June 12, 2025 • 46 mins
Internal Affairs investigators question Joel on allegations of misconduct. Will he tell the truth?
If you would like to reach out to the Betrayal Team, email us at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod.
To access our newsletter and additional content and to connect with the Betrayal community, join our Substack at betrayal.substack.com.
You can listen new episodes of Betrayal Season 4 completely ad-free and 1 week early with an iHeart True Crime+ subscription, available exclusively on Apple Podcasts.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey guys. Before we get into the episode, a quick note.
We're looking for news stories of betrayal for our weekly
Betrayal series, which returns in August. If you've experienced betrayal
and feel ready to share your story, now is a
great time to reach out. Email us at Betrayal Pod
at gmail dot com. That's Betrayal Pod at gmail dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
She starts screaming and yelling at us, and we just
got up and started to walk away, and then as
we were walking out of their house, she's fallen behind us,
and then she says, I'm going to ruin.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
Your fucking lives.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
I'm Andrea Gunning and this is Betrayal, Season four, Episode four,
Shock to the Conscience. In our last episode, we saw
Joel Kern's double life, a side by side comparison of
two different realities, but those two realities were on a
(01:15):
collision course because Joel's reckoning day at the Colorado Springs
Police Department was rapidly approaching. This was the day he'd
be forced to answer for his lies, and this time
it wouldn't be Caroline who was left in disbelief. It
would be Joel's coworkers, officers he'd worked closely with for
(01:37):
over two decades men. He graduated from the police academy
with men who'd been close friends and mentors. In March
twenty twenty two, Joel was under investigation at the CSPD
because a couple came in to file a complaint against him.
The wife confessed to having sex with Joel in his
(01:58):
police car. He was making amends for her actions, and
part of that was alerting the department that one of
their officers was up to no good. So the department
launched an internal investigation and dug into the claims. Then
they called Joel in for his official interview with internal Affairs.
He was even able to bring an attorney. His future
(02:22):
hinged on what happened in this meeting. We've got it
all on tape and we want you to hear it.
Speaker 4 (02:30):
Good to see you again. It's been a while, okay, Joe,
being in the form you've been up be here, so
I'll let you read that.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
They start the interview by having Joel sign a garrity advisement.
It's an acknowledgment that he's under investigation, it explains the process,
and most importantly, it requires him to answer truthfully. After
he signs this document. A lie could mean termination.
Speaker 4 (02:58):
Sir, Okay, we'll get started. It's Lieutenan ron Field Chancellor
with the Coloria Springs Police Department Internal Affairs Section. Today's Monday,
March twenty first, twenty twenty two. I'm an interviewing on
Lieutenant Joel Kern in regards to Internal Affairs case twenty two.
That's zero two three. Also present are Lieutenant James Sokolick
and Lieutenant Kern's attorney, Joan John Newson. Joel, I know
(03:21):
you were a peer, so before going on the record
where you provided a tight garrity advicetment, I was did
you signed up voluntarily?
Speaker 3 (03:29):
Yes?
Speaker 4 (03:29):
Do you have any questions regarding the garrity advicement?
Speaker 3 (03:31):
No? Okay.
Speaker 4 (03:33):
Will you be answering all of our questions concerning this
matter truthfully today?
Speaker 3 (03:37):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (03:39):
You may remember in episode two, Joel's boss, Commander Strawsner,
reported a conversation he had with Joel where Joel denied
knowing the couple and was worried that someone was impersonating
him or filing a false complaint. Strawsner believed him.
Speaker 4 (03:56):
This is now under garrity. This is your opportunity to
just let us know what happened. I don't want you
to feel tied to whatever you said to Strustner. Anything
that was said there is that good? Is that? Bear?
Speaker 3 (04:10):
I'll tell you exactly what I told you.
Speaker 4 (04:12):
Okay, tell us why do you think those allegations against
you were brought forward?
Speaker 2 (04:20):
I don't know why specifically these allegations were made, but
I have some ideas. I think maybe the the persons
making allegations got in over their head or something, and
I suspect that they're catfished me in whatever communication they
(04:42):
were having.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
But before they got into that, Chancel wanted to focus
on the incident at Joel's house the day a stranger
showed up accusing Joel of having sex with his wife
and his police cruisers.
Speaker 4 (04:57):
My wife out there, the one that you thought in
your cruiser? What are you talking about that?
Speaker 1 (05:02):
Joel wasn't aware that the man had secretly recorded the
entire encounter, and Joel didn't know that the man gave
the recording to the CSPD. Chanza gave Joel an opportunity
to recount what happened from his point of view, I
was just.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
In shocked that someone was standing there saying this to me.
So I said, I don't know who you are, but
I'm not fucking your wife or anybody else's wife.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
And he.
Speaker 2 (05:32):
Looked at me again and then he said, well, I
don't even really know if it's you, and if it's
not you, I'm really sorry. And I took pause for
a second because I'm like, you're coming to my house
banging on my front door, and then you dropped this
bomb on my household, and then you're going to say
(05:54):
that you don't even know if it's me. So I said,
you need to get the fuck off my property. I
walked onto the sidewalks so I could look in the
car just to see who this is. And when I
saw the person, I didn't recognize them at all. And
then she gets out of the car and then like
(06:15):
she's staring at me, and then she has these huge,
huge sunglasses on, like so huge I couldn't even see
her face really, but they weren't like total blackout, and
I could see through the sunglasses that looked like she
had like two black eyes, and she's crying.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
It seemed like Joel, in an effort to deflect the
attention off of his own actions, was slightly suggesting this
man was beating his wife.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
And then this guy slams the back of their car
and says, is that him like screaming at her? And
she startles and she starts to cry even more, and
then she shakes her head yes, and then gets right
back into the car. And then he said, well, the
(07:05):
least that you can do is apologize for ruining my family.
And then so I started walking away and I said,
I have nothing to apologize for because I don't know you,
I don't know your wife. I'm not fucking your wife.
I'm not fucking anybody else. And then I just started
to walk back in my house and then they drove
(07:25):
away eventually.
Speaker 4 (07:28):
Okay, so you have never seen either one of them.
No going back to catfishing. You made a comment about
that at the beginning when we opened up. What does
that have to do with them coming to your front door?
Speaker 2 (07:50):
And like two years ago there was a essentially like
a breakup of friendships with like four different couples.
Speaker 1 (08:00):
It seemed like Joel had come prepared with a backstory.
He says it all started at a dinner party that
he and Caroline attended. It was with a group of
couples an argument broke out. The couple hosting got into
it with Caroline and Joel. The wife in particular was enraged,
so she.
Speaker 2 (08:18):
Starts screaming and yelling at us, and we just got
up and started to walk away, and then as we
were walking out of their house, she's fallen behind us,
and then she says, I'm going to ruin your fucking lives.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
The story was over the top ridiculous. Even then it
got even stranger, Joel said. Another woman got pulled into
the conflict, and the two women teamed up to take
down the Kerns.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
There was another couple who was friends with this lady
that said that she's gonna fucking.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
Ruin my life or ruin our lives.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
And she, when we were all friends, used to brag
about how she would make fake social media accounts and
then converse with people using the fake account. Her idea
of fun was to impersonate a friend of a person
that they already have on Facebook, and then she would
(09:12):
start conversing with him on the instant messaging.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Chanza asked more questions about the women Joel believed targeted
his family, but eventually they got to the heart of
the matter.
Speaker 4 (09:24):
Have you ever had any kind of sexual contact insite
your city, a scign take on vehicle?
Speaker 3 (09:28):
No?
Speaker 4 (09:29):
Have you ever had any sexual contact with anyone while
on duty? No? Okay, so the allegations that are being
brought against you are absolutely not true.
Speaker 5 (09:40):
No.
Speaker 1 (09:42):
Chanza then showed Joel a photograph of a woman. It
was not the woman who filed the complaint, it was
someone else.
Speaker 4 (09:50):
Have you ever met this lady?
Speaker 3 (09:52):
No?
Speaker 4 (09:53):
No. Have you ever uploaded WhatsApp on your work cell
phone number?
Speaker 5 (09:58):
No?
Speaker 4 (10:01):
Obviously you're aware we took your phone, and, as you
may imagine, we dumped your laptop. What if I were
to tell you that you did communicate with someone directing
them to go to WhatsApp?
Speaker 6 (10:15):
With that, refresher memory?
Speaker 1 (10:37):
Lieutenant Chanza began to lay out the evidence they collected. Immediately,
Joel's tone shifted, so did his story. These guys worked
with Joel for years. This was the last situation they
wanted to be in.
Speaker 4 (10:52):
Obviously, you're aware we took your phone, and, as you
may imagine, we dumped your flaptop. What if I were
to tell you that you did communicate with someone directing
them to go to WhatsApp?
Speaker 6 (11:05):
With that, refresh your memory?
Speaker 7 (11:08):
Now?
Speaker 3 (11:08):
I don't remember in what context you said that her names?
Speaker 4 (11:13):
What would to help you if batold you she has
a Denver number?
Speaker 2 (11:23):
Yeah? I met her at a brew function. I'm sorry
to what a brewery function like a beer function?
Speaker 4 (11:35):
Can you describe that?
Speaker 3 (11:35):
FORCE just met her.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Through there and then we started talking and then share
common interests and became friends. But I just know her
as her first name. I don't know her last name
or anything like that.
Speaker 3 (11:52):
Well, you recognize the pictures, right, Yeah? Now I do? Yep, Julie.
Speaker 4 (11:58):
You know how that's looking?
Speaker 3 (11:59):
Right? Is this the person making allegations? We'll get to.
Speaker 4 (12:05):
That, But I mean, if we're trying to establish credibility veracity,
I'm showing you a picture, I'm giving you a chance
to take a look at it, and you're telling me
to my face that you don't recognize them.
Speaker 3 (12:18):
Well, I was mistaken. I apologize for that.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
I recognized her because I just met her at the
prow functions.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
But that's it.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
The woman in the photo was the same woman we
heard from in an earlier episode. We're not using her
name here. She was the one Joel had sex with
in the parking lot of a sporting good store. The
one Joel was texting when he said, there's been some
drama and I deleted everything. The CSPD had copies of
their messages.
Speaker 4 (12:52):
You don't have any kind of leather relationship with her? No.
Have you communicated with her through WhatsApp?
Speaker 2 (12:59):
Yes, just as friends talking through that about different things,
but that's it.
Speaker 8 (13:06):
Do you have a romantic relationship with her, Joel.
Speaker 3 (13:08):
I do not. Would she say differently, I don't know.
I don't have a romantic relationship with her.
Speaker 8 (13:19):
You've been intimate with her?
Speaker 4 (13:21):
No?
Speaker 9 (13:22):
When I say intimate, I'll be very brontu belueal. So
we don't have any to have you even the physically
intimate or had sex with her.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
Before Joel could say anything, so Glik decided to lay
it all out there. He was done with Joel's denial.
Speaker 9 (13:36):
Before you answer that could of pausing I want to say,
is I want to make sure it's very clear that
the internal affairs detectives are in Denver right now to
contact or during this meeting.
Speaker 8 (13:45):
So this should be a really easy question, Joel.
Speaker 4 (13:46):
We're another hear to tricky Joe. This is whe're trying
to get to the bottom of this. I mean, do
you know both of us.
Speaker 9 (13:51):
So I think let me stop things for a second here. Okay,
I really want to clear I know you're talking about
catfish all this. That is not the allegation. The allegation,
you very clear is you had sex with this person,
not that she talked to you about having sex. That
you have had sex with this person in your department vehicle.
That's not a catfishing situation. It's a very serious allegation.
(14:12):
And it's not like a misunderstanding. I'm talking to the
wrong person online. This person's identifying that they had sex
with you, Joel Kern in your department car, and I'll
be honest that it doesn't sound as you being a
one hundred percent honest to your Joel. So we're asking
again real quick understanding. The detectors are out there to
talking to her right now. Have you in physically intimate
with this individual?
Speaker 3 (14:32):
Yes?
Speaker 8 (14:34):
Did you have sex with them?
Speaker 3 (14:36):
Yes?
Speaker 8 (14:37):
Did that occur inside the department vehicle?
Speaker 4 (14:39):
No?
Speaker 8 (14:40):
Did it occur on duty?
Speaker 3 (14:43):
No? I mean I guess it could have.
Speaker 8 (14:47):
Are you familiar with fat Life.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
I've heard of it, but yeah, bet life is a
cank and fetish social networking website.
Speaker 8 (14:54):
Did you meet her through fat Life.
Speaker 3 (14:57):
I can't remember if I did or not.
Speaker 8 (14:59):
You have a fat life account? Did you have a
fat Life account?
Speaker 3 (15:02):
No?
Speaker 9 (15:03):
Okay, So in order to go through fat Life, you
have to have an account in order to have those
conversations back and forth or do dms of that kind
of stuff. So how would you have met her potentially
there if you do have an account of that life.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
I don't remember how I met her exactly. It's been
a few years.
Speaker 4 (15:21):
So we're not gonna let's just give them this one.
You just said I might have. So clearly you have
been on fed life. Can we establish that.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
I looked at it.
Speaker 4 (15:34):
Yes, But and what Jimmy just said is that you
cannot get on there without having an account. We've tested
all this out.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
Hm, I deleted I had an account, and then I
deleted it when I was trying to get my life
back on track.
Speaker 4 (15:54):
Okay, that's a step in our direction. So you had
an account, but you don't know if you've met her
through that life.
Speaker 3 (16:03):
I think I think I did. Yeah, but it wasn't.
You're painting it out to be.
Speaker 4 (16:12):
Passing judgment, Joe. I'll stop you there. We're not. We're
giving you an opportunity.
Speaker 6 (16:16):
To talk to us.
Speaker 4 (16:18):
All we're trying to establish is that you violate policy,
and if you did, obviously we have to be held accountable.
Period I mean, that's it. We're not here to pass judgment.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
So there's periods in my marriage and home life that
were bad and then you know, I met her and
talked to her and then we just became fast friends.
But to the question of violating policy and.
Speaker 4 (16:50):
All that, okay, but you said that possibly you met
her while you were on duty. You were coming back
from Denver when you went to this trip that you're
thinking about where you're driving your take home vehicle.
Speaker 6 (17:07):
Yes, okay, So how does that happen?
Speaker 4 (17:11):
How do you meet her?
Speaker 6 (17:13):
You said you went to a brewery.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
It was coming back from a training and then she
suggested that we meet, and then so we met on
the way back, and then coming back, we just.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
Met at the I forget the name of the store.
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Is an outdoor store like around Lincoln and by twenty
five okay.
Speaker 4 (17:39):
And then where do you guys go and have intimate relationships.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
Well, she came over into my car and then we
just talked and everything, and then kissed.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
A part of the car front passenger.
Speaker 4 (18:03):
Seat, any other area of the car she might have been.
And I'm sure you can probably guess where we're going
with this. We obviously took the car, we had the
lab search it and do what they do. Would there
be any chance for her DNA to be in the
(18:25):
back of that car?
Speaker 3 (18:27):
Oh, sure, she's in the car.
Speaker 4 (18:29):
Or so, Joel, is your name besides kiss?
Speaker 2 (18:36):
Well, this is all very embarrassing and humiliating, but yeah,
we had sex.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
Whereabouts in the car, in the in the back only
the one time.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
Okay, Joel admitted to certain details, but when and only
then he realized they already knew it.
Speaker 4 (19:03):
So the picture that we're getting, Joel, is that there
might be more than one person, And so we want
you to think about it. Pause, if you need to
take a break, if you need to use the restroom,
get some water, and then we can talk about that
when we get back.
Speaker 1 (19:21):
They took a break, and when they returned, Chanza and
so Click continued their questioning, did.
Speaker 3 (19:29):
You have conversations during that light I don't know her name.
Speaker 2 (19:34):
Or who she is or anything like that, but yeah,
I think you had conversations or I did have conversations
with her flight did.
Speaker 8 (19:42):
You arrange per the download to what's appen so you
guys can have conversations privately on your phone.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
Yes.
Speaker 9 (19:49):
Did you arrange to meet her at a oil park? Yes,
then basically you had sex with her at a oil park.
Speaker 3 (19:55):
Didn't have sex, there's no penetration.
Speaker 8 (19:58):
So that was oral sexallently.
Speaker 3 (20:00):
Yes.
Speaker 1 (20:01):
Juel is treading carefully here, because admitting to having sex
in public is not only admitting to a violation of
his duty, but a violation of the law.
Speaker 9 (20:10):
During this conversation, said when you arranged that, basically she
is submissive and you were dominant. She says you struck
her several times, leading bruises. I will say before in
front of our two. She says this was a consensual accounter.
She is not alleging a sexual assault.
Speaker 4 (20:27):
And remember you're within the confines of garrety.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Remember the garrity advisement is a warning given to police
officers during an internal investigation. The individual signing this advisement
is declaring that they will tell the truth.
Speaker 9 (20:42):
This is not having to do anything to do with
a criminal investigation. I'm just trying to lock in her statement.
She said you left bruses, physically struck her, pull her hair,
that type of thing. No, okay, So obviously at some
point in time after this takes place, you break.
Speaker 8 (20:57):
Contact with her. Yes, yes, you have any further contact
with her.
Speaker 2 (21:05):
Just here there afterwards, but nothing what is here and there?
Mean just texting a little bit on the app, but
no physical meetings at westoever.
Speaker 8 (21:19):
So when her husband showed up, you know what he
was talking about?
Speaker 3 (21:24):
You know who I am?
Speaker 4 (21:25):
No, guess my wife felt there when that you're talking
your cruiser. What are you talking about?
Speaker 2 (21:33):
Well, yeah, but again I didn't have sex with her,
as in you know, sexual intercourse or anything like that.
So but yeah, I had an idea.
Speaker 8 (21:51):
Did you recognize her that day?
Speaker 3 (21:54):
Vaguely?
Speaker 4 (21:55):
Yes, So just to clarify the make sure that I'm
showing you here, Joe ass the lady that was there
that day in front of your house.
Speaker 3 (22:05):
Yes.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
Then the investigators turned to an important element in this case.
They have a selfie. Joel sent to this woman, a
photo where he's wearing his police uniform. You can clearly
see his badge on his chest, and the investigators needed
to know why. What was Joel's intention?
Speaker 4 (22:26):
You sent a picture of yourself to the complainant in
this case, the person that you met at Memorial Park. Yes, okay,
four you in uniform, can't remember? Did you identify yourself
as a police officer to this person?
Speaker 3 (22:46):
And after some time after we were talking to me, is.
Speaker 4 (22:49):
Why did you do that?
Speaker 3 (22:51):
Because she said that she works in law.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
And the intent was a developing friendships and all that
and having friendships. So it's just more of like a
getting to know.
Speaker 4 (23:04):
The information we received is that she was nervous. Is
that why you sent a picture of yourself or is
that why you identified yourself as a police officer to
now make her feel more comfortable?
Speaker 3 (23:16):
No, absolutely not, But you.
Speaker 4 (23:19):
Did identify yourself as a police officer.
Speaker 3 (23:21):
Yes, So so we start our list.
Speaker 8 (23:25):
Why didn't you see what happened?
Speaker 2 (23:31):
Because it's humiliating, it's embarrassing, it's traumatic, and you know,
all the demons from my past come to rise. And
I was at a low point definitely in my marriage
and in my life and.
Speaker 3 (23:55):
Trying to save face, trying to not get fired.
Speaker 2 (24:03):
And I think maybe I priy for help.
Speaker 9 (24:14):
There's anything you want to make sure that the person
who means this gets here directly from you?
Speaker 2 (24:21):
Yeah, I think I think I'm salvageable I acknowledge that
that I needed help for a long time, and I
just throw myself at the mercy of the people reading
this and promise that you know, I want to do better,
(24:46):
and I think I need help, and I think it
would be nice for the department to help me get there.
We pay a lot of lip service about our employees
as our family and all that, but I like to
maybe somehow believe in that and recognize that I've had issues,
and I've had issues for a long long time, and
(25:12):
every day is a struggle, and I want help.
Speaker 4 (25:17):
And closing this investigation is ongoing. In order to maintain
the confidentiality of this case, I'm giving you a direct
order not to discuss this case or this interview with
anyone other than Internal Affairs or anyone from whom the
discussion would be legally protected and confidential under Colorado's statute.
Do you understand this order?
Speaker 3 (25:33):
I do, okay.
Speaker 4 (25:35):
This will conclude the interview. The time now is thirteen
forty four hours.
Speaker 1 (25:45):
Caroline and I listened to the Internal Affairs interview together.
I wanted to know what she thought of Joel's performance.
Finally she could hear what was really going on with
Joel while she was still in the dark. Caroline remembers
exactly what she was doing the week of Joel's interview
(26:07):
because she was on vacation with her daughter. They decided
to take a trip to Vegas together and soak up
the desert sun. Joel hung back, saying he was busy
with work all the while he knew he'd been caught.
He was just waiting to find out how bad the
consequences would be.
Speaker 7 (26:26):
And he picked us up at the airport with our
dogs in the card, gets out of the car, kisses me,
hugs her.
Speaker 10 (26:33):
Missed you, guys, Oh, we missed you.
Speaker 7 (26:35):
We're catching up. We're talking about the food, we ate
and we're filling him in.
Speaker 10 (26:39):
How was work?
Speaker 7 (26:39):
Oh, my gosh, so busy this week. I have replayed
that over and over and over and over again to Caroline.
Speaker 1 (26:49):
Her husband seemed completely normal.
Speaker 7 (26:52):
Meanwhile, he has just revealed what is going to be
the detriment to our family.
Speaker 10 (27:00):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (27:01):
I mean he signs the garrity, which is basically saying
that he's promising to tell the truth, and from the
very beginning from question one, he is lying. Do you
feel like he thought that he could talk his way
out of it.
Speaker 7 (27:18):
I don't think he just thought he could talk his
way out of it. I think that he truly and
his gut believed he would get away with it. He
not only thought that he could have his attorney believe him,
but Joel believed that he would be able to have
Raphael and Jimmy believe him as well.
Speaker 1 (27:35):
And those are the two internal affairs investigators we heard
questioning him, Raphael Chans and Jimmy Soklick. These are two
people who both knew you guys personally.
Speaker 7 (27:45):
Yes. The part that disturbs me so much on this
is not just that he lied, but the level of
personal connection and whom he lied to. They were promoted
on the same day together as lieutenants. We were at
Jimmy Sokolick's wedding. Wow, these were people who had been
at personal events and our lives. He's lying to them,
(28:09):
and not only just lying to them as professionals, colleagues
and friends, but he is lying about the dynamic of
our home. There was not this unhealthy, horrible life at home.
And yet this is what he reverts back to time
and time and time again on the times where he
has gotten caught.
Speaker 1 (28:30):
Yeah, I was going to say, he refers to your
marriage being in a bad place. And this isn't the
first IA investigation where he cites this experience. You don't
look back at that time feeling like your marriage was
in a bad place. I do not do you even
recognize the person on that tape.
Speaker 7 (28:53):
So when I hear the investigation, I see the stranger
who I lived with. I do not know that man.
That man who is on that tape is evil. I
don't know anything about him. He just didn't think he
would get to that point. That's why he started with
the line denying, deflecting, and shifting any of the responsibility.
(29:17):
And then when he had to fall on his sword,
magically it became all this was going sideways at home.
I have demons, I need help. Yeah, it turned into
a different deflection.
Speaker 5 (29:31):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (29:32):
He would make comments about quote slaying his demons, and
then he would talk about I just need to get
back to the man I was.
Speaker 10 (29:39):
I could be the husband I was, I could be
the dad I was. But the fact of the matter is.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
What were you? Yah? Who were you ever?
Speaker 7 (29:48):
That's a question that the kids and I have grappled with.
Those are the moments where I question things but I
have to remind myself the kids and I were living
the truth. He loving the lie.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
Yeah yeah, How long is it taking you to get
to that place to be able to say that I.
Speaker 10 (30:10):
Do it daily? I still have to do it daily,
(30:32):
all right.
Speaker 5 (30:34):
So just to go on the record, today's ago.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
About a month after Joel's Internal Affairs interview judgment day
finally came, Joel had to face his boss, Commander Strassner,
who had believed in him, thought the best of him.
You've heard the date several times now, April eleventh, twenty two,
and Strawsner got right to it.
Speaker 3 (30:57):
I want believer the point here this is not.
Speaker 5 (31:03):
Did not expect to have to do this with you, Joey,
Really you never expected this would have to be the case.
Did you get the agenda for the meeting?
Speaker 3 (31:13):
Yes, sir, yes, sir. Okay.
Speaker 1 (31:17):
Strassner began by laying up the facts of the case.
Speaker 5 (31:20):
About four thirty to five pm, you informed me that
you knew you were under investigation. When I asked how
you knew that, you proceeded doing tell me about the
confrontation that occurred on February fifth, professing your innocence and
adamantly denying any involvement in the situation. I had no
reason not to believe your innocence in this case, which
(31:44):
meant that either the couple was lying and needed to
be criminally charged, or that another cop was impersonating you
and needed to be fired, and that we would make
sure the case was thoroughly investigated. After being advised and
signing the garrity warning, which included in order to answer
questions truthfully, you knowingly lied, providing false information to the
(32:06):
investigators from nearly forty to forty five minutes. You initially
attempted to blame someone you know as for causing you
and your wife's problems and somehow causing this complaint by
catfishing you online. You initially denied ever having an account
on fet life and denied knowing either. Only after being
confronted with specific facts did you begin to admit to
(32:28):
having sex with While admitting to having sex with her,
you initially denied the encounter occurred in your police car.
You later confessed you might have met her on fet life,
and then did admit the sexual encounter did occur in
your police vehicle. After taking a break in the interview,
you returned finally you admit that you arranged a meeting
(32:51):
and memorial park with you stated you did not have
sex with her because there was no penetration, and quite frankly,
I think this is QUI over the details. Because she
did perform oral sex on you in the back of
the suv. There are discrepancies in the rest of the
interview between what can you describe as having occurred in
the back of the suv. Quite frankly, those details are
(33:14):
irrelevant to proving the overall case. However, given the false
statements you've provided to Internal Affairs, I have no reason
to discount any of her recollection of these events. That's
my overall case summary.
Speaker 3 (33:29):
Lieutenant.
Speaker 5 (33:30):
Do you have any comments that you want to make.
Speaker 2 (33:33):
I'm extremely remorseful, I'm extremely ashamed, humiliated, embarrassed, upset. I'm
begging for mercy. I literally was not in my right mind,
and I've been going through a hard time for several
years and I can promise you that.
Speaker 3 (33:56):
Nothing like that, whatever ever, happen again.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
I initially light in the eye interview because I was humiliated, embarrassed, scared.
Speaker 3 (34:12):
Didn't I want to.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
How this come to fruition and lose everything.
Speaker 8 (34:21):
That I have.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
I am on bended knee asking for forgiveness. I promise
you that none of this will ever happen again. I
understand that I've shattered your trust and it's something that
I want to work hard to get back. I apologize
for any of this happening. The last three months have
(34:49):
been hell, and I just am begging for your mercy.
Speaker 5 (34:58):
I'm gonna move to the next section here and just
talking about my comments and insight regarding this case. This
case is not about the sex or how you meant
these women. Honestly, I don't really care what your preferences
are unless the PD is somehow brought into this situation.
(35:19):
Has occurred in this case when you sent essentially these
strangers a photograph of yourself in police uniform and used
your work vehicle for your activities. That's what made this
police issue. The week the allegation was filed, you didn't
need to say anything to me about the case, and
quite honestly, I wish you'd not said.
Speaker 3 (35:39):
Anything to me at all. You literally lied.
Speaker 5 (35:41):
To my face on that Wednesday afternoon proclaiming your innocence,
and unless than twenty minutes later was texting with to
tell her there was drama, and that you deleted everything.
Even on Friday, when I tried to reassure you that
I had no reason not to believe you and would
make sure that this case was the investigated, you didn't
(36:02):
flinch even when I threatened to criminally charge this couple
or maybe fire another employee, and you later thanked me
for believing in you. To me, this is the most
disturbing piece of the entire case. Even in your interview
with IA, as a former investigator yourself, you lied to
(36:24):
Jimmy and rolf A, all trying to pin this on
a third person named You had five and a half
weeks to think about your interview and decided to stick
with your story and deny that any of this occurred.
The fact that you lied, the fact that you were
willing to put this on a third person or possibly
even have charges filed against the complainant, is absolutely horrific
(36:45):
and constitutes a violation of your oath in office. I
also cannot ignore the previous history from the twenty nineteen case.
Speaker 1 (36:54):
Strawsner is referring to the case when a reporter contacted
the CSPD because Joel was for the public information officer job.
The reporter alleged that Joel had sexually harassed her and
other reporters.
Speaker 5 (37:08):
Twenty nineteen, Commander Mandel wrote, in regard to that incident,
Lieutenant Kern is a valuable member of the departments, committed
to putting this behind him and being a better person
and leader for the organization. I have full confidence that
Lieutenant Kern has learned from his mistakes and he will
not place himself or the department in this position again.
I'm hearing some of the same things that were said
(37:30):
last time.
Speaker 1 (37:30):
In that case, Strassner is right back in twenty nineteen,
Joel had used some of the exact same language. Here's
Joel in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 11 (37:41):
I'm mis shaped, and I'm embarrassed, and I'm hamiliated, and
again I take four responsibility for my actions and yes,
for mercy.
Speaker 5 (37:56):
Not only did you put yourself in that same position,
you made it worse. Someone might make that argument that
you were initially evasive in the ie interview, but that
you rectified it later by telling the truth. I want
to be clear that I do not believe you fully
redeemed your credibility or you were completely transparent even near
(38:17):
the end of your interview. You were specifically asked by
Lieutenant Socolick whether you deleted the WhatsApp, to which you
told them yes. Later, Lieutenant Chansa asked you do you
still use WhatsApp currently, and you replied, just to talk
to I believe the slip up proves you're still not
being completely honest with investigators, that you're unable to keep
track of all your lives, and quite frankly, I question
(38:40):
how many other women are out there that may bring
forward allegations in the future. Now, before I present my findings,
I want to address something you stated during your interview
with Lieutenant chans And Sokolick said that you believe you
need help and it would be nice for the department
to help you get there, And you said, quote, we
(39:01):
pay a lot of lip service about our employees as family,
and I'd like to maybe somehow believe in that and
recognize I've had issues. I want to point out a
couple of things. In twenty nineteen, you receive nothing more
than a written reprimand at a time when you might
have been able to get more, and you said you
were already seeking the help. I believe this department has
(39:21):
treated you more than fair regarding these previous indiscretions.
Speaker 3 (39:25):
I'm not saying that they weren't.
Speaker 5 (39:29):
I'm about to go into the findings of the policies.
Did you have anything you wanted to add?
Speaker 2 (39:35):
Yeah, that I know that the department has been good
to me. I am sorry that I that this kind
of stuff happened a second time, but I swear that
there is nobody else. I'm willing to do whatever it
takes to hold on to my employment, and two to
(40:00):
show that I can do better. And I apologize from
the bottom of my heart. I understand that it looks
bad the way everything's been discussed here, and again, I'm
begging for your mercy.
Speaker 1 (40:18):
Strassner was unmoved.
Speaker 5 (40:20):
Okay, let's go through each of the policies. So as
I go through these, remember the standard as a preponderance
of the evidence. First one is nine oh six point
three zero. It's the take home Vehicles policy. By a
preponderance of the evidence, your take home vehicle was inappropriately used.
(40:42):
This allegation is sustained four hundred point three zero.
Speaker 1 (40:48):
Another big one, conduct unbecoming of a police officer.
Speaker 5 (40:53):
What's reasonable believe that using photographs of yourself an official
police uniform to gain the trust of women you have
met on fees life and then having sex with them
in an official police vehicle has brought disrepute to the
police department. Further, your false statements to me at the
onset were unsolicited and used to paint yourself in the
most favorable light regarding this investigation. This allegation is sustained.
Speaker 1 (41:17):
Then Strawsner reached the most egregious of Joel's violations, and
the final.
Speaker 5 (41:22):
Allegation is four hundred point one to three employee conduct
departing from the truth. Employees will not willfully or knowingly
depart from the truth and giving testimony or in connection
with official duties. You were given a garrity advisement and
sign that invisement, knowing you were being ordered to tell
the truth by a preponderance of the evidence, you gave
a false statement for the first approximate forty minutes of
(41:44):
the interview. Only when confronted with evidence did you finally
begin to confess some of your role in this case. Yet,
as I said, I still am not sure that you've
told the whole truth. This is sustained as well. This
(42:05):
whole thing has just been like a shock to my conscience.
It really has, and honestly, I think we've been painted
into a corner where there's really only one outcome. In
this case, I can recommend. I have no option but
to recommend your termination.
Speaker 1 (42:30):
Caroline. It feels like, maybe for the first time, someone
with authority sees through Joel's facade. What went through your
mind when you heard Joel's boss in front him.
Speaker 7 (42:42):
I think it's fascinating to listen to when Strasner says,
and I believe there's more, there's more women. I question
how many other women will come forward? And then hearing
Joel say I swear these were the only two. I
swear these were the only two. And next thing you know,
it's all kinds of different names are being revealed, and
all of these sexual encounters and sexually illicit behavior while
(43:06):
he's under the guise of a police officer.
Speaker 1 (43:08):
Did you ever talk to Strawsner?
Speaker 5 (43:10):
I did.
Speaker 1 (43:12):
What can you tell me about that?
Speaker 10 (43:14):
There's two people who.
Speaker 7 (43:17):
A lot of people will be shocked that I'm grateful
for the first one is the male who came to
my front door, the husband of the wife who Joel
had an affair with. And the second one is Jeff Strassner.
I'm extremely grateful for Jeff Strawssner. I was at a
community event and he was there, and as we walked
(43:38):
out together, I said, hey, Jeff, and I could tell
he was nervous to see me, and he was like, oh,
you know, hey, Caroline, and I said I'd like to
thank you, and he looks shocked, and I said, thank
you for not believing him.
Speaker 10 (43:57):
Thank you for.
Speaker 7 (44:00):
The due diligence of hearing this one out and not
giving him the benefit of the doubt. You may have
saved mine in my kids' lives.
Speaker 10 (44:10):
Thank you.
Speaker 7 (44:12):
And Jeff's always been a very friendly and a little
bit stoic of a man. But his voice started a
crack and you could see the emotion on him, and
he said, oh my gosh, thank you for saying that.
I appreciate you saying that. I have thought about you
and the kids so much. So when I hear Jeff
(44:34):
Strassner's commentary in this interview, I'm extremely grateful for him.
I know that just hours later is when Joel's going
to do his reveal to me and the kids. So
it's an interesting thing to reflect back on it and think, yeah,
(44:57):
what that day must have been like in his world.
Speaker 1 (45:01):
So we know that Strassner recommended Joel for termination, but
he wasn't fired, was he.
Speaker 4 (45:10):
No?
Speaker 1 (45:14):
Joel wasn't fired, and this case only gets more interesting.
We'll explore how he was able to avoid termination on
the next episode of Betrayal. Thank you for listening to
Betrayal season four. If you would like to reach out
(45:34):
to the Betrayal team, email us at Betrayalpod at gmail
dot com. That's Betrayal Pod at gmail dot com. Also,
please be sure to follow us on Instagram at Betrayal
Pod and me Andrea H. Gunning for all Betrayal content,
news and updates. One way to support the series is
by subscribing to our show on Apple Podcasts. Please rate
(45:56):
and review Betrayal five star reviews help us know you
appreciate what we do. Betrayal is a production of Glass Podcasts,
a division of Glass Entertainment Group, in partnership with iHeart Podcasts.
The show is executive produced by Nancy Glass and Jennifer Fason.
Betrayal is hosted and produced by me Andrea Gunning, written
(46:16):
and produced by Carrie Hartman, also produced by Ben Fetterman,
our associate producers are Caitlin Golden and Kristin Melcury. Our
iHeart team is Ali Perry and Jessica Crincheck. Story editing
by Monique Leboard, audio editing and mixing by Matt Delvecchio,
editing by Tanner Robbins, and special thanks to Caroline and
(46:37):
her family. Betrayal's theme is composed by Oliver Baines. Music
library provided by my Music and For more podcasts from iHeart,
visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get
your podcasts
Hey guys. Before we get into the episode, a quick note.
We're looking for news stories of betrayal for our weekly
Betrayal series, which returns in August. If you've experienced betrayal
and feel ready to share your story, now is a
great time to reach out. Email us at Betrayal Pod
at gmail dot com. That's Betrayal Pod at gmail dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
She starts screaming and yelling at us, and we just
got up and started to walk away, and then as
we were walking out of their house, she's fallen behind us,
and then she says, I'm going to ruin.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
Your fucking lives.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
I'm Andrea Gunning and this is Betrayal, Season four, Episode four,
Shock to the Conscience. In our last episode, we saw
Joel Kern's double life, a side by side comparison of
two different realities, but those two realities were on a
(01:15):
collision course because Joel's reckoning day at the Colorado Springs
Police Department was rapidly approaching. This was the day he'd
be forced to answer for his lies, and this time
it wouldn't be Caroline who was left in disbelief. It
would be Joel's coworkers, officers he'd worked closely with for
(01:37):
over two decades men. He graduated from the police academy
with men who'd been close friends and mentors. In March
twenty twenty two, Joel was under investigation at the CSPD
because a couple came in to file a complaint against him.
The wife confessed to having sex with Joel in his
(01:58):
police car. He was making amends for her actions, and
part of that was alerting the department that one of
their officers was up to no good. So the department
launched an internal investigation and dug into the claims. Then
they called Joel in for his official interview with internal Affairs.
He was even able to bring an attorney. His future
(02:22):
hinged on what happened in this meeting. We've got it
all on tape and we want you to hear it.
Speaker 4 (02:30):
Good to see you again. It's been a while, okay, Joe,
being in the form you've been up be here, so
I'll let you read that.
Speaker 1 (02:40):
They start the interview by having Joel sign a garrity advisement.
It's an acknowledgment that he's under investigation, it explains the process,
and most importantly, it requires him to answer truthfully. After
he signs this document. A lie could mean termination.
Speaker 4 (02:58):
Sir, Okay, we'll get started. It's Lieutenan ron Field Chancellor
with the Coloria Springs Police Department Internal Affairs Section. Today's Monday,
March twenty first, twenty twenty two. I'm an interviewing on
Lieutenant Joel Kern in regards to Internal Affairs case twenty two.
That's zero two three. Also present are Lieutenant James Sokolick
and Lieutenant Kern's attorney, Joan John Newson. Joel, I know
(03:21):
you were a peer, so before going on the record
where you provided a tight garrity advicetment, I was did
you signed up voluntarily?
Speaker 3 (03:29):
Yes?
Speaker 4 (03:29):
Do you have any questions regarding the garrity advicement?
Speaker 3 (03:31):
No? Okay.
Speaker 4 (03:33):
Will you be answering all of our questions concerning this
matter truthfully today?
Speaker 3 (03:37):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (03:39):
You may remember in episode two, Joel's boss, Commander Strawsner,
reported a conversation he had with Joel where Joel denied
knowing the couple and was worried that someone was impersonating
him or filing a false complaint. Strawsner believed him.
Speaker 4 (03:56):
This is now under garrity. This is your opportunity to
just let us know what happened. I don't want you
to feel tied to whatever you said to Strustner. Anything
that was said there is that good? Is that? Bear?
Speaker 3 (04:10):
I'll tell you exactly what I told you.
Speaker 4 (04:12):
Okay, tell us why do you think those allegations against
you were brought forward?
Speaker 2 (04:20):
I don't know why specifically these allegations were made, but
I have some ideas. I think maybe the the persons
making allegations got in over their head or something, and
I suspect that they're catfished me in whatever communication they
(04:42):
were having.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
But before they got into that, Chancel wanted to focus
on the incident at Joel's house the day a stranger
showed up accusing Joel of having sex with his wife
and his police cruisers.
Speaker 4 (04:57):
My wife out there, the one that you thought in
your cruiser? What are you talking about that?
Speaker 1 (05:02):
Joel wasn't aware that the man had secretly recorded the
entire encounter, and Joel didn't know that the man gave
the recording to the CSPD. Chanza gave Joel an opportunity
to recount what happened from his point of view, I
was just.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
In shocked that someone was standing there saying this to me.
So I said, I don't know who you are, but
I'm not fucking your wife or anybody else's wife.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
And he.
Speaker 2 (05:32):
Looked at me again and then he said, well, I
don't even really know if it's you, and if it's
not you, I'm really sorry. And I took pause for
a second because I'm like, you're coming to my house
banging on my front door, and then you dropped this
bomb on my household, and then you're going to say
(05:54):
that you don't even know if it's me. So I said,
you need to get the fuck off my property. I
walked onto the sidewalks so I could look in the
car just to see who this is. And when I
saw the person, I didn't recognize them at all. And
then she gets out of the car and then like
(06:15):
she's staring at me, and then she has these huge,
huge sunglasses on, like so huge I couldn't even see
her face really, but they weren't like total blackout, and
I could see through the sunglasses that looked like she
had like two black eyes, and she's crying.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
It seemed like Joel, in an effort to deflect the
attention off of his own actions, was slightly suggesting this
man was beating his wife.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
And then this guy slams the back of their car
and says, is that him like screaming at her? And
she startles and she starts to cry even more, and
then she shakes her head yes, and then gets right
back into the car. And then he said, well, the
(07:05):
least that you can do is apologize for ruining my family.
And then so I started walking away and I said,
I have nothing to apologize for because I don't know you,
I don't know your wife. I'm not fucking your wife.
I'm not fucking anybody else. And then I just started
to walk back in my house and then they drove
(07:25):
away eventually.
Speaker 4 (07:28):
Okay, so you have never seen either one of them.
No going back to catfishing. You made a comment about
that at the beginning when we opened up. What does
that have to do with them coming to your front door?
Speaker 2 (07:50):
And like two years ago there was a essentially like
a breakup of friendships with like four different couples.
Speaker 1 (08:00):
It seemed like Joel had come prepared with a backstory.
He says it all started at a dinner party that
he and Caroline attended. It was with a group of
couples an argument broke out. The couple hosting got into
it with Caroline and Joel. The wife in particular was enraged,
so she.
Speaker 2 (08:18):
Starts screaming and yelling at us, and we just got
up and started to walk away, and then as we
were walking out of their house, she's fallen behind us,
and then she says, I'm going to ruin your fucking lives.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
The story was over the top ridiculous. Even then it
got even stranger, Joel said. Another woman got pulled into
the conflict, and the two women teamed up to take
down the Kerns.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
There was another couple who was friends with this lady
that said that she's gonna fucking.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
Ruin my life or ruin our lives.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
And she, when we were all friends, used to brag
about how she would make fake social media accounts and
then converse with people using the fake account. Her idea
of fun was to impersonate a friend of a person
that they already have on Facebook, and then she would
(09:12):
start conversing with him on the instant messaging.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Chanza asked more questions about the women Joel believed targeted
his family, but eventually they got to the heart of
the matter.
Speaker 4 (09:24):
Have you ever had any kind of sexual contact insite
your city, a scign take on vehicle?
Speaker 3 (09:28):
No?
Speaker 4 (09:29):
Have you ever had any sexual contact with anyone while
on duty? No? Okay, so the allegations that are being
brought against you are absolutely not true.
Speaker 5 (09:40):
No.
Speaker 1 (09:42):
Chanza then showed Joel a photograph of a woman. It
was not the woman who filed the complaint, it was
someone else.
Speaker 4 (09:50):
Have you ever met this lady?
Speaker 3 (09:52):
No?
Speaker 4 (09:53):
No. Have you ever uploaded WhatsApp on your work cell
phone number?
Speaker 5 (09:58):
No?
Speaker 4 (10:01):
Obviously you're aware we took your phone, and, as you
may imagine, we dumped your laptop. What if I were
to tell you that you did communicate with someone directing
them to go to WhatsApp?
Speaker 6 (10:15):
With that, refresher memory?
Speaker 1 (10:37):
Lieutenant Chanza began to lay out the evidence they collected. Immediately,
Joel's tone shifted, so did his story. These guys worked
with Joel for years. This was the last situation they
wanted to be in.
Speaker 4 (10:52):
Obviously, you're aware we took your phone, and, as you
may imagine, we dumped your flaptop. What if I were
to tell you that you did communicate with someone directing
them to go to WhatsApp?
Speaker 6 (11:05):
With that, refresh your memory?
Speaker 7 (11:08):
Now?
Speaker 3 (11:08):
I don't remember in what context you said that her names?
Speaker 4 (11:13):
What would to help you if batold you she has
a Denver number?
Speaker 2 (11:23):
Yeah? I met her at a brew function. I'm sorry
to what a brewery function like a beer function?
Speaker 4 (11:35):
Can you describe that?
Speaker 3 (11:35):
FORCE just met her.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Through there and then we started talking and then share
common interests and became friends. But I just know her
as her first name. I don't know her last name
or anything like that.
Speaker 3 (11:52):
Well, you recognize the pictures, right, Yeah? Now I do? Yep, Julie.
Speaker 4 (11:58):
You know how that's looking?
Speaker 3 (11:59):
Right? Is this the person making allegations? We'll get to.
Speaker 4 (12:05):
That, But I mean, if we're trying to establish credibility veracity,
I'm showing you a picture, I'm giving you a chance
to take a look at it, and you're telling me
to my face that you don't recognize them.
Speaker 3 (12:18):
Well, I was mistaken. I apologize for that.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
I recognized her because I just met her at the
prow functions.
Speaker 3 (12:29):
But that's it.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
The woman in the photo was the same woman we
heard from in an earlier episode. We're not using her
name here. She was the one Joel had sex with
in the parking lot of a sporting good store. The
one Joel was texting when he said, there's been some
drama and I deleted everything. The CSPD had copies of
their messages.
Speaker 4 (12:52):
You don't have any kind of leather relationship with her? No.
Have you communicated with her through WhatsApp?
Speaker 2 (12:59):
Yes, just as friends talking through that about different things,
but that's it.
Speaker 8 (13:06):
Do you have a romantic relationship with her, Joel.
Speaker 3 (13:08):
I do not. Would she say differently, I don't know.
I don't have a romantic relationship with her.
Speaker 8 (13:19):
You've been intimate with her?
Speaker 4 (13:21):
No?
Speaker 9 (13:22):
When I say intimate, I'll be very brontu belueal. So
we don't have any to have you even the physically
intimate or had sex with her.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
Before Joel could say anything, so Glik decided to lay
it all out there. He was done with Joel's denial.
Speaker 9 (13:36):
Before you answer that could of pausing I want to say,
is I want to make sure it's very clear that
the internal affairs detectives are in Denver right now to
contact or during this meeting.
Speaker 8 (13:45):
So this should be a really easy question, Joel.
Speaker 4 (13:46):
We're another hear to tricky Joe. This is whe're trying
to get to the bottom of this. I mean, do
you know both of us.
Speaker 9 (13:51):
So I think let me stop things for a second here. Okay,
I really want to clear I know you're talking about
catfish all this. That is not the allegation. The allegation,
you very clear is you had sex with this person,
not that she talked to you about having sex. That
you have had sex with this person in your department vehicle.
That's not a catfishing situation. It's a very serious allegation.
(14:12):
And it's not like a misunderstanding. I'm talking to the
wrong person online. This person's identifying that they had sex
with you, Joel Kern in your department car, and I'll
be honest that it doesn't sound as you being a
one hundred percent honest to your Joel. So we're asking
again real quick understanding. The detectors are out there to
talking to her right now. Have you in physically intimate
with this individual?
Speaker 3 (14:32):
Yes?
Speaker 8 (14:34):
Did you have sex with them?
Speaker 3 (14:36):
Yes?
Speaker 8 (14:37):
Did that occur inside the department vehicle?
Speaker 4 (14:39):
No?
Speaker 8 (14:40):
Did it occur on duty?
Speaker 3 (14:43):
No? I mean I guess it could have.
Speaker 8 (14:47):
Are you familiar with fat Life.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
I've heard of it, but yeah, bet life is a
cank and fetish social networking website.
Speaker 8 (14:54):
Did you meet her through fat Life.
Speaker 3 (14:57):
I can't remember if I did or not.
Speaker 8 (14:59):
You have a fat life account? Did you have a
fat Life account?
Speaker 3 (15:02):
No?
Speaker 9 (15:03):
Okay, So in order to go through fat Life, you
have to have an account in order to have those
conversations back and forth or do dms of that kind
of stuff. So how would you have met her potentially
there if you do have an account of that life.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
I don't remember how I met her exactly. It's been
a few years.
Speaker 4 (15:21):
So we're not gonna let's just give them this one.
You just said I might have. So clearly you have
been on fed life. Can we establish that.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
I looked at it.
Speaker 4 (15:34):
Yes, But and what Jimmy just said is that you
cannot get on there without having an account. We've tested
all this out.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
Hm, I deleted I had an account, and then I
deleted it when I was trying to get my life
back on track.
Speaker 4 (15:54):
Okay, that's a step in our direction. So you had
an account, but you don't know if you've met her
through that life.
Speaker 3 (16:03):
I think I think I did. Yeah, but it wasn't.
You're painting it out to be.
Speaker 4 (16:12):
Passing judgment, Joe. I'll stop you there. We're not. We're
giving you an opportunity.
Speaker 6 (16:16):
To talk to us.
Speaker 4 (16:18):
All we're trying to establish is that you violate policy,
and if you did, obviously we have to be held accountable.
Period I mean, that's it. We're not here to pass judgment.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
So there's periods in my marriage and home life that
were bad and then you know, I met her and
talked to her and then we just became fast friends.
But to the question of violating policy and.
Speaker 4 (16:50):
All that, okay, but you said that possibly you met
her while you were on duty. You were coming back
from Denver when you went to this trip that you're
thinking about where you're driving your take home vehicle.
Speaker 6 (17:07):
Yes, okay, So how does that happen?
Speaker 4 (17:11):
How do you meet her?
Speaker 6 (17:13):
You said you went to a brewery.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
It was coming back from a training and then she
suggested that we meet, and then so we met on
the way back, and then coming back, we just.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
Met at the I forget the name of the store.
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Is an outdoor store like around Lincoln and by twenty
five okay.
Speaker 4 (17:39):
And then where do you guys go and have intimate relationships.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
Well, she came over into my car and then we
just talked and everything, and then kissed.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
A part of the car front passenger.
Speaker 4 (18:03):
Seat, any other area of the car she might have been.
And I'm sure you can probably guess where we're going
with this. We obviously took the car, we had the
lab search it and do what they do. Would there
be any chance for her DNA to be in the
(18:25):
back of that car?
Speaker 3 (18:27):
Oh, sure, she's in the car.
Speaker 4 (18:29):
Or so, Joel, is your name besides kiss?
Speaker 2 (18:36):
Well, this is all very embarrassing and humiliating, but yeah,
we had sex.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
Whereabouts in the car, in the in the back only
the one time.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
Okay, Joel admitted to certain details, but when and only
then he realized they already knew it.
Speaker 4 (19:03):
So the picture that we're getting, Joel, is that there
might be more than one person, And so we want
you to think about it. Pause, if you need to
take a break, if you need to use the restroom,
get some water, and then we can talk about that
when we get back.
Speaker 1 (19:21):
They took a break, and when they returned, Chanza and
so Click continued their questioning, did.
Speaker 3 (19:29):
You have conversations during that light I don't know her name.
Speaker 2 (19:34):
Or who she is or anything like that, but yeah,
I think you had conversations or I did have conversations
with her flight did.
Speaker 8 (19:42):
You arrange per the download to what's appen so you
guys can have conversations privately on your phone.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
Yes.
Speaker 9 (19:49):
Did you arrange to meet her at a oil park? Yes,
then basically you had sex with her at a oil park.
Speaker 3 (19:55):
Didn't have sex, there's no penetration.
Speaker 8 (19:58):
So that was oral sexallently.
Speaker 3 (20:00):
Yes.
Speaker 1 (20:01):
Juel is treading carefully here, because admitting to having sex
in public is not only admitting to a violation of
his duty, but a violation of the law.
Speaker 9 (20:10):
During this conversation, said when you arranged that, basically she
is submissive and you were dominant. She says you struck
her several times, leading bruises. I will say before in
front of our two. She says this was a consensual accounter.
She is not alleging a sexual assault.
Speaker 4 (20:27):
And remember you're within the confines of garrety.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Remember the garrity advisement is a warning given to police
officers during an internal investigation. The individual signing this advisement
is declaring that they will tell the truth.
Speaker 9 (20:42):
This is not having to do anything to do with
a criminal investigation. I'm just trying to lock in her statement.
She said you left bruses, physically struck her, pull her hair,
that type of thing. No, okay, So obviously at some
point in time after this takes place, you break.
Speaker 8 (20:57):
Contact with her. Yes, yes, you have any further contact
with her.
Speaker 2 (21:05):
Just here there afterwards, but nothing what is here and there?
Mean just texting a little bit on the app, but
no physical meetings at westoever.
Speaker 8 (21:19):
So when her husband showed up, you know what he
was talking about?
Speaker 3 (21:24):
You know who I am?
Speaker 4 (21:25):
No, guess my wife felt there when that you're talking
your cruiser. What are you talking about?
Speaker 2 (21:33):
Well, yeah, but again I didn't have sex with her,
as in you know, sexual intercourse or anything like that.
So but yeah, I had an idea.
Speaker 8 (21:51):
Did you recognize her that day?
Speaker 3 (21:54):
Vaguely?
Speaker 4 (21:55):
Yes, So just to clarify the make sure that I'm
showing you here, Joe ass the lady that was there
that day in front of your house.
Speaker 3 (22:05):
Yes.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
Then the investigators turned to an important element in this case.
They have a selfie. Joel sent to this woman, a
photo where he's wearing his police uniform. You can clearly
see his badge on his chest, and the investigators needed
to know why. What was Joel's intention?
Speaker 4 (22:26):
You sent a picture of yourself to the complainant in
this case, the person that you met at Memorial Park. Yes, okay,
four you in uniform, can't remember? Did you identify yourself
as a police officer to this person?
Speaker 3 (22:46):
And after some time after we were talking to me, is.
Speaker 4 (22:49):
Why did you do that?
Speaker 3 (22:51):
Because she said that she works in law.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
And the intent was a developing friendships and all that
and having friendships. So it's just more of like a
getting to know.
Speaker 4 (23:04):
The information we received is that she was nervous. Is
that why you sent a picture of yourself or is
that why you identified yourself as a police officer to
now make her feel more comfortable?
Speaker 3 (23:16):
No, absolutely not, But you.
Speaker 4 (23:19):
Did identify yourself as a police officer.
Speaker 3 (23:21):
Yes, So so we start our list.
Speaker 8 (23:25):
Why didn't you see what happened?
Speaker 2 (23:31):
Because it's humiliating, it's embarrassing, it's traumatic, and you know,
all the demons from my past come to rise. And
I was at a low point definitely in my marriage
and in my life and.
Speaker 3 (23:55):
Trying to save face, trying to not get fired.
Speaker 2 (24:03):
And I think maybe I priy for help.
Speaker 9 (24:14):
There's anything you want to make sure that the person
who means this gets here directly from you?
Speaker 2 (24:21):
Yeah, I think I think I'm salvageable I acknowledge that
that I needed help for a long time, and I
just throw myself at the mercy of the people reading
this and promise that you know, I want to do better,
(24:46):
and I think I need help, and I think it
would be nice for the department to help me get there.
We pay a lot of lip service about our employees
as our family and all that, but I like to
maybe somehow believe in that and recognize that I've had issues,
and I've had issues for a long long time, and
(25:12):
every day is a struggle, and I want help.
Speaker 4 (25:17):
And closing this investigation is ongoing. In order to maintain
the confidentiality of this case, I'm giving you a direct
order not to discuss this case or this interview with
anyone other than Internal Affairs or anyone from whom the
discussion would be legally protected and confidential under Colorado's statute.
Do you understand this order?
Speaker 3 (25:33):
I do, okay.
Speaker 4 (25:35):
This will conclude the interview. The time now is thirteen
forty four hours.
Speaker 1 (25:45):
Caroline and I listened to the Internal Affairs interview together.
I wanted to know what she thought of Joel's performance.
Finally she could hear what was really going on with
Joel while she was still in the dark. Caroline remembers
exactly what she was doing the week of Joel's interview
(26:07):
because she was on vacation with her daughter. They decided
to take a trip to Vegas together and soak up
the desert sun. Joel hung back, saying he was busy
with work all the while he knew he'd been caught.
He was just waiting to find out how bad the
consequences would be.
Speaker 7 (26:26):
And he picked us up at the airport with our
dogs in the card, gets out of the car, kisses me,
hugs her.
Speaker 10 (26:33):
Missed you, guys, Oh, we missed you.
Speaker 7 (26:35):
We're catching up. We're talking about the food, we ate
and we're filling him in.
Speaker 10 (26:39):
How was work?
Speaker 7 (26:39):
Oh, my gosh, so busy this week. I have replayed
that over and over and over and over again to Caroline.
Speaker 1 (26:49):
Her husband seemed completely normal.
Speaker 7 (26:52):
Meanwhile, he has just revealed what is going to be
the detriment to our family.
Speaker 10 (27:00):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (27:01):
I mean he signs the garrity, which is basically saying
that he's promising to tell the truth, and from the
very beginning from question one, he is lying. Do you
feel like he thought that he could talk his way
out of it.
Speaker 7 (27:18):
I don't think he just thought he could talk his
way out of it. I think that he truly and
his gut believed he would get away with it. He
not only thought that he could have his attorney believe him,
but Joel believed that he would be able to have
Raphael and Jimmy believe him as well.
Speaker 1 (27:35):
And those are the two internal affairs investigators we heard
questioning him, Raphael Chans and Jimmy Soklick. These are two
people who both knew you guys personally.
Speaker 7 (27:45):
Yes. The part that disturbs me so much on this
is not just that he lied, but the level of
personal connection and whom he lied to. They were promoted
on the same day together as lieutenants. We were at
Jimmy Sokolick's wedding. Wow, these were people who had been
at personal events and our lives. He's lying to them,
(28:09):
and not only just lying to them as professionals, colleagues
and friends, but he is lying about the dynamic of
our home. There was not this unhealthy, horrible life at home.
And yet this is what he reverts back to time
and time and time again on the times where he
has gotten caught.
Speaker 1 (28:30):
Yeah, I was going to say, he refers to your
marriage being in a bad place. And this isn't the
first IA investigation where he cites this experience. You don't
look back at that time feeling like your marriage was
in a bad place. I do not do you even
recognize the person on that tape.
Speaker 7 (28:53):
So when I hear the investigation, I see the stranger
who I lived with. I do not know that man.
That man who is on that tape is evil. I
don't know anything about him. He just didn't think he
would get to that point. That's why he started with
the line denying, deflecting, and shifting any of the responsibility.
(29:17):
And then when he had to fall on his sword,
magically it became all this was going sideways at home.
I have demons, I need help. Yeah, it turned into
a different deflection.
Speaker 5 (29:31):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (29:32):
He would make comments about quote slaying his demons, and
then he would talk about I just need to get
back to the man I was.
Speaker 10 (29:39):
I could be the husband I was, I could be
the dad I was. But the fact of the matter is.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
What were you? Yah? Who were you ever?
Speaker 7 (29:48):
That's a question that the kids and I have grappled with.
Those are the moments where I question things but I
have to remind myself the kids and I were living
the truth. He loving the lie.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
Yeah yeah, How long is it taking you to get
to that place to be able to say that I.
Speaker 10 (30:10):
Do it daily? I still have to do it daily,
(30:32):
all right.
Speaker 5 (30:34):
So just to go on the record, today's ago.
Speaker 1 (30:37):
About a month after Joel's Internal Affairs interview judgment day
finally came, Joel had to face his boss, Commander Strassner,
who had believed in him, thought the best of him.
You've heard the date several times now, April eleventh, twenty two,
and Strawsner got right to it.
Speaker 3 (30:57):
I want believer the point here this is not.
Speaker 5 (31:03):
Did not expect to have to do this with you, Joey,
Really you never expected this would have to be the case.
Did you get the agenda for the meeting?
Speaker 3 (31:13):
Yes, sir, yes, sir. Okay.
Speaker 1 (31:17):
Strassner began by laying up the facts of the case.
Speaker 5 (31:20):
About four thirty to five pm, you informed me that
you knew you were under investigation. When I asked how
you knew that, you proceeded doing tell me about the
confrontation that occurred on February fifth, professing your innocence and
adamantly denying any involvement in the situation. I had no
reason not to believe your innocence in this case, which
(31:44):
meant that either the couple was lying and needed to
be criminally charged, or that another cop was impersonating you
and needed to be fired, and that we would make
sure the case was thoroughly investigated. After being advised and
signing the garrity warning, which included in order to answer
questions truthfully, you knowingly lied, providing false information to the
(32:06):
investigators from nearly forty to forty five minutes. You initially
attempted to blame someone you know as for causing you
and your wife's problems and somehow causing this complaint by
catfishing you online. You initially denied ever having an account
on fet life and denied knowing either. Only after being
confronted with specific facts did you begin to admit to
(32:28):
having sex with While admitting to having sex with her,
you initially denied the encounter occurred in your police car.
You later confessed you might have met her on fet life,
and then did admit the sexual encounter did occur in
your police vehicle. After taking a break in the interview,
you returned finally you admit that you arranged a meeting
(32:51):
and memorial park with you stated you did not have
sex with her because there was no penetration, and quite frankly,
I think this is QUI over the details. Because she
did perform oral sex on you in the back of
the suv. There are discrepancies in the rest of the
interview between what can you describe as having occurred in
the back of the suv. Quite frankly, those details are
(33:14):
irrelevant to proving the overall case. However, given the false
statements you've provided to Internal Affairs, I have no reason
to discount any of her recollection of these events. That's
my overall case summary.
Speaker 3 (33:29):
Lieutenant.
Speaker 5 (33:30):
Do you have any comments that you want to make.
Speaker 2 (33:33):
I'm extremely remorseful, I'm extremely ashamed, humiliated, embarrassed, upset. I'm
begging for mercy. I literally was not in my right mind,
and I've been going through a hard time for several
years and I can promise you that.
Speaker 3 (33:56):
Nothing like that, whatever ever, happen again.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
I initially light in the eye interview because I was humiliated, embarrassed, scared.
Speaker 3 (34:12):
Didn't I want to.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
How this come to fruition and lose everything.
Speaker 8 (34:21):
That I have.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
I am on bended knee asking for forgiveness. I promise
you that none of this will ever happen again. I
understand that I've shattered your trust and it's something that
I want to work hard to get back. I apologize
for any of this happening. The last three months have
(34:49):
been hell, and I just am begging for your mercy.
Speaker 5 (34:58):
I'm gonna move to the next section here and just
talking about my comments and insight regarding this case. This
case is not about the sex or how you meant
these women. Honestly, I don't really care what your preferences
are unless the PD is somehow brought into this situation.
(35:19):
Has occurred in this case when you sent essentially these
strangers a photograph of yourself in police uniform and used
your work vehicle for your activities. That's what made this
police issue. The week the allegation was filed, you didn't
need to say anything to me about the case, and
quite honestly, I wish you'd not said.
Speaker 3 (35:39):
Anything to me at all. You literally lied.
Speaker 5 (35:41):
To my face on that Wednesday afternoon proclaiming your innocence,
and unless than twenty minutes later was texting with to
tell her there was drama, and that you deleted everything.
Even on Friday, when I tried to reassure you that
I had no reason not to believe you and would
make sure that this case was the investigated, you didn't
(36:02):
flinch even when I threatened to criminally charge this couple
or maybe fire another employee, and you later thanked me
for believing in you. To me, this is the most
disturbing piece of the entire case. Even in your interview
with IA, as a former investigator yourself, you lied to
(36:24):
Jimmy and rolf A, all trying to pin this on
a third person named You had five and a half
weeks to think about your interview and decided to stick
with your story and deny that any of this occurred.
The fact that you lied, the fact that you were
willing to put this on a third person or possibly
even have charges filed against the complainant, is absolutely horrific
(36:45):
and constitutes a violation of your oath in office. I
also cannot ignore the previous history from the twenty nineteen case.
Speaker 1 (36:54):
Strawsner is referring to the case when a reporter contacted
the CSPD because Joel was for the public information officer job.
The reporter alleged that Joel had sexually harassed her and
other reporters.
Speaker 5 (37:08):
Twenty nineteen, Commander Mandel wrote, in regard to that incident,
Lieutenant Kern is a valuable member of the departments, committed
to putting this behind him and being a better person
and leader for the organization. I have full confidence that
Lieutenant Kern has learned from his mistakes and he will
not place himself or the department in this position again.
I'm hearing some of the same things that were said
(37:30):
last time.
Speaker 1 (37:30):
In that case, Strassner is right back in twenty nineteen,
Joel had used some of the exact same language. Here's
Joel in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 11 (37:41):
I'm mis shaped, and I'm embarrassed, and I'm hamiliated, and
again I take four responsibility for my actions and yes,
for mercy.
Speaker 5 (37:56):
Not only did you put yourself in that same position,
you made it worse. Someone might make that argument that
you were initially evasive in the ie interview, but that
you rectified it later by telling the truth. I want
to be clear that I do not believe you fully
redeemed your credibility or you were completely transparent even near
(38:17):
the end of your interview. You were specifically asked by
Lieutenant Socolick whether you deleted the WhatsApp, to which you
told them yes. Later, Lieutenant Chansa asked you do you
still use WhatsApp currently, and you replied, just to talk
to I believe the slip up proves you're still not
being completely honest with investigators, that you're unable to keep
track of all your lives, and quite frankly, I question
(38:40):
how many other women are out there that may bring
forward allegations in the future. Now, before I present my findings,
I want to address something you stated during your interview
with Lieutenant chans And Sokolick said that you believe you
need help and it would be nice for the department
to help you get there, And you said, quote, we
(39:01):
pay a lot of lip service about our employees as family,
and I'd like to maybe somehow believe in that and
recognize I've had issues. I want to point out a
couple of things. In twenty nineteen, you receive nothing more
than a written reprimand at a time when you might
have been able to get more, and you said you
were already seeking the help. I believe this department has
(39:21):
treated you more than fair regarding these previous indiscretions.
Speaker 3 (39:25):
I'm not saying that they weren't.
Speaker 5 (39:29):
I'm about to go into the findings of the policies.
Did you have anything you wanted to add?
Speaker 2 (39:35):
Yeah, that I know that the department has been good
to me. I am sorry that I that this kind
of stuff happened a second time, but I swear that
there is nobody else. I'm willing to do whatever it
takes to hold on to my employment, and two to
(40:00):
show that I can do better. And I apologize from
the bottom of my heart. I understand that it looks
bad the way everything's been discussed here, and again, I'm
begging for your mercy.
Speaker 1 (40:18):
Strassner was unmoved.
Speaker 5 (40:20):
Okay, let's go through each of the policies. So as
I go through these, remember the standard as a preponderance
of the evidence. First one is nine oh six point
three zero. It's the take home Vehicles policy. By a
preponderance of the evidence, your take home vehicle was inappropriately used.
(40:42):
This allegation is sustained four hundred point three zero.
Speaker 1 (40:48):
Another big one, conduct unbecoming of a police officer.
Speaker 5 (40:53):
What's reasonable believe that using photographs of yourself an official
police uniform to gain the trust of women you have
met on fees life and then having sex with them
in an official police vehicle has brought disrepute to the
police department. Further, your false statements to me at the
onset were unsolicited and used to paint yourself in the
most favorable light regarding this investigation. This allegation is sustained.
Speaker 1 (41:17):
Then Strawsner reached the most egregious of Joel's violations, and
the final.
Speaker 5 (41:22):
Allegation is four hundred point one to three employee conduct
departing from the truth. Employees will not willfully or knowingly
depart from the truth and giving testimony or in connection
with official duties. You were given a garrity advisement and
sign that invisement, knowing you were being ordered to tell
the truth by a preponderance of the evidence, you gave
a false statement for the first approximate forty minutes of
(41:44):
the interview. Only when confronted with evidence did you finally
begin to confess some of your role in this case. Yet,
as I said, I still am not sure that you've
told the whole truth. This is sustained as well. This
(42:05):
whole thing has just been like a shock to my conscience.
It really has, and honestly, I think we've been painted
into a corner where there's really only one outcome. In
this case, I can recommend. I have no option but
to recommend your termination.
Speaker 1 (42:30):
Caroline. It feels like, maybe for the first time, someone
with authority sees through Joel's facade. What went through your
mind when you heard Joel's boss in front him.
Speaker 7 (42:42):
I think it's fascinating to listen to when Strasner says,
and I believe there's more, there's more women. I question
how many other women will come forward? And then hearing
Joel say I swear these were the only two. I
swear these were the only two. And next thing you know,
it's all kinds of different names are being revealed, and
all of these sexual encounters and sexually illicit behavior while
(43:06):
he's under the guise of a police officer.
Speaker 1 (43:08):
Did you ever talk to Strawsner?
Speaker 5 (43:10):
I did.
Speaker 1 (43:12):
What can you tell me about that?
Speaker 10 (43:14):
There's two people who.
Speaker 7 (43:17):
A lot of people will be shocked that I'm grateful
for the first one is the male who came to
my front door, the husband of the wife who Joel
had an affair with. And the second one is Jeff Strassner.
I'm extremely grateful for Jeff Strawssner. I was at a
community event and he was there, and as we walked
(43:38):
out together, I said, hey, Jeff, and I could tell
he was nervous to see me, and he was like, oh,
you know, hey, Caroline, and I said I'd like to
thank you, and he looks shocked, and I said, thank
you for not believing him.
Speaker 10 (43:57):
Thank you for.
Speaker 7 (44:00):
The due diligence of hearing this one out and not
giving him the benefit of the doubt. You may have
saved mine in my kids' lives.
Speaker 10 (44:10):
Thank you.
Speaker 7 (44:12):
And Jeff's always been a very friendly and a little
bit stoic of a man. But his voice started a
crack and you could see the emotion on him, and
he said, oh my gosh, thank you for saying that.
I appreciate you saying that. I have thought about you
and the kids so much. So when I hear Jeff
(44:34):
Strassner's commentary in this interview, I'm extremely grateful for him.
I know that just hours later is when Joel's going
to do his reveal to me and the kids. So
it's an interesting thing to reflect back on it and think, yeah,
(44:57):
what that day must have been like in his world.
Speaker 1 (45:01):
So we know that Strassner recommended Joel for termination, but
he wasn't fired, was he.
Speaker 4 (45:10):
No?
Speaker 1 (45:14):
Joel wasn't fired, and this case only gets more interesting.
We'll explore how he was able to avoid termination on
the next episode of Betrayal. Thank you for listening to
Betrayal season four. If you would like to reach out
(45:34):
to the Betrayal team, email us at Betrayalpod at gmail
dot com. That's Betrayal Pod at gmail dot com. Also,
please be sure to follow us on Instagram at Betrayal
Pod and me Andrea H. Gunning for all Betrayal content,
news and updates. One way to support the series is
by subscribing to our show on Apple Podcasts. Please rate
(45:56):
and review Betrayal five star reviews help us know you
appreciate what we do. Betrayal is a production of Glass Podcasts,
a division of Glass Entertainment Group, in partnership with iHeart Podcasts.
The show is executive produced by Nancy Glass and Jennifer Fason.
Betrayal is hosted and produced by me Andrea Gunning, written
(46:16):
and produced by Carrie Hartman, also produced by Ben Fetterman,
our associate producers are Caitlin Golden and Kristin Melcury. Our
iHeart team is Ali Perry and Jessica Crincheck. Story editing
by Monique Leboard, audio editing and mixing by Matt Delvecchio,
editing by Tanner Robbins, and special thanks to Caroline and
(46:37):
her family. Betrayal's theme is composed by Oliver Baines. Music
library provided by my Music and For more podcasts from iHeart,
visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get
your podcasts
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.