: her DNA. It turned out that Nancy Hyde provided a
Speaker 1: sample of her blood to the FBI ten years earlier,
Speaker 1: but it had greatly degraded by this point, so they
Speaker 1: actually had to track down Nilen's biological father, Bill Briscoe,
Speaker 1: to get a sample of his DNA, because of course
Speaker 1: Kim Marshall was just Nilen's stepfather, so he wouldn't have
Speaker 1: had the same DNA. But they did a comparison and
Speaker 1: finally ruled out the possibility that this woman Helena was
Speaker 1: Nileen because the DNA did not match. But unfortunately there's
Speaker 1: no follow up. So I would really like to know
Speaker 1: more about Helena's backstory, since it sounded like something awfully
Speaker 1: sketchy was going on with her and this other.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's all of these interesting subplots along with this case,
Speaker 2: but yeah, I would like to know what was going
Speaker 2: on with Helena. If you're about to give birth, what
Speaker 2: would be the impetus for leaving the hospital? You're in
Speaker 2: a safe place where you can deliver your baby, and
Speaker 2: you're running away from that safe place to go where
Speaker 2: and why? I want to know more.
Speaker 1: Yeah, unfortunately we don't have more. At least with Monica Bania,
Speaker 1: we finally got the full backstory, but it is kind
Speaker 1: of crazy that they found no less than two older
Speaker 1: children who people thought might be Nileen and were ruled out,
Speaker 1: but seem to have interesting abduction stories of their own.
Speaker 1: So by the time this development occurred in nineteen ninety eight,
Speaker 1: Kim Marshall had got remarried and relocated to Texas with
Speaker 1: Nileen's two other siblings, Nathan and Noreen. But during an
Speaker 1: interview with Nancy's sister, Mickey Kinsley, she revealed that there
Speaker 1: have been a lot of friction between her side of
Speaker 1: the family and Kim, as she did not believe that
Speaker 1: Kim was forthcoming about the details of Nancy's death with them,
Speaker 1: and also alleged that Kim was abusive towards his family.
Speaker 1: Kim responded by stating that Nancy's family had serious problems
Speaker 1: of their own and that Nancy had al always had
Speaker 1: issues with them and was practically a strange from her
Speaker 1: side of the family, so he said, you should take
Speaker 1: anything they say with a grain of salt because they
Speaker 1: just don't personally like me. And they also interviewed Nileen's
Speaker 1: younger sister, Noraene, who publicly denied the allegations that her
Speaker 1: father was abusive, and she stated, quote, my father has
Speaker 1: never laid a hand on us. It really angers. My
Speaker 1: father has been supportive of Nathan and I and done
Speaker 1: whatever he could for us end quote.
Speaker 2: I mean, I think it's pretty natural with families for
Speaker 2: there to be some kind of infighting and finger pointing,
Speaker 2: especially when there isn't a resolution. But it feels so
Speaker 2: protracted this information about Kim coming out, does it not?
Speaker 1: It does? Yeah, And the only time I've ever seen
Speaker 1: any comment from law enforcement is during an news segment
Speaker 1: from twenty thirteen where the interviewed the Jefferson County Sheriff
Speaker 1: at that time, Craig Doolittle, who stated, quote, from what
Speaker 1: I've been told, the stepfather was and was throughout the investigation,
Speaker 1: considered to be a person of interest end quote. But
Speaker 1: other than that, I haven't heard anything. But if you
Speaker 1: research this case online on discussion boards and message boards,
Speaker 1: you'll see a lot of uncorroborated rumors in innuendo about
Speaker 1: Kim possibly being not only responsible for ni Leen's disappearance,
Speaker 1: but arranging for Nancy's murder in Mexico City, even though
Speaker 1: he was in Tokyo at the time. But of course,
Speaker 1: the few comments we have seen from Noreen, she talks
Speaker 1: about him as a loving father and says there are
Speaker 1: no problems in the marriage, no problems with the children.
Speaker 1: And I've noticed apparently that some of these comments online
Speaker 1: are apparently from family members of Bill Briscoe, who was
Speaker 1: ni Lean's biological father, who played no role in her
Speaker 1: life whatsoever. And Kim legally adopted Nileen when he married
Speaker 1: Nancy and pretty much raised her as her own daughter.
Speaker 1: So you've not seen any indication that Kim ever did
Speaker 1: anything wrong. It seems like it's nothing more than rumors
Speaker 1: here saying innuendo. And when you look at the logistics,
Speaker 1: like I have to assume that Kim's like whereabouts on
Speaker 1: the entire day Nileen went missing would have been accounted for.
Speaker 1: He was at a picnic with other people. He probably
Speaker 1: didn't have many moments when he was off by himself.
Speaker 1: So I have a hard time believing, even though the
Speaker 1: sheriff says he was a person of interest, that he
Speaker 1: would have been responsible for Nileen's disappearance.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it feels like these insults and these critiques of
Speaker 2: Kim are targeted, especially since we know that it's from
Speaker 2: potentially estranged members of Nancy's family and or Bill Brisco's family.
Speaker 2: So these are people that may want they may feel
Speaker 2: like they're helping. But if we're going to go off
Speaker 2: what Noreen has said about Kim as a father and
Speaker 2: as a husband, and I feel like we've got no
Speaker 2: reason not to believe her. If there's people where there's
Speaker 2: any strife in the relationship with Noreene, then we can
Speaker 2: understand why they would be pointing the finger at Kim,
Speaker 2: and they wouldn't have an accurate representation of what that
Speaker 2: relationship was like since they weren't close and Bill Briscoe
Speaker 2: wasn't even involved in his daughter's life. So I don't
Speaker 2: know if this is him trying to just paint himself
Speaker 2: as being the better person and paint Kim as being
Speaker 2: a bad person, because maybe there's some type of guilt
Speaker 2: there of not being present and being like he could
Speaker 2: have done more to protect my daughter, even though Bill
Speaker 2: wasn't present, wasn't involved, wasn't doing anything. Kim was the
Speaker 2: one who was showing up for Nileen. He adopted her,
Speaker 2: So it shows a certain level of care there. And
Speaker 2: it's not to say all adoptive parents are wonderful humans
Speaker 2: and great parents. But it shows that he loved Nancy
Speaker 2: and cared for Nileen. And so what we're reading these
Speaker 2: uncorroborated accounts on message boards, I'm going to say that
Speaker 2: I large disregarded. There's a possibility, of course, that Kim
Speaker 2: could be involved, but I think when we start extending
Speaker 2: it to these conspiracy theories that he was involved in
Speaker 2: this what murder for Higher plot while he was in
Speaker 2: Tokyo of his wife in Mexico, it's sounding a little
Speaker 2: bit unbelievable. It's not like he could go to the
Speaker 2: dark web during this time period, yeah, and like set
Speaker 2: up a hit man, Like how would he orchestrate that?
Speaker 1: Yeah, it just seems kind of ridiculous here, and it
Speaker 1: sounds like it's just from personal drama that maybe Nancy's
Speaker 1: side of the family did not like him and are
Speaker 1: just trying to point the finger at him. But even
Speaker 1: though Kim was not interviewed on Unsolved Mysteries, he did
Speaker 1: do a lot of interviews alongside Nancy during the nineteen eighties,
Speaker 1: like they were the ones pushing for an investigation. So, yeah,
Speaker 1: even though Kim was not interviewed during the Unsolved Mystery segment.
Speaker 1: He did do a lot of interviews with the local
Speaker 1: media during the nineteen eighties alongside Nancy, because remember, the
Speaker 1: law enforcement seemed content to write off Nileen's disappearance as
Speaker 1: her just wandering off into the woods and dying of exposure,
Speaker 1: whereas Kim and Nancy were pushed forwarding the idea that
Speaker 1: she was abducted by this mysterious man in the jogging suit.
Speaker 1: And I don't know why Kim would be doing that
Speaker 1: if he was personally involved. And also they did a
Speaker 1: lot of things to help other families because in the
Speaker 1: mid eighties they formed a nonprofit search dog corporation called
Speaker 1: Big Sky Rescue Dogs because they felt that if we
Speaker 1: had had these dogs during our original search effort for Nileen,
Speaker 1: perhaps they would have found her in the forest. So
Speaker 1: now we're going to start this resource to help the
Speaker 1: families of other missing children. And I can't see a
Speaker 1: guy doing that, killing his own daughter and then going
Speaker 1: out of his way to try to help other families
Speaker 1: just a couple of years later.
Speaker 2: I don't see it either. I think the probability of
Speaker 2: Kim making a big deal about Nileen being abducted if
Speaker 2: law enforcement. As we know, they believed that she wandered
Speaker 2: into the woods and died of exposure. So why sound
Speaker 2: the alarm? Why make this big deal out of this
Speaker 2: when they're looking in a complete other direction. Let them
Speaker 2: look in that other direction. If you are indeed guilty,
Speaker 2: why'd be like, oh, she was probably abducted. That doesn't
Speaker 2: really ring true to me. And then going so far
Speaker 2: as to start this rescue dog organization, Big Sky Rescue Dogs.
Speaker 2: It speaks to somebody who truly wants to find Nileen,
Speaker 2: somebody who's still committed. If you were responsible, would you really,
Speaker 2: in the aftermath continue to look and go so far
Speaker 2: as to start these types of organizations to help other people?
Speaker 2: It doesn't ring true as like a guilty person's actions
Speaker 2: to me personally.
Speaker 1: Definitely not No, And in retrospect I kind of wondered
Speaker 1: maybe if law enforcement like had developed tunnel vision, maybe
Speaker 1: they were they were disregarding these sightings of the children
Speaker 1: of the man in the jogging suit because maybe they
Speaker 1: thought Kim was responsible and he was trying to use
Speaker 1: hypnosis to like plant these false memories in them and
Speaker 1: provide this fictitious story about the jogging suit guy to
Speaker 1: take suspicion off himself, which just seems pretty ridiculous, but
Speaker 1: then completely change their tune once the phone calls and
Speaker 1: the anonymous letters started happening, thinking, Okay, like, this guy
Speaker 1: has revealed information about that Nilen's disappearance which he could
Speaker 1: not have known unless he was responsible. So it's clear
Speaker 1: that Kim was not involved in this. But maybe that's
Speaker 1: why they originally considered him to be a person of interest.
Speaker 1: But I know that after nineteen ninety eight, after Nancy
Speaker 1: started the side of the family started flinging mud at Kim,
Speaker 1: that he pretty much stayed out of the spotlight. He's
Speaker 1: lived a quiet life ever since with his two other children,
Speaker 1: and has not done any interviews in many years. But yeah,
Speaker 1: I completely agree that he was probably not involved in
Speaker 1: any way, and he was not involved in Nancy's murder either,
Speaker 1: And I do think that the scenario of Nileen being
Speaker 1: abducted by the man in the jogging suit is probably
Speaker 1: the correct one. But it's just a matter of the letters.
Speaker 1: Here was this guy telling the truth about Kim raising
Speaker 1: Nileen for a couple of years as his own or
Speaker 1: was nothing more than an elaborate fantasy, because instead he
Speaker 1: killed her on the same day that she went missing,
Speaker 1: and her body is still out there somewhere. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm inclined to believe that Nileen is no longer alive
Speaker 1: because I have a hard time believing that you would
Speaker 1: be living over forty years now under a new identity.
Speaker 1: I don't believe that she wandered off and died of exposure.
Speaker 1: And because we have so many different accounts from these
Speaker 1: witnesses about the man in the jogging suit, I have
Speaker 1: a feeling that this guy was the abductor, but I'm
Speaker 1: still on the fence about whether he killed her immediately
Speaker 1: or if at the very least he kept her alive
Speaker 1: and raised her as his own for a couple of years.
Speaker 1: Do you have any thoughts?
Speaker 2: Okay, So, I'm inclined to agree with you that the
Speaker 2: abductor was the guy in the jogging suit. I think
Speaker 2: more care should have been taken with getting these statements
Speaker 2: from these children and pursuing the lead. I think they
Speaker 2: wrote them off because it was children and they thought
Speaker 2: this is incredible. She most likely wandered off, and that
Speaker 2: is typical of cases at the time, and the way
Speaker 2: that they investigated them. Unfortunately, even when it was missing children,
Speaker 2: and so I believe that there is a possibility that
Speaker 2: he took Nileen and he kept her for a period
Speaker 2: of time, maybe a couple of years, But I do
Speaker 2: not believe that it was a long term thing. There
Speaker 2: would be a point where she has to enter school
Speaker 2: and or people are going to start asking questions that
Speaker 2: it becomes untenable. And so personally, I'm just picking an
Speaker 2: arbitrary number, but I feel like a couple of years.
Speaker 2: But after that, I feel like it would become too
Speaker 2: dangerous to keep her alive. And then all of the questions,
Speaker 2: all of the things that you have to do to
Speaker 2: cover up for having this young girl living with you,
Speaker 2: it starts to grow and it starts to snowball. And
Speaker 2: I don't know what the abductor perpetrator, what his life
Speaker 2: looked like, what type of connections that he had, who
Speaker 2: was in his life, who would be asking questions? Was
Speaker 2: he incredibly isolated, lived a solitary existence where it would
Speaker 2: be easy to cover up having a girl living in
Speaker 2: your house, or would it be a situation where it
Speaker 2: was more difficult. Maybe he had a partner, Maybe he
Speaker 2: had to hide her in like a Heidi Hole type
Speaker 2: room in his place. There's a lot that we don't
Speaker 2: know about who this perpetrator is and what their life
Speaker 2: looks like. If it is indeed that scenario that we
Speaker 2: both believe that it is so, I think that by
Speaker 2: the time he wrote those letters, he had already killed Nileen.
Speaker 2: That is my one hundred percent belief based on the
Speaker 2: contents of the letters. I would have to go through
Speaker 2: it in more detail and look for statements where he's
Speaker 2: kind of leaking the truth and or there is deception,
Speaker 2: But just based on what Robin shared with me, I
Speaker 2: think she was deceased at this point in time. He's
Speaker 2: trying to rewrite a narrative. He's trying to resurrect her
Speaker 2: through his words and trying to at the same time
Speaker 2: paint himself as being more heroic than being this child
Speaker 2: predator by saying like, oh, she was wandering by herself
Speaker 2: on this road. I think that he likely is indeed
Speaker 2: the jogging suit man, and he's just trying to reframe.
Speaker 2: Let's reframe this and make me look even better. Let's
Speaker 2: reframe it and make Nileen alive and that she's cared
Speaker 2: for and that she's loved. And I think in doing
Speaker 2: that letter, he just puts out a little bit of
Speaker 2: something disgusting with the seamen where he's trying to go, Okay, see,
Speaker 2: I disclosed this, I'm honest, this is honest. You can
Speaker 2: trust me. I believe that in sharing this gross detail,
Speaker 2: he's trying to get the trust of the reader and
Speaker 2: so that they'll believe the rest of what he's saying.
Speaker 2: But I do not believe it. That word snuggle really
Speaker 2: hit me in the gut, and I would like to
Speaker 2: go through this in more detail at some point in time,
Speaker 2: but I believe his account to be bs and I
Speaker 2: do not think that Nileen was alive at this point
Speaker 2: in time. I think part of it is a guilty
Speaker 2: conscience and the desire to reframe it because law enforcement
Speaker 2: isn't digging that deep like this isn't like front page headlines,
Speaker 2: So coming forward was more about him than it was
Speaker 2: about law enforcement in my opinion.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that makes perfect sense to me, because it was
Speaker 1: like over two and a half years after Nileen originally
Speaker 1: went missing. When the phone calls in the LA start
Speaker 1: and you're wondering, why is he waiting all this time?
Speaker 1: Why is he bringing this back into the spotlight when
Speaker 1: law enforcement is inclined to write her off as just
Speaker 1: some child who wandered in the woods and died of exposure.
Speaker 1: But I think you're onto something that he probably kept
Speaker 1: Nileen for a few years but had killed her a
Speaker 1: short time before he started doing this just to create
Speaker 1: this false narrative, and he probably knew it was less risky,
Speaker 1: saying that if I've gotten rid of her body, that
Speaker 1: even if they tracked this to me, I could just
Speaker 1: say it was a prank and they don't have any
Speaker 1: evidence that I'm the actual perpetrator. And I really do
Speaker 1: hope that that detail about the spoonful of semen is false,
Speaker 1: that he never actually did that. But at the same time,
Speaker 1: you're wondering who could just make up something like that
Speaker 1: and throw that in there. So it is just kind
Speaker 1: of a weird letter where at the same time it
Speaker 1: has these disgusting details, Yet he's also creating this fantasy scenario,
Speaker 1: saying I'm giving her a good life, I'm traveling around
Speaker 1: to places like Great Britain and doing all this stuff
Speaker 1: with her, which I'm sure is completely one hundred percent false.
Speaker 1: I don't think he took her on all these trips,
Speaker 1: and I guess it was just his way of trying
Speaker 1: to clear his con saying that I did this horrible thing,
Speaker 1: but I'm going to write this letter to make it
Speaker 1: look like I'm this loving guardian who's giving Nileen a
Speaker 1: good life and maybe try to take some burn off
Speaker 1: her parents make her think that she's still alive somewhere
Speaker 1: and being well cared for. Even though I'm including all
Speaker 1: these discussing details.
Speaker 2: This is like a left field, but it totally reminds
Speaker 2: me of this like the classic series of like vander
Speaker 2: Pump Rules. There's this one character, James. His mom is
Speaker 2: and his father both have substance use disorder, and his
Speaker 2: mother exhibits behaviors where she potentially has multiple different personality
Speaker 2: disorders and narcissistic traits. There's a lot going on there,
Speaker 2: and they had put a lot of responsibility on this
Speaker 2: kid who's twenty something to be supporting both parents and
Speaker 2: supporting his siblings. And they used to have money, the
Speaker 2: dad had worked for was best friends and managed boy
Speaker 2: George back in the day and a real fall from grace.
Speaker 2: But this horrible situation in scenario where they put way
Speaker 2: too much responsibility on him and the mom looks at
Speaker 2: him like trying to justify her actions of constantly like
Speaker 2: asking him for money and requiring way too much of him,
Speaker 2: and says, you took your first steps at Tiffany's and
Speaker 2: it's like it reminds me of going to this luxury
Speaker 2: store when you're a child. Somehow justifies all of these
Speaker 2: other actions later. And I get this vibe with this perpetrator,
Speaker 2: being like I gave her a spoonful of semen, but
Speaker 2: yet she got to go on all of these trips
Speaker 2: and she could very you know, she could recount all
Speaker 2: of them. It's like one doesn't cancel out the other.
Speaker 2: You don't get to say I took her traveling to
Speaker 2: all of these places. Look at the luxury that I'm providing,
Speaker 2: and I've got this investment income. Look at me, like
Speaker 2: I can give her this great life. It doesn't make
Speaker 2: up for the fact that you just went and disclose
Speaker 2: to us that you're snuggling her and feeding her spoonfuls
Speaker 2: of semen. So I think that there's a level of
Speaker 2: delusion there in thinking that somehow the reader will be like, oh,
Speaker 2: well that's okay, then.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly, and that that's why I would really like
Speaker 1: to solve this case because I really want to find
Speaker 1: out this person's identity and learn more about their background,
Speaker 1: to know what they were thinking. And I've never seen
Speaker 1: this mentioned, but I do know that a lot of
Speaker 1: cold cases sometimes get solved with anonymous letters when they
Speaker 1: get DNA from the seal of the envelope if they
Speaker 1: liked it. So I wonder if they've ever thought of
Speaker 1: that as an option, and that even if this perpetrator
Speaker 1: is now deceased, maybe they could link his DNA to
Speaker 1: the letter and maybe identify him after all this time.
Speaker 1: So any further thoughts on the disappearance of Nileen k Marshall.
Speaker 2: God, my heart just goes out to Kim here. There's
Speaker 2: a lot of loss to have to lose Nileen obviously
Speaker 2: not his biological daughter, but he adopted her. It's essentially
Speaker 2: his daughter. And then also to have this happen to Nancy,
Speaker 2: to have her murdered in Mexico, and then to have
Speaker 2: these medicines or you know, people who are relatives of
Speaker 2: Bill and or Nancy pointing the finger at him and
Speaker 2: making him out to be abusive and potentially a murderer,
Speaker 2: and not only of nice Eileen, but of setting up
Speaker 2: the murder of Nancy in Mexico, which is just so
Speaker 2: unbelievable in my opinion. So my heart really breaks for
Speaker 2: him and the amount of trauma that he's had to
Speaker 2: endure with losing Nileen and then losing Nancy as well.
Speaker 1: Yeah, just so much tragedy with his entire family, And
Speaker 1: like I said, and always haunting when you watch old
Speaker 1: unsolved mystery segments and realize that, like the family members
Speaker 1: of these victims have since passed away, but in Nancy's case,
Speaker 1: to become the victim of a brutal murder that is
Speaker 1: still unsolved on its own, and knowing that the Mexican
Speaker 1: police will never try to do anything to solve it.
Speaker 1: And yeah, I think this could have turned out differently
Speaker 1: if the police had taken Nileen's disappearance a lot more
Speaker 1: seriously at first and not thought she had simply gotten lost.
Speaker 1: But this is a sign of the times back in
Speaker 1: the nineteen eighties, and it's because of cases like Nileen's
Speaker 1: that law enforcement and families have become a lot more
Speaker 1: cautious about people who will abduct and harm children. And hopefully,
Speaker 1: one of these days they can find her remains and
Speaker 1: possibly figure out the identity of the person who did this.
Speaker 1: So that about brings an end to this series of
Speaker 1: episodes of the Path Went Chili. Thank you so much
Speaker 1: for your support, and we'll be back next week to
Speaker 1: start talking about another case.
Speaker 2: Robin, do you want to tell us a little bit
Speaker 2: about the Trail Went Cold Patreon?
Speaker 1: Yes, The Trail Cold Patreon has been around for three
Speaker 1: years now, and we offer these standard bonus features like
Speaker 1: early ad free episodes, and I also send out stickers
Speaker 1: and sign thank you cards to anyone who signs up
Speaker 1: with us on Patreon. If you join our five dollars
Speaker 1: tier tier two, we also offer monthly bonus episodes in
Speaker 1: which I talk about cases which are not featured on
Speaker 1: the Trail Went Cold's original feed, so they're exclusive to Patreon,
Speaker 1: and if you join our highest tier tier three, the
Speaker 1: ten dollars tier. One of the features we offer is
Speaker 1: a audio commentary track over classic episodes of Unsolved Mysteries,
Speaker 1: where you can download an audio file and then boot
Speaker 1: up the original Unsolved Mysteries episode on Amazon Prime or
Speaker 1: YouTube and play it with my audio commentary playing in
Speaker 1: the background, where I just provide trivia and factoids about
Speaker 1: the cases featured in this episode and Incidentally, the very
Speaker 1: first episode that I did a commentary track over was
Speaker 1: the episode featuring this case. So if you want to
Speaker 1: download a commentary track in which I make more smart
Speaker 1: ass remarks about Jewel Kaylor, then be sure to join
Speaker 1: Tier three.
Speaker 2: So I want to let you know a little bit
Speaker 2: about the jeweles and Nashty patreons.
Speaker 3: So there's early ad free episodes of The Path Went Chili.
Speaker 3: We've got our Pathwent Chili mini's, which are always over
Speaker 3: an hour, so they're not very mini, but they're just
Speaker 3: too short to turn into a series, and we're really
Speaker 3: enjoying doing those. So we hope you'll check out those patreons.
Speaker 3: We'll link them in the show notes.
Speaker 1: So I want to thank you all for listening, and
Speaker 1: any chance you have to share us on social media
Speaker 1: with a friend or to rate and review is greatly appreciated.
Speaker 1: You can email us at The Pathwentchili at gmail dot com.
Speaker 1: You can reach us on Twitter at the Pathwin. So
Speaker 1: until next time, be sure to bundle up because cold
Speaker 1: trails and chilly pass call for warm clothing.
Speaker 2: Music by Paul Rich from the podcast Cold Callers Comedy