Speaker 1: In the late nineteenth century, a groundbreaking advancement in criminal
Speaker 1: investigations took place. In the aftermath of a brutal attack
Speaker 1: on a family that left too dead, a single bloody
Speaker 1: fingerprint was discovered. This lone piece of evidence would ultimately
Speaker 1: solve the case, bringing the murderer to justice, marking the
Speaker 1: first time fingerprints were ever used to convict a criminal,
Speaker 1: and it changed investigation methods forever.
Speaker 2: My name's Ben, I'm Nicole, and you're listening to Wicked Ingram,
Speaker 2: a true crime podcast.
Speaker 1: The following podcast and material intended for a mature audience
Speaker 1: listener discretion. Oh that's a good sound.
Speaker 2: It's been a while.
Speaker 1: It's been a while. I'm actually technically double fisting right now.
Speaker 1: You really are, because I have a beer open already,
Speaker 1: just a little bit left in the bottom, but I
Speaker 1: needed a second one for that sound at the beginning
Speaker 1: of the podcast. So I'm just like, I need to
Speaker 1: so here I am. You just needed it, Hey, sometimes
Speaker 1: you do.
Speaker 2: Sometimes you do.
Speaker 1: And when your favorite sports team loses as bad as
Speaker 1: they just did for us, you need to.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because I think you were saving that for the podcast,
Speaker 2: and then you're like, fuck it, I'm gonna have one
Speaker 2: now and later.
Speaker 1: That's exactly what happens. So here we are.
Speaker 2: Oh boy, Oh well, what.
Speaker 1: Can you do? You can drink two beer. Though they
Speaker 1: can't always they they can certainly always lose. By the
Speaker 1: looks of it. You almost spat your freaking drink at me.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I wasn't expecting that.
Speaker 1: So are you stoked for this episode?
Speaker 2: I am, actually.
Speaker 1: Because this is I'm talking criminology history on this one.
Speaker 1: This isn't just a regular case. This is something that
Speaker 1: marked a very significant time and a very significant advancement
Speaker 1: in criminal investigations.
Speaker 2: No kidding. And I don't think this is ever anything
Speaker 2: I've looked into or looked up. So this is this
Speaker 2: is great.
Speaker 1: It's not something I ever considered either, except recently. I
Speaker 1: started in twenty twenty four using chat gpt for finding
Speaker 1: new and interesting cases, and in a discussion with chat
Speaker 1: gept about some obscure interesting cases in a discussion, well yeah,
Speaker 1: in a discussion.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And I'm obsessed with chatpt. I feel like they're
Speaker 2: like my friend. They talk to me so nice.
Speaker 1: I know, and I talked to them nicely to because
Speaker 1: they're so nice. And also, you know, just in case
Speaker 1: one day. Hey, maybe it might spare my life. I
Speaker 1: don't know, but I digress. I had a conversation with
Speaker 1: Chatgypt and they brought this up to me and I
Speaker 1: was like, hmm, that seems interesting. Tell me more. And
Speaker 1: then so it did, and then I was like, I
Speaker 1: think I just found a case that I'm gonna be
Speaker 1: researching soon. And then so it stuck in my list
Speaker 1: for a little while and then yeah, here I am.
Speaker 2: That's awesome.
Speaker 1: Cool story, Hey bro, super cool story.
Speaker 2: I know. Actually, every time I ask chapt anything, I'm
Speaker 2: always like okay, like thanks so much, and then they
Speaker 2: always are like, oh, You're so welcome if you need
Speaker 2: any more help. But I'm like, right, thanks so much,
Speaker 2: and they just wish you luck on all your endeavors,
Speaker 2: and I'm like, I.
Speaker 1: Am, okay, wan on something really cool. Because I wrote
Speaker 1: a poem the other day, you.
Speaker 2: Did, he was supposed to be working What were you
Speaker 2: supposed to be working on? Is that research?
Speaker 1: I think it's probably really like, how's it going on?
Speaker 2: I wrote a poem?
Speaker 1: Yeah? So the reason I wrote a poem is because
Speaker 1: we're attending a Robbie Burns Night event. I believe I
Speaker 1: discussed it on a recent episode. Yeah, and so Robbie
Speaker 1: Burns is a poet that's celebrated globally, Scottish poet. Long, so,
Speaker 1: long story story. I wrote a poem to share at
Speaker 1: our table in honor of Robbie Burns and in honor
Speaker 1: of the people were sharing the evening with. It's really
Speaker 1: good and thank you. I had a little bit of
Speaker 1: help from chat gapt in a couple of lines. Is
Speaker 1: getting stuck with, you know, a little bit of flow
Speaker 1: sort of thing, right, help me refine, I guess if
Speaker 1: you will. And at the end of it, chat gpt
Speaker 1: even cheers me in Scottish. It wished me luck on
Speaker 1: the event and reading the poem and it said Solange
Speaker 1: of va. Oh wow Scottish cheers.
Speaker 2: Okay, that's cool.
Speaker 1: It was amazing.
Speaker 2: Oh man, okay, yeah, that is so awesome.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but I digress. Sorry, I think we should we
Speaker 1: should get to this episode.
Speaker 2: Yeah, let's do it.
Speaker 1: Okay. So we're going back, as I said in the intro,
Speaker 1: to the late nineteenth century, and we're heading to Argentina.
Speaker 1: So Argentina was going undergoing significant changes at the time.
Speaker 1: The small coastal town of Nechoia, located along the Atlantic
Speaker 1: Ocean was about three hundred and thirty miles from Buenos Aires,
Speaker 1: and it remained a quiet retreat despite the country's economic growth.
Speaker 1: Fishermen set out at dawn, and during the warmer months,
Speaker 1: visitors flocked to its wide beaches, its hot springs, and
Speaker 1: of course the forested trails as well. Life here moved
Speaker 1: at a slower and more peaceful play pace. Picture exactly
Speaker 1: what we all want to get away from the hustle
Speaker 1: and bustle and go move to. That's pretty much what's
Speaker 1: happening here.
Speaker 2: Sounds lovely now.
Speaker 1: Francisca Roja Roja, I think Rojas, Roha, Roja, Roja, I'm
Speaker 1: going with Roja. Francisca Roja was born in Necochia in
Speaker 1: eighteen sixty five, and Nicochia is the area. Again. This
Speaker 1: is one of those things. I don't know how to
Speaker 1: pronounce it, but I'm doing my best.
Speaker 2: So.
Speaker 1: She grew up in a modest home, receiving only a
Speaker 1: basic education, as schooling in Argentina was still not widely accessible.
Speaker 1: It wasn't until eighteen eighty four that a law was
Speaker 1: passed ensuring free and secular education for all children. Now,
Speaker 1: during this period in Argentina. It was expanding, you know, economically,
Speaker 1: with a wave of European immigrants arriving to work in
Speaker 1: the country's growing industries. Many sought better opportunities in larger cities,
Speaker 1: but Francisca chose to stay in her hometown. As a
Speaker 1: young woman, she married a man by the name of
Speaker 1: Ponciano carral Bayo, and together they had two children, a son,
Speaker 1: Ponziano Junior and a daughter, Felicia. They lived a short
Speaker 1: distance from the center of town. Now, Ponziano worked long
Speaker 1: hours but earned a modest living, so he was one
Speaker 1: of those hard work and father sort of thing, doing
Speaker 1: his best, but you know, just bringing home your average
Speaker 1: sort of income. Now, over time, their marriage became strained
Speaker 1: for one reason or another. Rumors spread that Francisca had
Speaker 1: been seeing another man. Ooh, and whispers of her supposed
Speaker 1: infidelity reached the ears of her husband.
Speaker 2: Oh shit, I hate that.
Speaker 1: That is just the absolute worst infidelity, Yeah, or people talking.
Speaker 2: I guess both, but more so the infidelity. Like gosh,
Speaker 2: I just think that is just the worst.
Speaker 1: I honestly think if there is infidelity this excuse me,
Speaker 1: infidelity occurring that I would prefer people to talk because
Speaker 1: that way you learn about it. Right.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, but I mean, just like I separate, I suppose,
Speaker 2: right yeah, or anything like that happens, or.
Speaker 1: There's no point in hurting another person. Just yeah, do
Speaker 1: exactly what you say.
Speaker 2: Separate, I mean, which would still hurt them. But I
Speaker 2: think like the infidelity is worse.
Speaker 1: Well, it hurts more because then there's infidelity, and so
Speaker 1: it's like, you know, it's even more piled up. Yeah, now,
Speaker 1: friends and neighbors, Warren Ponciano that his wife was not faithful,
Speaker 1: and eventually he made a very difficult decision. He made
Speaker 1: the decision that he was going to leave her and
Speaker 1: take the children with him.
Speaker 2: Okay, yeah.
Speaker 1: He believed that if you were to take the children
Speaker 1: that they would have a better life without her in it.
Speaker 2: Wow, okay, you go now.
Speaker 1: For Francesca, though, this was devastating. Under Argentina's Civil Code,
Speaker 1: which had been enacted in eighteen sixty nine, men and
Speaker 1: women were legally considered equals, which I mean hell yeah,
Speaker 1: which meant for her that she would not receive any
Speaker 1: special consideration in this separation, and she feared without her
Speaker 1: husband's support, she would be I mean living, would just
Speaker 1: become extremely difficult, right, He was kind of the bread
Speaker 1: winter before, right.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, but I mean she should have thought about
Speaker 2: her actions.
Speaker 1: Then, exactly. So she pleaded with Ponciano to reconsider, but
Speaker 1: his mind was made up. He was still young, hardworking,
Speaker 1: and determined to provide for a better future for his children,
Speaker 1: just not with Francisco in their lives.
Speaker 2: I kind of love this actually, that he's just like peace,
Speaker 2: right yeah, with the kiddos.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So in Argentina by nineteen sorry, by eighteen ninety two,
Speaker 1: which is when this is taking place, Argentina was slowly
Speaker 1: recovering from a financial crisis that left many people struggling.
Speaker 1: Though the economy was improving at the time, jobs were
Speaker 1: still scarce and wages remained low. So for Francisca, you know,
Speaker 1: things remained uncertain for her. She's like, how am I
Speaker 1: going to get a job? What am I going to
Speaker 1: do to support myself? Right?
Speaker 2: M hmm.
Speaker 1: With her husband planning to leave take the children, it
Speaker 1: was just like all this worry of how she's going
Speaker 1: to survive on her own that was piling up. So
Speaker 1: on June nineteenth, Ponciano returned to the house that they
Speaker 1: shared now This was still the same day that he
Speaker 1: broke this news to her, right, So he broke this
Speaker 1: news to her, went off. For whatever reason, he had
Speaker 1: left the house and he was going to come back
Speaker 1: at a certain time, and he told Francisca about his
Speaker 1: decision to leave already, right though he hadn't actually moved
Speaker 1: out yet. It's same day. Lots to deal with, right,
Speaker 1: it takes time. Yeah, So the time was just after
Speaker 1: two pm when he had arrived back at the house.
Speaker 1: So he expected, you know, to come on in, enter
Speaker 1: as usual, gone about their day, figure out what the
Speaker 1: next steps are. But when he arrived and tried to
Speaker 1: open the door, the door wouldn't budge. It was stuck. Now,
Speaker 1: this struck odd. Francisca and the children were supposed to
Speaker 1: be home, and she hadn't mentioned going anywhere, like locking
Speaker 1: out the house or whatever right before she left. It
Speaker 1: was a Sunday, a day when most people weren't working,
Speaker 1: and she knew he was coming home. So on, growing unease,
Speaker 1: growing unease, Pontiana went to his neighbor, Romano Velasquez, and
Speaker 1: he asked for help to get in the home. Now,
Speaker 1: the two men returned to the house and worked together
Speaker 1: to force the door open. Nothing could have prepared them
Speaker 1: for what they found on the other side of that door.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh. What well. As soon as they stepped inside,
Speaker 1: they were met with a gruesome scene. Francisca was laying
Speaker 1: near the entrance to the door, covered in blood, clutching
Speaker 1: her neck in a panic. But the true horror was
Speaker 1: in the bedroom. She was still alive, but both of
Speaker 1: their children were dead. Their throats had been slashed so
Speaker 1: brutally that their heads were nearly severed from their body.
Speaker 2: Oh my gosh. Okay. Also, you, I don't know if
Speaker 2: I should say this, you distracted the absolute shit out
Speaker 2: of me because you were like the true horror, and
Speaker 2: I was like, is the life? And then I was
Speaker 2: just thinking of all that, and I wasn't taking the
Speaker 2: scene seriously, and I was like, oh god.
Speaker 1: The true horror. Horror.
Speaker 2: Okay. So anyway, the wife is alive, she's alive, and
Speaker 2: the kids are fucking dead. Correct, Holy shit, that's horrible. Yeah,
Speaker 2: way to make a shitty day, like, you know, about
Speaker 2: a million times shittier.
Speaker 1: Exactly right. So the neighbor of Lasquez ran for help immediately,
Speaker 1: and the authorities quickly arrived. Ponciano was inconsolable, overwhelmed with
Speaker 1: shock and grief. Now Francisca, though alive, was in a
Speaker 1: state of hysteria, making it difficult for doctors to even
Speaker 1: assess her injuries whatsoever. As police surveyed the crime scene,
Speaker 1: one question loomed overhead. Who could committed such a monstrous act,
Speaker 1: especially against two innocent children, six year old Ponziano Junior
Speaker 1: and four year old Felicia Gosh.
Speaker 2: I have a feeling that it has something to do
Speaker 2: with the infidelity, and like the kids are just like
Speaker 2: the innocent ones in this, so this is horrible.
Speaker 1: They are, Well, if it has something to do with
Speaker 1: the infidelity, what do you think could have happened? Where's
Speaker 1: your head going with that?
Speaker 2: Well?
Speaker 1: Curious?
Speaker 2: My thought is maybe it's like someone that she was
Speaker 2: with or something like a different partner. I don't know
Speaker 2: if she had more than one or whatever, or I
Speaker 2: was almost even the at first like it was her.
Speaker 2: But then if she's super injured, that's not that could
Speaker 2: doesn't necessarily rule her out. Her being injured because like
Speaker 2: self infliction, potentially we've heard of that before. I think, yeah,
Speaker 2: but I think I'm gonna go with like one of
Speaker 2: her her partners that was from outside the marriage.
Speaker 1: Okay, why would a partner attack like this though like that?
Speaker 1: That That's what I'm trying to wrap my head around here.
Speaker 2: Why he was leaving with the kids?
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 2: Maybe I don't know. I feel like it's more it
Speaker 2: more so could be her, But I don't know the
Speaker 2: extent of her of the injury. So let's let me
Speaker 2: just carry on listening.
Speaker 1: Well, no one's really sure of the extent of her
Speaker 1: injuries because she's in such hysteria, like doctors canning me
Speaker 1: close to her.
Speaker 2: Okay, because she could have just the blood of the
Speaker 2: kids on her potentially.
Speaker 1: Which is true. So okay, Now, once Francisca did calm
Speaker 1: down a bit, police, like I said, doctors weren't able
Speaker 1: to check her out. She'd fucking panic if that were
Speaker 1: the case. But police were able to speak with her,
Speaker 1: and though her injuries were serious, they weren't life threatening.
Speaker 1: And she was asked who attacked her and killed her children,
Speaker 1: she didn't hesitate. She named the neighbor, the neighbor Velasquez,
Speaker 1: mister Velaskaz, the same man who helped Pontiano break into
Speaker 1: the house. She claimed that Vlaskaz struck her with a spade,
Speaker 1: the very tool that was found to have wedged against
Speaker 1: the door that was holding it shut.
Speaker 2: Okay, what the shit.
Speaker 1: However, this statement immediately raised questions for authorities. The spade
Speaker 1: had been blocking the entrance from the inside, So how
Speaker 1: could Velaskaz have been the attacker if he was outside
Speaker 1: to help Pontiano force the door open? Right? Okay, so
Speaker 1: the police pressed on back door. Maybe I don't know. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: they pressed her on this, and but she insisted. She
Speaker 1: explained that Ponziano had asked Velasquez to come and take
Speaker 1: the children as he planned to leave her and you know,
Speaker 1: raise him on his own right. So, according to Francesca,
Speaker 1: when Velasquez arrived to collect them, she refused to let
Speaker 1: them go. An argument broke out, and in a fit
Speaker 1: of rage, she claimed, he attacked her and then brutally
Speaker 1: murdered the children in the attack. It wasn't long before
Speaker 1: Velasquez was arrested. News of the crime quickly spread through
Speaker 1: the town, and before any real investigation had taken place,
Speaker 1: most of the people had already made up their minds
Speaker 1: that he.
Speaker 2: Was guilty, okay and sorry. The thought was that he
Speaker 2: was in there to gather the children.
Speaker 1: That that's what she says. Yes, that's what Francesca says. Okay,
Speaker 1: so she said that he came to like collect the
Speaker 1: children for her husband, Ponsano, and she refused and then
Speaker 1: like like a toussl or, something broke out and it
Speaker 1: escalated and that happened.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but that would make no sense that like he
Speaker 2: would go about killing the kids, like, if anything, I
Speaker 2: could see her being injured, but not necessarily the kids.
Speaker 1: Right, and then of course the spade and the door,
Speaker 1: how did that happen? House? He on the outside. So
Speaker 1: there's a lot of queries floating around on how does
Speaker 1: this really play at? Like huh, like you know what
Speaker 1: I mean?
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Now, at the police station, Velasquez was interrogated relentlessly. He
Speaker 1: swore he had nothing to do with the murders. No
Speaker 1: matter how much the authorities pressured him, he was disorbed.
Speaker 1: He just said like no. They resorted to brutal interrogation
Speaker 1: methods against him, and even like keep in mind, this
Speaker 1: is nineteenth century Argentina here, this is like not a
Speaker 1: modern day a era. He refused to confess no matter
Speaker 1: what they threw at him. He kept repeating the same
Speaker 1: story he had only helped Pontiano get inside the house,
Speaker 1: he had nothing to do with the attack.
Speaker 2: Gosh, I think you should just never be a neighbor
Speaker 2: because this is the second case now where like the
Speaker 2: neighbor just gets like shit on.
Speaker 1: Okay, just buy one hundred acres, live out in the woods.
Speaker 1: That's what you need to do.
Speaker 2: Yeah, never had neighbors. Still look like a weird person
Speaker 2: that could potentially commit murder.
Speaker 1: Probably, Yeah, there's that weird person who lives out in
Speaker 1: the woods. It's probably them now. Regardless of Pontiano denying
Speaker 1: any of this, the police they weren't convinced of his innocence.
Speaker 1: They believed that they had their men, and so did
Speaker 1: the townspeople. The evidence, though, didn't add up, but in
Speaker 1: their eyes, there was no need to look any further. Well,
Speaker 1: not necessarily look any further, I guess I kind of
Speaker 1: wrote that a little bit wrong. Not necessarily look any further.
Speaker 1: They're looking further into it, but they they believed they
Speaker 1: already had the answer, I guess. So the investigation was continuing.
Speaker 1: Witnesses began actually coming forward, in fact, during this the
Speaker 1: next few days, and there were some statements that kind
Speaker 1: of seemed uh to change a little bit. Several people
Speaker 1: confirmed that Raman Velasquez had actually been with them at
Speaker 1: the approximate time that the murders would have taken place. Okay,
Speaker 1: their accounts matched perfectly, in fact of lining up with
Speaker 1: what Velaskaz himself had told the police at the very beginning.
Speaker 1: So detectives poured over the details again and again. In
Speaker 1: one statement in particular stood out. Velasquez had mentioned that
Speaker 1: on the morning of the crime, Francisca had come to
Speaker 1: his house and had a heated argument with his wife.
Speaker 1: When she left, he recalled that she had been visibly angry. Now,
Speaker 1: at first the police they couldn't shake the idea that
Speaker 1: Flaskaz might have gone to the house afterwards and committed
Speaker 1: the crime in a fit of rage. But his alibi
Speaker 1: was air tight. No matter how much they wanted to
Speaker 1: believe he was guilty. There was just these inconsistencies that
Speaker 1: made them hesitate. What they thought before was a slam dunk,
Speaker 1: Now it didn't seem so sure. There is that one
Speaker 1: glaring inconsistency that still loomed over them though. The door
Speaker 1: being jammed shut from the inside. If Laskaz had killed
Speaker 1: Francisca and the sorry Francisca's children, there we go. That
Speaker 1: was almost a tongue twister for me, and assaulted her
Speaker 1: and then left. How could he have locked himself out?
Speaker 2: Well, that's why I was thinking that maybe there's a
Speaker 2: second door or some shit.
Speaker 1: Right, No, I don't believe that's the case, unfortunately. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's when investigators started to ask themselves a different question.
Speaker 1: What if Velaskaz wasn't the killer. But if he wasn't,
Speaker 1: then who was. One week after the attack, Francisca was
Speaker 1: finally examined by a doctor. Remember at the beginning, I
Speaker 1: said she was like hysterical, hysterical, and doctors couldn't get
Speaker 1: near her right. She claimed she was still in pain
Speaker 1: from the injuries that she had suffered that day. But
Speaker 1: the doctors inspected her and they were prized there was
Speaker 1: no visible signs of bruising, and she claimed to have
Speaker 1: been struck by this shovel in the back and the head,
Speaker 1: not to mention that she had laceration on her neck.
Speaker 1: Right now, the spade that was found on the crime scene,
Speaker 1: it was a heavy tool. If someone as strong as
Speaker 1: Vlaskaz had struck her, as she claimed the injuries will
Speaker 1: be far more severe, and they also couldn't understand how
Speaker 1: she actually survived this injury when it was or sorry
Speaker 1: with this attack with only minor injuries, because the laceration
Speaker 1: on her neck wasn't as bad as it first seemed.
Speaker 1: It only really seemed to be a small cut. It
Speaker 1: almost like it had healed up way too fast. Oh jeez.
Speaker 2: Well and also like whoever was doing this was you know,
Speaker 2: in for vengeance, right with what they did to the kids. Yeah,
Speaker 2: so she wouldn't be getting out of that like.
Speaker 1: Scott free exactly. So this small cut that she had,
Speaker 1: it was pretty much healed, and it's like, okay, this
Speaker 1: is to be a brutal inflicted injury. Like the children's
Speaker 1: heads are nearly severed, you're covered in blood and like hysterical,
Speaker 1: and now here we are a week later and it's
Speaker 1: like almost completely gone. There's no bruisings on you, no,
Speaker 1: nothing like this again doesn't add up. So by July eighth,
Speaker 1: news of the shocking crime had spread beyond the area,
Speaker 1: reaching La Plata, a capital in Buenos Aires Province. Now
Speaker 1: the case had drawn attention from higher authorities, and with
Speaker 1: pressure mounting to solve it, A more experienced team of
Speaker 1: investigators was actually sent out to investigate, so leading the
Speaker 1: new investigation was inspected Inspector at Duardo Alvarez, a seasoned
Speaker 1: officer with a strong reputation. When he arrived in town, Roman,
Speaker 1: Velasquez was still in custody despite the lack of solid
Speaker 1: evidence against him, so police were reluctant to release him.
Speaker 1: I mean, after all, he was their only suspect, right,
Speaker 1: But inspect.
Speaker 2: It doesn't, honest seem like there is really much evidence
Speaker 2: pointing to him though at all.
Speaker 1: There's not. The only evidence really pointing towards him is
Speaker 1: the victims. What's the word confession not confession statement statement?
Speaker 1: I guess, yeah, the victim statement and is.
Speaker 2: Close proximity I guess too, I guess so.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Now, Inspector Alvarez wasn't convinced that he was the
Speaker 1: man that Velasquez was the man. Inspector Alvarez arrived at
Speaker 1: the crime scene. I mean, this is a week later, right,
Speaker 1: but we do have this crime scene, and he's determined
Speaker 1: to piece together what really happened. By now we are
Speaker 1: nearly three weeks past. Sorry, so we are three weeks
Speaker 1: past the brutal attack and the murder of the two
Speaker 1: children's remained unsolved. After surveying the property, he carefully reviewed
Speaker 1: the statements given by both Francisca and Vlasquez. Almost immediately
Speaker 1: for him, something felt off. Vlaska's account had been backed
Speaker 1: up by witnesses who were with him at the time
Speaker 1: of the crime, but Francisca's version it didn't add up.
Speaker 1: Her injuries were suspiciously minor, she had initially refused medical attention,
Speaker 1: and the most puzzling of all, the door was jam
Speaker 1: shut from the inside of the home with this spade.
Speaker 2: Yep.
Speaker 1: So if Flaskaz was a killer, you know again, how
Speaker 1: can he lock himself out? Inspector Alvarez couldn't understand why
Speaker 1: the police had Flaskeez in custody for so long with
Speaker 1: so little evidence against him. Then he came across something
Speaker 1: in the case file that caught his attention. Velasquez had
Speaker 1: reported hearing Francisca say that her lover refused to marry
Speaker 1: her because she had young children. Oh shit, remember when
Speaker 1: there was that heated argument with his wife and Francisca.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yep.
Speaker 1: So it was a seemingly small detail, but Alvarez. To him,
Speaker 1: it was significant for the first time he considered the
Speaker 1: possibility that Francesca herself, Wow, might be responsible for the murders.
Speaker 2: What a complete monster if this is what has actually happened.
Speaker 1: Yeah, do you want to revise your your thoughts? Do
Speaker 1: you want to tell me what your head's at now,
Speaker 1: what you think is going on?
Speaker 2: Well, at first, I because I did mention it could
Speaker 2: potentially have been her, But then I was thinking it
Speaker 2: was more so like because he, like her ex or
Speaker 2: husband or whatever, was going to take the kids away.
Speaker 2: So it's like if I can't have my kids, like
Speaker 2: no one can, kind of thing like I thought she
Speaker 2: was kind of she maybe did this in spite, but
Speaker 2: like to just be with her freaking lover. Oh man,
Speaker 2: that's t that, Okay. I was gonna say that ten
Speaker 2: times worse. Either one is terrible. Either one's so terrible.
Speaker 2: But this lady is like a selfish piece of shit,
Speaker 2: Like she's just disgusting. I'm disgusted with her fair enough.
Speaker 2: I don't even want to listen to about her anymore.
Speaker 1: You just done well. As I mentioned in the intro,
Speaker 1: there's a very significant piece of this puzzle.
Speaker 2: Right, Yes, that's where I'm wondering. Oh, okay, so abriy,
Speaker 2: I was like, it could be the lover then maybe potentially, Okay, okay,
Speaker 2: are you good? I'm good.
Speaker 1: Sorry, do you want to explain what just happened? I
Speaker 1: feel like you just had a stroke or something.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm just so convinced that it was her, but like,
Speaker 2: it's still very much could be her lover. I'm thinking
Speaker 2: because even if they found a bloody fingerprint in there,
Speaker 2: I am unsure and it was hers, I'm unsure that
Speaker 2: would like solve this per se. But if they found
Speaker 2: the fingerprint and it was like the lovers, then it's
Speaker 2: like okay, boom okay.
Speaker 1: Determined to find concrete evidence, the inspector returned to the
Speaker 1: home once again, and he was convinced that something had
Speaker 1: been overlooked, so he meticulously searched each room up down,
Speaker 1: every square inch, paying attention to detail all over the place,
Speaker 1: and specifically in the children's bedroom, and that's when he
Speaker 1: noticed it, a dried blood stain on the door. Now,
Speaker 1: at first glance, it looked like an ordinary smear, but
Speaker 1: on closer inspection, Alvarez realized that it's the distinct shape
Speaker 1: of a fingerprint. He thought the stain had darkened over
Speaker 1: time it was still but it was still clearly visible,
Speaker 1: now just a dark brown color. But he believed it
Speaker 1: could be a crucial piece of forensic evidence, so he
Speaker 1: ordered his men to carefully remove that section of the door. Now,
Speaker 1: Francesca had claimed in her statement that she had never
Speaker 1: touched the children's bodies after they were killed. If the
Speaker 1: bloody fingerprint turned out to be hers, it could suggest
Speaker 1: that she was lying, and might also suggest that she
Speaker 1: was the real killer. Now, at the time, fingerprints were
Speaker 1: already being used for identification, but they'd never been used
Speaker 1: to solve a crime. So a little bit of history here.
Speaker 1: Sir William Herschel, a British officer working in India, had
Speaker 1: been one of the first Europeans to recognize their significance.
Speaker 1: In the eighteen fifties, while working for the Indian civil
Speaker 1: Service in Bengal, he began using fingerprints on contracts to
Speaker 1: prevent fraud. He also documented his own fingerprints over the
Speaker 1: years to prove that they remained unchanged over time. Okay,
Speaker 1: so the potential of fingerprints and forensic work had first
Speaker 1: been proposed in eighteen eighty. At this point, that would
Speaker 1: have been twelve years prior by doctor Henry Faulds and
Speaker 1: later expanded on by Sir Francis Galton. Now Galton. His
Speaker 1: research revealed that fingerprints were unique to each and every
Speaker 1: individual and that no two were exact alike. This discovery
Speaker 1: laid the foundation for fingerprint analysis as a scientific method
Speaker 1: for identification. Now Inspector Alvarez happened to have a friend
Speaker 1: who was deeply involved in this field. The man who
Speaker 1: had immigrated to Argentina from Croatia in eighteen eighty two,
Speaker 1: was at the age of twenty four, was an anthropologist
Speaker 1: working in the police headquarters Mar del Plata. There he
Speaker 1: had been developing fingerprint classification methods based on Galton's work,
Speaker 1: So in March of eighteen ninety two, he established Argentina's
Speaker 1: first fingerprint bureau. Believing he might be onto something groundbreaking,
Speaker 1: Inspector Alvarez collected ink fingerprint samples from both Francesca and Velasquez,
Speaker 1: and he sent them to his friend at this location.
Speaker 1: We're talking the same, very very same guy, right, the
Speaker 1: guy who's expanding on Galton's work. He sent these over
Speaker 1: there for him for analysis, to compare them against this
Speaker 1: bloody fingerprint on the section of the door, and guess
Speaker 1: what found a match. When the results came back, the
Speaker 1: investigators were stunned. The fingerprint on the door was a
Speaker 1: perfect match to the ink sample that was taken by
Speaker 1: the mom Francesca.
Speaker 2: Yes, oh my gosh, so right there, Like she's a liar,
Speaker 2: a big time liar.
Speaker 1: At the very least, it was proof that she'd been
Speaker 1: in contact with a crime scene in the way that
Speaker 1: she previously did not, Right.
Speaker 2: I also just have to say that would be so difficult,
Speaker 2: I feel like too, like without using computer, Like you
Speaker 2: think CSI and the digital and like you're overlapping a
Speaker 2: fingerprint to match and shit, like, I feel like that
Speaker 2: would be so difficult to do on like without digital.
Speaker 1: You know, well, I don't know. I mean, I'm not
Speaker 1: sure on the invention of the microscope, but I mean
Speaker 1: you at least have some magnification of certain sorts. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And I mean with a light underneath the pane of glass,
Speaker 1: you can overlap two papers really easy, I guess, right,
Speaker 1: So I'm not sure in the process, but that's where
Speaker 1: my head's going. You know, a little bit of magnification here,
Speaker 1: some light underneath, let's see if we can line these
Speaker 1: up right. Okay. So now, despite the evidence, the police
Speaker 1: were still uncertain about the reliability of fingerprint analysis in
Speaker 1: criminal investigations. Nonetheless, they confronted from Chesca with their findings.
Speaker 1: At first, she was quite confused about the whole situation,
Speaker 1: but as officers explained the methodology behind their conclusion, her
Speaker 1: composure crumbled. Overcome with emotion, she broke down and confessed
Speaker 1: to the murder of her two children. Gosh. She explained
Speaker 1: to Inspector Alvarez that when her husband told her he
Speaker 1: was leaving and taking the children with him, she was devastated.
Speaker 1: Unable to bear the thought of them being separated, she
Speaker 1: decided that it would be better if they died all together.
Speaker 2: Oh my gosh.
Speaker 1: Her plan had been to kill the children and then
Speaker 1: take her own life. However, after carrying out the first
Speaker 1: part of horrific decision, she found herself unable to go
Speaker 1: through with her own death.
Speaker 2: Which is kind of surprising if you just killed your
Speaker 2: own two kids, like, I'm unsure you could go forward
Speaker 2: from that, you know.
Speaker 1: Well, here's something from my thoughts here. She did more
Speaker 1: than kill her own kids. Their heads were almost completely
Speaker 1: severed from the body.
Speaker 2: Holy shit.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so I believe she took out some frustration or
Speaker 1: anger or something of some sort of emotion on her kids.
Speaker 2: Holy shit. I just that is just unfamable to think
Speaker 2: rather a mom could do that.
Speaker 1: Hey, yeah, but she did. Wow. Francisca was formally charged
Speaker 1: with the murders and taken into custody. Now given the
Speaker 1: brutality for crime, she was extensively examined by doctors to
Speaker 1: determine whether she was legally insane. While murder was a
Speaker 1: capital offense in Argentina at the time, women were exempt
Speaker 1: from the death penalty, so after multiple evaluations, medical experts
Speaker 1: concluded that Francesca was indeed quote insane, and on September twentieth,
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty sorry eighteen ninety four, she was transferred to
Speaker 1: Laura's Penitentiary near Marja Plata, where she remained behind bars
Speaker 1: for the rest of her life. Her case had a
Speaker 1: lasting impact on forensic science. The success of fingerprint analysis
Speaker 1: in solving the crime encouraged Argentina government to expand its
Speaker 1: research into fingerprint identification. By nineteen hundreds, Argentina issued its
Speaker 1: first official identification card based on fingerprint records, and soon
Speaker 1: police departments around the world adopted what became known as
Speaker 1: the I'm going to pronounce this this? Are you going
Speaker 1: to butcher this pronunciation Vouchic method of fingerprint classification Vucich
Speaker 1: I think is maybe how you say it Voucich method
Speaker 1: a fingerprint classification. Francesca Rosa del Cabaro Cabalo, There we go,
Speaker 1: became the first person in history, the very first person
Speaker 1: in history, to be convicted based on fingerprint evidence, a
Speaker 1: breakthrough that changed criminal investigations for ever.
Speaker 2: Okay, good because like, honestly, without that, she would have
Speaker 2: probably have gotten away with this.
Speaker 1: That's exactly what would have happened. Damn holy shit.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this case is just mind blowing for like many reasons.
Speaker 2: The fact that she could do that to her own
Speaker 2: children is just horrific.
Speaker 1: Fucking boggles the mind. Hey, what a bitch? Like seriously, I'm.
Speaker 2: Not like more more than a bitch is like being nice.
Speaker 1: Yeah, she's at least a double bitch, Holy.
Speaker 2: Shit, like a quadruple bitch. But also because yeah, like
Speaker 2: you said, she was taking like her rage out or
Speaker 2: but the kids didn't do anything. No, I'm just they're
Speaker 2: so young.
Speaker 1: Well, she probably would have been directing some rage that
Speaker 1: she had at her husband Ponziano onto the kids.
Speaker 2: Well, then do it to him, like what the actual.
Speaker 1: Shit, don't do it to him, don't do it to anybody.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, you know what I mean. But the kids gosh,
Speaker 2: and then and yeah, this whole the fingerprint world opening up,
Speaker 2: Like that's just unreal. That is that's so good though
Speaker 2: it's it's solved so many things.
Speaker 1: Yes, I mean, if there is a person to be
Speaker 1: the first one in history, it's gonna be a piece
Speaker 1: of shit like that.
Speaker 2: Hm.
Speaker 1: So I'm glad that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, But then I also hate that she like kind
Speaker 2: of goes down in history and then her I don't know,
Speaker 2: her story gets like you know, told like do you
Speaker 2: know what I'm trying to say?
Speaker 1: There fair enough, however, I will rebuttal with forever in history,
Speaker 1: no one will ever forget how big of a piece
Speaker 1: of shit she.
Speaker 2: Was to Sche.
Speaker 1: So there we go to Sche.
Speaker 2: Honestly, fingerprints are so weird, Like it is actually so
Speaker 2: odd that everyone has different fingerprints, and like you can't
Speaker 2: even really like see by looking at your your fingers
Speaker 2: super close. You know, the other day, I was doing
Speaker 2: some serious manual labor for a bit, which is a
Speaker 2: and later I was just like, holy shit, I feel
Speaker 2: like I don't even have fingertips right now, Like our
Speaker 2: finger prints, they're just like they just worn off, got
Speaker 2: worn off.
Speaker 1: Well, do you have you heard of the case about
Speaker 1: like the whole like Koala bear thing with fingerprints. No,
Speaker 1: so Koala bears have fingerprints as well, and their fingerprints
Speaker 1: are very similar to human beings. Oh shit, So there
Speaker 1: have been crime scenes where Koala bear fingerprints have been
Speaker 1: and it fucks up the whole fucking investigation. They're trying
Speaker 1: to find certain fingerprints and it turns out it's a
Speaker 1: fucking Koala bear.
Speaker 2: Really, yeah, I have never ever heard anything like that.
Speaker 1: Really. No, Yeah, it's a legit thing, aren't.
Speaker 2: Kuala Bears like those cute little things, Like they're quite
Speaker 2: cute looking.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but they also carry syphilis. They literally carry an STD. Okay,
Speaker 1: they're adorable, don't get me wrong, but yeah, huh wow, Okay,
Speaker 1: that's all you got to say.
Speaker 2: No, I was just thinking, like, how fingerprints, like in
Speaker 2: that time, it's such a big deal and now, I
Speaker 2: mean they're still useful for sure, but it's like we've
Speaker 2: progressed so much more right with like DNA and stuff.
Speaker 1: All the advancements. Yeah, and honestly, like that was one
Speaker 1: hundred and thirty years ago, one hundred and forty years ago,
Speaker 1: somewhere in that ballpark. Yeah, like that's like we've come
Speaker 1: a long way, no shit to think that they just
Speaker 1: figured out fingerprints and now we have like the whole
Speaker 1: DNA profiling with genetics and stuff online because hey, you
Speaker 1: anti sent some fucking sample in tencestry dot com.
Speaker 2: I know, it's so funny that Aunt Sue just is
Speaker 2: like getting your assut like in jail, right, Like it's
Speaker 2: act be pretty hilarious it honestly it is. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: and you're almost kind of like, don't do that, but
Speaker 2: also like go.
Speaker 1: For it out, so just do it, do it. Honestly,
Speaker 1: I kind of want to put my DNA in there
Speaker 1: just so I could like fuck up any relatives that
Speaker 1: do some shit stuff.
Speaker 2: Oh, if you look at it that way, it kind
Speaker 2: of makes me want to. But I've always like been like, oh,
Speaker 2: I'm not going to bother or I don't think I
Speaker 2: want to do that, but I don't know that I'm
Speaker 2: planning to commit any crimes. And plus I think my
Speaker 2: sister's done it, so I'm fucked anyway, really right, like
Speaker 2: if someone that close to you has done it, like, okay,
Speaker 2: watch your back, no kidding, don't do anything shady.
Speaker 1: But yeah, I thought that would be a fun case
Speaker 1: to cover a little bit interesting in history around it.
Speaker 1: I know, have we covered the one about amber Amber Hagerman?
Speaker 1: Have we covered that one yet?
Speaker 2: Is that like the nine one one thing or no?
Speaker 1: The Amber alert?
Speaker 2: Okay, oh shit, I don't know. I remember looking at
Speaker 2: something when nine one one or something became a thing,
Speaker 2: So this is I'm more thinking different cases here. I
Speaker 2: don't know if we.
Speaker 1: Have because that's when I know I've read up on
Speaker 1: a long time ago, very interesting case about Yeah, because
Speaker 1: we all know the Amber alert, like, yeah, missing child,
Speaker 1: right up, doctor child. Yeah, it's it's not amber like
Speaker 1: the color, it's amber. The name name.
Speaker 2: Well, if we haven't, we should, we should have to
Speaker 2: look it up.
Speaker 1: I guess, gosh, go through our library just to be certain.
Speaker 1: We honestly have to do that all the time, just
Speaker 1: retrack through our library. And she's like, did we do
Speaker 1: this one? I think?
Speaker 2: Well, I mean it's kind of hard to think back
Speaker 2: like one hundred and fifty episodes or two hundred episodes,
Speaker 2: while you've done.
Speaker 1: Two hundred and fifty. Okay, there you go plus Patreon. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so we're probably sitting around three hundred episodes. Yeah, how
Speaker 1: does that make you feel?
Speaker 2: Honestly, I can't even remember what the hell I had
Speaker 2: for breakfast yesterday, so like there's just no way in
Speaker 2: hell that I'm going to remember.
Speaker 1: What you're saying is you don't feel you just numb?
Speaker 2: How am I numb?
Speaker 1: Because I'm like, how does that make you feel? And
Speaker 1: you're like, I don't even remember what I had for breakfast?
Speaker 1: Like all right, so you don't feel Oh okay, anyways,
Speaker 1: we're tired. Yeah, okay, we'll talk to you guys later.
Speaker 1: Hopefully enjoyed this one, good one, It was good one,
Speaker 1: and hopefully until next time.
Speaker 2: But also I just have to say, those poor kids,
Speaker 2: they did not deserve that whatsoever.
Speaker 1: So that's true, and description links and things and well
Speaker 1: this is we're an indie podcast, and.
Speaker 2: Can you tell? This was about as informal as it
Speaker 2: fucking gets. So anyway, until next episode, stay wicked