June 21, 2022 • 28 mins
Today’s guests are producer Jeff Shane and investigative journalist Suzanne Buchanan. Suzanne spent many years working in Thailand and ended up writing the hit book, The Curse of the Turtle: The True Story of Thailand's Backpacker Murders which is about suspicious backpacker deaths that occurred on the island of Koh Tao.
Robyn and Sissy are lifelong best friends, but the limits of their bond are put to the ultimate test when one of their husbands turns up dead. Will the police be able to find the real killer and will the woman's friendship survive?
To connect with Suzanne, check her out on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook at Subuchanan70.
You can find her book, The Curse of the Turtle online here: https://www.amazon.com/CURSE-TURTLE-Thailands-Backpacker-Murders-ebook/dp/B09QH854PC
Check us out online! www.instagram.com/KT_Studios
Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
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 (00:01):
Falling in love is the best feeling in the world.
You see stars, you feel giddy, But sometimes that makes
you do crazy things, and sometimes that means murder. Just
because the story starts out with Once upon a Times
doesn't mean it ends happily ever after. Welcome to Crazy
and Love, a production of Katie Studios and I Heart Radio.
(00:24):
Today's guests are producer Jeff Shane an investigative journalist Sue Buchanan.
Sue spent many years working in Thailand and ended up
writing the hip book The Curse of the Turtle, the
true story of Thailand's backpacker murders. The book is about
suspicious backpacker deaths that occurred on the island of Katao
and is available now wherever you get your books. Sue
(00:49):
can be found on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook at Sue Buchanan. Seventy,
Episode thirty two, The Case of the Best Friends, the
Cheat Husband, and the Lies That Bind. For anyone who
knew thirty nine year old Brian Davis, the word that
(01:11):
would come to mind was fun. Whether he was out
on the lake fishing his biggest passion, or in the
office working on selling insurance, Brian had a jovial and
carefree attitude that was infectious. Friends and family said it
was impossible not to have a good time when Brian
was around, simply because he was that good natured. But
(01:34):
fun wasn't Brian's only good quality. He was also an
outgoing and intelligent man. He could strike up a conversation
with just about anyone, and it didn't hurt that he
seemed to know a little something about everyone. That intelligent
confidence allowed Brian to meet his fair share of ladies,
but one in particular caught his eye, a woman named
(01:56):
Robin he met at work. Responsible and reserved, Robin didn't
care for Brian's personality. Despite both being single parents who
adored their kids, Robin didn't think they had anything in common.
Frankly put, she found him annoying. So after three years
of working together, Robin was surprised when Brian asked her out,
(02:20):
and she was even more surprised at her response. Yes.
Despite some trepidations, the two hit it off and were
married within four years, living in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Here's
Jeff So. While the story between Robin and Brian is
certainly important to the case, the real relationship at the
(02:41):
core of everything is actually between Robin and her best friend,
a woman named Sissy Saltzman. The two had been friends
for over twenty years and they did everything together. When
they went to the beauty salon, they had a standing
double appointment. They were both Southern women who were fiercely
loyal to not only each other, but also the men
in their lives. Robin explained their ship, It's the kind
(03:01):
of friendship that all people should have, she said. It's
the one person that you can call no matter what,
and they're they're regardless. So do you know anything more
about Robin and Brian's marriage, Well, I know that women
needed to lean on each other when Robin had to
deal with Brian, her husband. Despite Brian being a loving husband,
he also had a wandering eye. Robin caught him cheating
(03:23):
on her at least twice, and one of the affairs
was with a woman named Fanny, and that one lasted
for two years. According to Fanny, she and Brian loved
each other, but it wasn't just Fanny. Brian was potatious
with women everywhere he went. However, Robin gave him a pass.
She decided to forgive him and move past it. So
(03:44):
it sounds like while their marriage maybe worked, there were
definitely some cracks. I think definitely. I mean, obviously he's um,
he's a flirtatious guy. He's got a roving eye. And
it's not just the eye that's roving. I mean he's
acting on this and he's held down another relationship with
this woman called Franny for for two years, So he's,
you know, slightly devious, I would imagine, and I'm not
(04:06):
quite sure how Robin could look past that and just
suck it up. But it seems that, you know, there
was enough in the relationship for her to decide to
stay with him and stay low to him. Two years
is not just a quick affair. That's a real relationship.
I think if you're with someone for two years, you
can't put that down to a mistake or one drunken
night out where you've done something wrong. I mean explaining
(04:27):
away how you've been, you know, having a double relationship
for two years. It's not easy, is it. So I'm
surprised Robin would would tolerate that. But then maybe she
loved him, maybe she didn't want to be on her own,
Maybe she was willing to get past that. Just so
you know she didn't end up single, and by all accounts,
she really leaned on her friends Sissy in good times
and bad times. I think she had a really strong
(04:50):
relationship with to See And obviously, you know, finding out
your husband's cheating on you as devastating, so she would
have needed her friend a lot for moral support for
going out chewing over the fat discussing what her husband
was doing, I mean, it has to be pretty devastating,
and I'm sure her self esteem was very low, so
I would imagine Cissy was the one that pepped her
(05:10):
back up and gave it back her self worth. And
it would be interesting to know if if Cissy had
ever suggested that perhaps she was in the wrong relationship,
if Robin should leave her husband. I mean, who knows.
There were also kids involved in the relationship so well,
So while we don't know for sure, it's possible that
Robin felt like keeping her family together was more important
than maybe happiness in her relationship. And I would imagine
(05:34):
being a single mother again would be quite a daunting prospect.
That maybe she was willing to not have a perfect
relationship was better than going back to being a single mom.
And remember this is the South. We obviously know that
Robin really cared about her appearances. She went and got
her hair and nails done every week, and so perhaps
keeping up the appearance of this happy marriage was just
(05:56):
more important to her than having a faithful marriage. Yeah,
I'm sure there was an element of pride and not
wanting people to know that, you know, perhaps her relationship
wasn't all that it seemed to be. I mean, you're
not going to go around announcing that your husband's you know,
regularly cheating on you, especially when one of the women
he cheated with, Fanny, you know, said they were in
love with each other. I mean, two years is a
(06:17):
substantial amount of time to be dullying with somebody else.
I mean there must have had, you know, some level
of love for each other for it to last that long. Otherwise,
why would why would he stick around? On June two
thousand and nine, Brian was about to fulfill a lifelong
dream of buying a fishing boat. Ever, the supportive wife, Robin,
(06:37):
joined her husband for a day of shopping, but after
a few hours, Robin grew tired of looking at boat
after boat, so around three thirty pm, Robin said that
Brian dropped her off at home. He then switched cars
and took off in his under accord it would be
the last time Robin would ever see her husband alive.
(07:00):
At ten PM, when Brian hadn't returned home, Robin called
nine one. Police told her she had to wait twenty
four hours to file a missing person's report. For two days,
friends and family were panicked about Brian's whereabouts. It wasn't
like the father of four to just up and leaf.
Two days after disappearing, a man found Brian's body on
(07:22):
wagon wheel drive, a small dirt road that is miles
from Brian's house and near the expanse of Marshland in
the region. Brian's body had been laying close to a
swamp for at least two days in the southern summer heat,
so there was a fair amount of decomposition. However, the
coroner determined Brian had been shot four times in the back.
(07:45):
Gunshell casings were also strewn around the area. Police studied
the entire crime scene and made some interesting findings. Despite
Brian's car being jacked up as if there were a
flat tire, the tire itself was in working condition and
wouldn't have required changing. Someone had also taken Brian's cell phone, wallet, laptop, gun,
(08:07):
and GPS device, but detectives didn't think this was a robbery.
Brian was still wearing his ring and watch. Police surmise
that if someone were trying to rob the man, they
would have taken all the valuables. But the most mysterious
thing about the scene was the fact that Brian's shoes
were off and his belt undone. One thing was clear.
(08:30):
This case was not cut and dry here, Sue. Well,
we know that Robin told the cops that she was
really worried about Brian after he failed to come home,
and she told the police she'd called him quite a
few times and she'd left multiple voice messages before she
eventually called nine one one. She was obviously really concerned
about his whereabouts. But while all that seems like the
(08:53):
right thing to do, Robin struck a nerve with Brian's
family because she never called them so he was missing.
Brian went missing on Monday, and his family didn't find
out until Wednesday, and that was only when Brian's ex
wife called his sister to ask her if she could
help search for him. The sister was furious. She called
(09:13):
Robin and Robin told her don't freak out, she could
handle it, and as we know, later on that day
Brian's body was found. Well, it seems like Robin had
her own way of dealing with it. The police were
hard at work trying to figure out what happened to Brian.
Nine days after finding his body, the police brought in
Robin's best friend, Sissy, for questioning. She was very close
(09:34):
with the deceased and his wife, so it stood to
reason she would have some information. Let's take a listen
to some of her interview. The night before Sunday night,
when I went to get in my car, it would start,
so I just too his car home because he was
taking her truck to work. Sissy told the cops that
the last time she saw Brian was the day before
(09:55):
the murder. What she said was that she borrowed his
car because she was having trouble with hers. Cissy said
that she dropped it back at his house the morning
Brian disappeared. Where did she spend the day, cops asked.
Sissy said that she had been harm between eleven am
and three thirty pm, waiting for Robin to pick her up.
Take a listen to her explaining her schedule to the police,
(10:19):
didn't you anywhere come back? In all of the missing
people's cases I've covered or even watched on documentaries, suspicion
always goes to immediate family, normally partners. Do you have
to wonder what family's husband was doing around this time.
I don't think it's unusual to to bring people into questioning,
(10:42):
you know, the wife, the friend of the wife, close family.
I mean, that's where you're going to get all your
information from. But I do find it strange that Robin
didn't bother to tell his family he not shown up
that night. You know, if someone was missing from my life,
the first thing I do is call around and see
if they'd seen him. That is weird. We know she
was concerned enough that she said she called him multiple times,
(11:03):
so you would sort of think, like you said, that
she would also call his family and ask if he's there,
Questions like have you seen him? Have you heard of
her m Those are all things that the family might
not Yeah, of course, because potentially if he's not at home,
then maybe he's called rand to see his family. You know,
maybe his mother fell ill, maybe he suddenly had to
divert to the family home, so that would seem to
me to be a logical place to start looking. But
(11:25):
apparently she didn't make that call. And to play devil's advocate,
we don't necessarily know her relationship with his family, and
so maybe it wasn't the kind of relationship that she
would even call in kind of a scary time. To me,
it does seem weird, but again, we don't know the
dynamics of this family. Even if I didn't get on
with my in laws, I still want to knock off
list of potential places he could be. But yeah, you're right,
(11:48):
maybe they didn't have a good relationship. We don't know that,
so difficult to stay, but certainly not unusual for the
place to bring in, you know, close friends and family
in this kind of investigation. In my experience, I'll just
find interesting that his ex wife knew he was missing
before his immediate family. As police looked at the people
in good natured Brian's life, they wondered who would want
(12:09):
him dead. It seemed that one person might have motive,
the husband of Brian's long term mistress, a man named
Shane Deets. Here's what we know about Shane. He had
been married to Fanny who was having that two year
affair with Brian. Fanny, the mistress, had allegedly told her
husband Shane about the affair just two months before Brian
(12:31):
was found dead. Getting back at the man who was
sleeping with your wife would certainly be a good enough
reason to kill So what else do we know about
the relationship between Fanny and Brian. So we know that
Fanny gave emails to the police between her and Brian,
and in those emails, Fanny and Brian often talked about
Brian's interest in public sex. And remember when he was
(12:53):
found his belt and shoes were off. Could he have
been out on wagon wheel road to meet Fanny for
a trust? Not so fast. People who knew Brian said
he was obsessed with his car and wouldn't have taken
it down such a dirty and bumpy roade for nothing.
In fact, Fanny said that even if he had flies
on his windshield, he immediately got the car washed. But
(13:14):
perhaps he was lured there by Shane and the false
presentses about an open air rendezvous with Fanny. It turned
out that, despite seemingly having a pretty good motive to
kill him, the cops never even called Shane before questioning him.
The police called his place of work instead, and his
boss said that Shane had clocked in the day Brian disappeared.
That was good enough for detectives to dismiss him as
(13:36):
a suspect. It just seems weird because we don't actually
know when Brian was killed, just the day that he disappeared.
But in any case, Shane was never an official suspect.
Let's clarify that, because we know that Brian was last
seen sometime in the afternoon, either at the boat shop
or dropping his wife off, and as far as our
research could tell, we actually don't know a time of
(13:57):
death because if you look at the decomposite Shan, Brian
wasn't completely decomposed when the cops found him. And having
covered a fair amount of these true crime cases, we
know that a body can decompose in the summer quickly,
and in Louisiana this time of year, Brian could have
been decomposed very quickly. So I think, you know, there's
very little evidence here in terms of time of death
(14:20):
and the whereabouts the potential suspect. We're going to take
a break, we'll be back in just a moment. I
(14:41):
just can't believe that cops would not even call Shane
because at the very least he would have information about
the case. What if Fanny had been the killer, Shane
could have at least provided some sort of insight into
Brian's frame of mind or the relationship between Fanny and Brian.
And it did say that, you know, Fanny and Brian
have been having an affair for two years, but it
seems like it possibly could have come to an end.
(15:03):
And if she was really upset that he was going
to stay with his wife when perhaps previously she thought
she'd end up together with him, then that that gives
someone else a motive. And you know, as anyone checking
for a DNA, is anyone checking for firearms or anything
in Fanny's car or Shane's car? I mean, why aren't
these people being adequately investigated? That's a very good question.
(15:24):
I mean, did Fanny have a gun? You know, did
she go to the shooting range, did she have a
temper as she got, any history of previous criminal activity?
And the same goes for Shane. So you have two
people here with a potential motive, and yet they've really
not been investigated at all. What do we know about
Shane's history. You know, has he got any criminal record,
has he been involved in anything like this before, has
(15:46):
he got a temper? I mean, who is this guy?
We know so little about him, and so in your
experience covering criminal cases, do you think that the police should,
in their due diligence look at every single suspect thoroughly.
From the information got here, I would say the police
have shown no due diligence and it was a really
shodly investigated case. I mean, you know, you've got a
(16:06):
couple of potential suspect, you've not even been questioned, and
they're just taking Shane's boss's word for it that he
clocked in. Where's the proof he clocked in? You know,
and we don't even know if that day was the
day that Brian died anyway, so you know, they should
be checking his whereabouts for you know, at least forty
eight hours from him going missing to his body being found.
So it doesn't seem like a very tight investigation to me.
(16:28):
In fact, it seems that, you know, quite the opposite.
It really just seems that there's no true diligence going
on here. I wouldn't trust this police force as Shane
was cleared of the crime, police turn their attention back
to the two best friends who seemed to have a
lot to hide. While Robin told the police she had
called Brian numerous times when he failed to come home
(16:49):
from boat shopping, her phone records proved otherwise. As it
turns out Robin never called Brian. It wouldn't be the
last lie the besties would allegedly tell. Sissy had told
officials she had been home the day Brian disappeared. The
police looked to sell tower records to see if this
(17:11):
was true. It was not. Starting at one thirty pm,
Sissy's phone picked off a tower that was eleven miles
from her home. It also happened to be the closest
tower to the crime scene. This means she made a
call near the scene of the crime. According to cell
tower experts, there was no way Sissy's cell phone would
(17:32):
have picked from that tower if in fact, she had
been home. The police's theory was that Brian never actually
went home and switched cars like Robin had said, and
that Sissy had never returned the car after borrowing it
like she had said. The police thought that Sissy called
Brian from wagon will drive, pretending to have a flat tire,
and when Brian and Robin arrived, one or both of
(17:54):
the woman shot him. Robin stood to gain more than
six hundred thousand dollars and insurance out She did, in fact,
attempt to cash in on that policy just two weeks
after her husband's death. She had recently lost her job
and had racked up considerable gambling debts, and the couple
were on the verge of losing their home. So so
(18:16):
why would Saysie also be involved? Well, that would be
sheer loyalty to her best friend. I guess so often
we see in these cases that money becomes the motivation,
or at least what the police think is the motivation,
to commit murder. I'd agree with that, but I also
think that if I was about to lose my home
and I had gambling debts and he had life insurance policy,
I would be thinking of making myself financially secure anyway.
(18:39):
I mean, you know, that's what life insurance policies are born.
So if one of you dies, the other one doesn't
you know, land in the suit. So although I think
it's a motive, I don't think it's that unusual. And
I also think if I had killed my husband, I
would be waiting more than two weeks before I cashed
that in because they're looking too obvious. So you know,
(19:00):
it's either not a very well thought out plan. But
then on the other hand, it could be a smoke
screen because she could say, well, you know, if I
killed him, why would I be claiming on the insurance
two weeks later? So there's different ways of looking at it.
That's a very interesting point. If he had died of
a heart attack, no one would bet an eyelash that
she waited two weeks to collect the money. In fact,
that would probably seem like a long time. So if
(19:21):
she didn't actually kill him, the two week timeline doesn't
really mean anything. No, I wouldn't have thought so. I mean,
we know she'd lost her job, so you know, it
seems quite radical to kill your husband to get money
just because you've lost your job. Then he was also
having affairs. If he died of natural causes, then you know,
waiting a fortnight before trying to make yourself financially is
(19:42):
actually quite a long time. Also, the fact that they
sold insurance, I think speaks to this two week timeline.
It's her job to know the system. So she knows
very well that when someone dies you have to file
to claim the money. And when you've lost someone you love,
I mean six days is not going to bring him back,
but it takes this thing out of it when you're
not struggling for money. So and don't forget, you know,
(20:03):
she's got his kids and her kids. She's got six
kids now between them. Of course she's going to want
some money. Six months after Brian was found dead, Robbin
and Cissy were charged with murder. Internally, the police were
referring to the investigation as the Felmer and Louise case.
The two women would stay on trial as they did
(20:25):
everything else together. We know that. The May two thousand
and twelve trial, the defense talked about the lack of
physical evidence. I mean, we've got no fingerprints here, we've
got no DNA, And they also pointed to the fact
that a local bar had a surveillance camera on the
road and that would have easily proved if Robin and
Cissy were guilty because the CCTV would have picked them
(20:47):
up driving down that road. But amazingly, the cops actually
lost the take. The defense went on to say the
cops were incompetent to their theories just could not be trusted.
And they also showed surveillance of Robin the morning of
the murder shopping for a boat with Brian, and she
could be seen wearing white capri pants and really flimsy
flip flop sandals. No one, they argued he was planning
(21:10):
on murdering their husband in a marsh would be wearing
such an impractical life bit. The defense also performed tests
with the cell phone towers that found when a tower
becomes overloaded with calls, they get bounced to other towers,
meaning Sissy might have been telling the truth. However, unfortunately
for the defense, that test was ruled an admissible in court.
So I want to go back to what the defense
(21:32):
was saying about the outfit, because I think it's pretty interesting.
They argued that Robin, who allegedly was the murderer, would
not have worn white pants and sandals to go kill
her husband. Basically, it's just an impractical outfit to do
such a strenuous and potentially dirty activity. I mean, from
my point of view and from my investigations, I mean
(21:53):
there's a couple of points raised here. I mean, you know,
she was wearing that at the time. But if she
premeditated this murder and she's been dropped off at home,
was to say she hasn't got changed, And then you've
got to decide was it premeditated or not. You know,
if she just decided to kill her husband and hadn't
pre planned it, you know, she's hardly going to be
worried about what she's wearing. So you've got the idea
(22:14):
here of premeditation or not premeditated, So you have to
look into that. And also I'd be interested to know
if she had ever shot a gun, you know, did
she have a gun, did she know how to shoot
a gun? And she got any experience with firearms? And
she'd go to a shooting club, but she's been shooting
with her husband and also Sissy, you know, did Cy
have any experience with firearms. There's no information to say,
(22:36):
you know, whether these women would even know how to
handle a firearm. I know my mother certainly wouldn't. She's
never touched one, so that's something else. I think it
is quite interesting. But I think the fact that you know,
the telling surveillance camera from that bar, that the fact
that police lost it, did they not watch it. First,
where's the evidence in court about what was on that tape?
(22:57):
Even without the footage? You know, if someone has seen it,
then that's another witness. That's a really good point. We
don't know the answer to that. I would imagine if
it had been good for the prosecution, someone would have
come forward and said, oh, I saw that tape. I mean,
how ad you lose the evidence like that? And like,
you know, I can't deny the defense are right really
when they when they suggested the cups are incompetent, but
(23:18):
losing one piece of valuable evidence that would pinpoint who
was at the steam Let's stop here for another break.
(23:41):
The other thing I've been interested in is m if
this theory that you know he wasn't in his car,
they hadn't switched cars, and you know he'd gone down
in in Robin's car, then why aren't we testing the
other car? Steve it had been down there? Look, you know,
why aren't we checking the tires while aren't we checking
you know, marsh soil would attach itself to the underside
(24:02):
of a car. You know, why aren't they scraping to
to do soil matches to find out where the cars
have been or at least where Robin's car has been.
That's another great point. It just seems like a really
ineffective investigation to me. I mean, there's just so many
points that haven't been covered, or at least if they have,
we don't know about it. What about muddy footprints in
the footwell, you know, if Robin's been down there and
(24:22):
shot her husband in this marshy land, you know, and
she and she's got away in her car, why aren't
we checking the footwell of her car? Why aren't we
checking her shoes? Why aren't we checking her clothes to
see if there's any splatterings of this marsh? You know,
there's there's really not much going on here in terms
of pinpointing where she might have been. After both the
prosecution and defense rested, Robin and Sissy remained pointedly emotionless
(24:44):
as the jury deliberated for three hours. By a vote
of eleven to one, the women were both found guilty.
So you might be wondering how this was possible. As
you might know, in nearly every state in America in
eleven to one jury split with Cosmos trial. But Louisiana
actually has a lab that only ten jurors voting guilty
(25:07):
are needed for a murder conviction, not a unanimous decision.
Like most states, people who supported Robin and Cissy called
into question the ethics of this law. So it seems
like up until the very end, there's just some things
here that did not go right, from the police losing
the tape to focusing so much on Robin from the
beginning to now this law that allows a jury to
(25:28):
convict the pair without a unanimous decision. Through it all,
I just don't know if Robin and Cissy got a
fair shake. It doesn't sound to me like they had
a fair trial. But then you know, we have one
juror that was completely convinced that women didn't do it,
but the others were, So you know, what were they
basing that decision on, Because from what I understand about
the case, I wouldn't be finding them guilty. I think
(25:49):
it was a completely inadequate investigation, and they presented very
little in the way of evidence, and you know, there
was no physical evidence. Where's the murder weapon and where
are the belongings that were sing? And you know, why
would you rob your own husband but leave you know,
his watches if you're going to try and make it
like a robbery. Then that was kind of bungled too.
So yeah, I'd be interested to know what it was
(26:12):
that these this jury found so compelling that they convicted them.
And had this trial had been in any other state,
this would have been a mistrial and they would have
walked away. As the judge sentenced the women to life
in prison without a chance of parole. The pair held hands. Today,
Robin and Sissy are both serving their sentences in the
(26:35):
same prison and claim they are closer than ever again.
You can find Suzanne Buchanan on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook
at Soue Buchanan seven zero. Her book, The Curse of
the Turtle from Wild Blue Press is available now wherever
(26:55):
you get your books. Yeah. The only thing I'd like
to say about, you know, been the author of the
Curse of the Turtle, which is the true story of
Thailand's backpack and murders, is that you know, I've also
spent a lot of time investigating cases where there's massive
amount of evidence missing um and where the more questions
you ask, the more questions you have, and where police
investigations have been pretty shoddy, and where families have walked away,
(27:18):
you know, very unsatisfied with what's happened because nothing adds up.
And this case is incredibly interesting to me because it's
very similar to all of the cases that I've investigated
in Kotao on Thailand. So, you know, I really feel
for these kinds of stories because I've spent seven and
a half years investigating crimes, despicious death, evidence that doesn't
add up, you know, theories that just don't make any
(27:41):
sense whichever way you look at it. And as a journalist,
I've always said, if you can't figure out a story,
it's because you've got the wrong information or you don't
have all of the information, and that certainly seems to
be the case with this police investigation, because you know,
whichever way you wrap it up, it still doesn't make sense.
Shameless plug. If you're enjoying Crazy and Love, leave us
a review and listen to season three of our hit
(28:03):
series The Piked and Massacre. New episodes there every Wednesday
wherever you get your podcasts, and don't forget to follow
us on Instagram at Katie Underscore Studios. Crazy in Love
is produced by Stephanie Lydecker, Jeff Shane, Chris Grieves, and
me Courtney Armstrong. Editing and sound designed by Jeff Ta.
(28:25):
Crazy in Love is a production of I heart Radio
and Katie Studios. For more podcasts from I heart Radio,
visit the i heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever
you listen to your favorite shows. Stay safe, lovers,
Falling in love is the best feeling in the world.
You see stars, you feel giddy, But sometimes that makes
you do crazy things, and sometimes that means murder. Just
because the story starts out with Once upon a Times
doesn't mean it ends happily ever after. Welcome to Crazy
and Love, a production of Katie Studios and I Heart Radio.
(00:24):
Today's guests are producer Jeff Shane an investigative journalist Sue Buchanan.
Sue spent many years working in Thailand and ended up
writing the hip book The Curse of the Turtle, the
true story of Thailand's backpacker murders. The book is about
suspicious backpacker deaths that occurred on the island of Katao
and is available now wherever you get your books. Sue
(00:49):
can be found on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook at Sue Buchanan. Seventy,
Episode thirty two, The Case of the Best Friends, the
Cheat Husband, and the Lies That Bind. For anyone who
knew thirty nine year old Brian Davis, the word that
(01:11):
would come to mind was fun. Whether he was out
on the lake fishing his biggest passion, or in the
office working on selling insurance, Brian had a jovial and
carefree attitude that was infectious. Friends and family said it
was impossible not to have a good time when Brian
was around, simply because he was that good natured. But
(01:34):
fun wasn't Brian's only good quality. He was also an
outgoing and intelligent man. He could strike up a conversation
with just about anyone, and it didn't hurt that he
seemed to know a little something about everyone. That intelligent
confidence allowed Brian to meet his fair share of ladies,
but one in particular caught his eye, a woman named
(01:56):
Robin he met at work. Responsible and reserved, Robin didn't
care for Brian's personality. Despite both being single parents who
adored their kids, Robin didn't think they had anything in common.
Frankly put, she found him annoying. So after three years
of working together, Robin was surprised when Brian asked her out,
(02:20):
and she was even more surprised at her response. Yes.
Despite some trepidations, the two hit it off and were
married within four years, living in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Here's
Jeff So. While the story between Robin and Brian is
certainly important to the case, the real relationship at the
(02:41):
core of everything is actually between Robin and her best friend,
a woman named Sissy Saltzman. The two had been friends
for over twenty years and they did everything together. When
they went to the beauty salon, they had a standing
double appointment. They were both Southern women who were fiercely
loyal to not only each other, but also the men
in their lives. Robin explained their ship, It's the kind
(03:01):
of friendship that all people should have, she said. It's
the one person that you can call no matter what,
and they're they're regardless. So do you know anything more
about Robin and Brian's marriage, Well, I know that women
needed to lean on each other when Robin had to
deal with Brian, her husband. Despite Brian being a loving husband,
he also had a wandering eye. Robin caught him cheating
(03:23):
on her at least twice, and one of the affairs
was with a woman named Fanny, and that one lasted
for two years. According to Fanny, she and Brian loved
each other, but it wasn't just Fanny. Brian was potatious
with women everywhere he went. However, Robin gave him a pass.
She decided to forgive him and move past it. So
(03:44):
it sounds like while their marriage maybe worked, there were
definitely some cracks. I think definitely. I mean, obviously he's um,
he's a flirtatious guy. He's got a roving eye. And
it's not just the eye that's roving. I mean he's
acting on this and he's held down another relationship with
this woman called Franny for for two years, So he's,
you know, slightly devious, I would imagine, and I'm not
(04:06):
quite sure how Robin could look past that and just
suck it up. But it seems that, you know, there
was enough in the relationship for her to decide to
stay with him and stay low to him. Two years
is not just a quick affair. That's a real relationship.
I think if you're with someone for two years, you
can't put that down to a mistake or one drunken
night out where you've done something wrong. I mean explaining
(04:27):
away how you've been, you know, having a double relationship
for two years. It's not easy, is it. So I'm
surprised Robin would would tolerate that. But then maybe she
loved him, maybe she didn't want to be on her own,
Maybe she was willing to get past that. Just so
you know she didn't end up single, and by all accounts,
she really leaned on her friends Sissy in good times
and bad times. I think she had a really strong
(04:50):
relationship with to See And obviously, you know, finding out
your husband's cheating on you as devastating, so she would
have needed her friend a lot for moral support for
going out chewing over the fat discussing what her husband
was doing, I mean, it has to be pretty devastating,
and I'm sure her self esteem was very low, so
I would imagine Cissy was the one that pepped her
(05:10):
back up and gave it back her self worth. And
it would be interesting to know if if Cissy had
ever suggested that perhaps she was in the wrong relationship,
if Robin should leave her husband. I mean, who knows.
There were also kids involved in the relationship so well,
So while we don't know for sure, it's possible that
Robin felt like keeping her family together was more important
than maybe happiness in her relationship. And I would imagine
(05:34):
being a single mother again would be quite a daunting prospect.
That maybe she was willing to not have a perfect
relationship was better than going back to being a single mom.
And remember this is the South. We obviously know that
Robin really cared about her appearances. She went and got
her hair and nails done every week, and so perhaps
keeping up the appearance of this happy marriage was just
(05:56):
more important to her than having a faithful marriage. Yeah,
I'm sure there was an element of pride and not
wanting people to know that, you know, perhaps her relationship
wasn't all that it seemed to be. I mean, you're
not going to go around announcing that your husband's you know,
regularly cheating on you, especially when one of the women
he cheated with, Fanny, you know, said they were in
love with each other. I mean, two years is a
(06:17):
substantial amount of time to be dullying with somebody else.
I mean there must have had, you know, some level
of love for each other for it to last that long. Otherwise,
why would why would he stick around? On June two
thousand and nine, Brian was about to fulfill a lifelong
dream of buying a fishing boat. Ever, the supportive wife, Robin,
(06:37):
joined her husband for a day of shopping, but after
a few hours, Robin grew tired of looking at boat
after boat, so around three thirty pm, Robin said that
Brian dropped her off at home. He then switched cars
and took off in his under accord it would be
the last time Robin would ever see her husband alive.
(07:00):
At ten PM, when Brian hadn't returned home, Robin called
nine one. Police told her she had to wait twenty
four hours to file a missing person's report. For two days,
friends and family were panicked about Brian's whereabouts. It wasn't
like the father of four to just up and leaf.
Two days after disappearing, a man found Brian's body on
(07:22):
wagon wheel drive, a small dirt road that is miles
from Brian's house and near the expanse of Marshland in
the region. Brian's body had been laying close to a
swamp for at least two days in the southern summer heat,
so there was a fair amount of decomposition. However, the
coroner determined Brian had been shot four times in the back.
(07:45):
Gunshell casings were also strewn around the area. Police studied
the entire crime scene and made some interesting findings. Despite
Brian's car being jacked up as if there were a
flat tire, the tire itself was in working condition and
wouldn't have required changing. Someone had also taken Brian's cell phone, wallet, laptop, gun,
(08:07):
and GPS device, but detectives didn't think this was a robbery.
Brian was still wearing his ring and watch. Police surmise
that if someone were trying to rob the man, they
would have taken all the valuables. But the most mysterious
thing about the scene was the fact that Brian's shoes
were off and his belt undone. One thing was clear.
(08:30):
This case was not cut and dry here, Sue. Well,
we know that Robin told the cops that she was
really worried about Brian after he failed to come home,
and she told the police she'd called him quite a
few times and she'd left multiple voice messages before she
eventually called nine one one. She was obviously really concerned
about his whereabouts. But while all that seems like the
(08:53):
right thing to do, Robin struck a nerve with Brian's
family because she never called them so he was missing.
Brian went missing on Monday, and his family didn't find
out until Wednesday, and that was only when Brian's ex
wife called his sister to ask her if she could
help search for him. The sister was furious. She called
(09:13):
Robin and Robin told her don't freak out, she could
handle it, and as we know, later on that day
Brian's body was found. Well, it seems like Robin had
her own way of dealing with it. The police were
hard at work trying to figure out what happened to Brian.
Nine days after finding his body, the police brought in
Robin's best friend, Sissy, for questioning. She was very close
(09:34):
with the deceased and his wife, so it stood to
reason she would have some information. Let's take a listen
to some of her interview. The night before Sunday night,
when I went to get in my car, it would start,
so I just too his car home because he was
taking her truck to work. Sissy told the cops that
the last time she saw Brian was the day before
(09:55):
the murder. What she said was that she borrowed his
car because she was having trouble with hers. Cissy said
that she dropped it back at his house the morning
Brian disappeared. Where did she spend the day, cops asked.
Sissy said that she had been harm between eleven am
and three thirty pm, waiting for Robin to pick her up.
Take a listen to her explaining her schedule to the police,
(10:19):
didn't you anywhere come back? In all of the missing
people's cases I've covered or even watched on documentaries, suspicion
always goes to immediate family, normally partners. Do you have
to wonder what family's husband was doing around this time.
I don't think it's unusual to to bring people into questioning,
(10:42):
you know, the wife, the friend of the wife, close family.
I mean, that's where you're going to get all your
information from. But I do find it strange that Robin
didn't bother to tell his family he not shown up
that night. You know, if someone was missing from my life,
the first thing I do is call around and see
if they'd seen him. That is weird. We know she
was concerned enough that she said she called him multiple times,
(11:03):
so you would sort of think, like you said, that
she would also call his family and ask if he's there,
Questions like have you seen him? Have you heard of
her m Those are all things that the family might
not Yeah, of course, because potentially if he's not at home,
then maybe he's called rand to see his family. You know,
maybe his mother fell ill, maybe he suddenly had to
divert to the family home, so that would seem to
me to be a logical place to start looking. But
(11:25):
apparently she didn't make that call. And to play devil's advocate,
we don't necessarily know her relationship with his family, and
so maybe it wasn't the kind of relationship that she
would even call in kind of a scary time. To me,
it does seem weird, but again, we don't know the
dynamics of this family. Even if I didn't get on
with my in laws, I still want to knock off
list of potential places he could be. But yeah, you're right,
(11:48):
maybe they didn't have a good relationship. We don't know that,
so difficult to stay, but certainly not unusual for the
place to bring in, you know, close friends and family
in this kind of investigation. In my experience, I'll just
find interesting that his ex wife knew he was missing
before his immediate family. As police looked at the people
in good natured Brian's life, they wondered who would want
(12:09):
him dead. It seemed that one person might have motive,
the husband of Brian's long term mistress, a man named
Shane Deets. Here's what we know about Shane. He had
been married to Fanny who was having that two year
affair with Brian. Fanny, the mistress, had allegedly told her
husband Shane about the affair just two months before Brian
(12:31):
was found dead. Getting back at the man who was
sleeping with your wife would certainly be a good enough
reason to kill So what else do we know about
the relationship between Fanny and Brian. So we know that
Fanny gave emails to the police between her and Brian,
and in those emails, Fanny and Brian often talked about
Brian's interest in public sex. And remember when he was
(12:53):
found his belt and shoes were off. Could he have
been out on wagon wheel road to meet Fanny for
a trust? Not so fast. People who knew Brian said
he was obsessed with his car and wouldn't have taken
it down such a dirty and bumpy roade for nothing.
In fact, Fanny said that even if he had flies
on his windshield, he immediately got the car washed. But
(13:14):
perhaps he was lured there by Shane and the false
presentses about an open air rendezvous with Fanny. It turned
out that, despite seemingly having a pretty good motive to
kill him, the cops never even called Shane before questioning him.
The police called his place of work instead, and his
boss said that Shane had clocked in the day Brian disappeared.
That was good enough for detectives to dismiss him as
(13:36):
a suspect. It just seems weird because we don't actually
know when Brian was killed, just the day that he disappeared.
But in any case, Shane was never an official suspect.
Let's clarify that, because we know that Brian was last
seen sometime in the afternoon, either at the boat shop
or dropping his wife off, and as far as our
research could tell, we actually don't know a time of
(13:57):
death because if you look at the decomposite Shan, Brian
wasn't completely decomposed when the cops found him. And having
covered a fair amount of these true crime cases, we
know that a body can decompose in the summer quickly,
and in Louisiana this time of year, Brian could have
been decomposed very quickly. So I think, you know, there's
very little evidence here in terms of time of death
(14:20):
and the whereabouts the potential suspect. We're going to take
a break, we'll be back in just a moment. I
(14:41):
just can't believe that cops would not even call Shane
because at the very least he would have information about
the case. What if Fanny had been the killer, Shane
could have at least provided some sort of insight into
Brian's frame of mind or the relationship between Fanny and Brian.
And it did say that, you know, Fanny and Brian
have been having an affair for two years, but it
seems like it possibly could have come to an end.
(15:03):
And if she was really upset that he was going
to stay with his wife when perhaps previously she thought
she'd end up together with him, then that that gives
someone else a motive. And you know, as anyone checking
for a DNA, is anyone checking for firearms or anything
in Fanny's car or Shane's car? I mean, why aren't
these people being adequately investigated? That's a very good question.
(15:24):
I mean, did Fanny have a gun? You know, did
she go to the shooting range, did she have a
temper as she got, any history of previous criminal activity?
And the same goes for Shane. So you have two
people here with a potential motive, and yet they've really
not been investigated at all. What do we know about
Shane's history. You know, has he got any criminal record,
has he been involved in anything like this before, has
(15:46):
he got a temper? I mean, who is this guy?
We know so little about him, and so in your
experience covering criminal cases, do you think that the police should,
in their due diligence look at every single suspect thoroughly.
From the information got here, I would say the police
have shown no due diligence and it was a really
shodly investigated case. I mean, you know, you've got a
(16:06):
couple of potential suspect, you've not even been questioned, and
they're just taking Shane's boss's word for it that he
clocked in. Where's the proof he clocked in? You know,
and we don't even know if that day was the
day that Brian died anyway, so you know, they should
be checking his whereabouts for you know, at least forty
eight hours from him going missing to his body being found.
So it doesn't seem like a very tight investigation to me.
(16:28):
In fact, it seems that, you know, quite the opposite.
It really just seems that there's no true diligence going
on here. I wouldn't trust this police force as Shane
was cleared of the crime, police turn their attention back
to the two best friends who seemed to have a
lot to hide. While Robin told the police she had
called Brian numerous times when he failed to come home
(16:49):
from boat shopping, her phone records proved otherwise. As it
turns out Robin never called Brian. It wouldn't be the
last lie the besties would allegedly tell. Sissy had told
officials she had been home the day Brian disappeared. The
police looked to sell tower records to see if this
(17:11):
was true. It was not. Starting at one thirty pm,
Sissy's phone picked off a tower that was eleven miles
from her home. It also happened to be the closest
tower to the crime scene. This means she made a
call near the scene of the crime. According to cell
tower experts, there was no way Sissy's cell phone would
(17:32):
have picked from that tower if in fact, she had
been home. The police's theory was that Brian never actually
went home and switched cars like Robin had said, and
that Sissy had never returned the car after borrowing it
like she had said. The police thought that Sissy called
Brian from wagon will drive, pretending to have a flat tire,
and when Brian and Robin arrived, one or both of
(17:54):
the woman shot him. Robin stood to gain more than
six hundred thousand dollars and insurance out She did, in fact,
attempt to cash in on that policy just two weeks
after her husband's death. She had recently lost her job
and had racked up considerable gambling debts, and the couple
were on the verge of losing their home. So so
(18:16):
why would Saysie also be involved? Well, that would be
sheer loyalty to her best friend. I guess so often
we see in these cases that money becomes the motivation,
or at least what the police think is the motivation,
to commit murder. I'd agree with that, but I also
think that if I was about to lose my home
and I had gambling debts and he had life insurance policy,
I would be thinking of making myself financially secure anyway.
(18:39):
I mean, you know, that's what life insurance policies are born.
So if one of you dies, the other one doesn't
you know, land in the suit. So although I think
it's a motive, I don't think it's that unusual. And
I also think if I had killed my husband, I
would be waiting more than two weeks before I cashed
that in because they're looking too obvious. So you know,
(19:00):
it's either not a very well thought out plan. But
then on the other hand, it could be a smoke
screen because she could say, well, you know, if I
killed him, why would I be claiming on the insurance
two weeks later? So there's different ways of looking at it.
That's a very interesting point. If he had died of
a heart attack, no one would bet an eyelash that
she waited two weeks to collect the money. In fact,
that would probably seem like a long time. So if
(19:21):
she didn't actually kill him, the two week timeline doesn't
really mean anything. No, I wouldn't have thought so. I mean,
we know she'd lost her job, so you know, it
seems quite radical to kill your husband to get money
just because you've lost your job. Then he was also
having affairs. If he died of natural causes, then you know,
waiting a fortnight before trying to make yourself financially is
(19:42):
actually quite a long time. Also, the fact that they
sold insurance, I think speaks to this two week timeline.
It's her job to know the system. So she knows
very well that when someone dies you have to file
to claim the money. And when you've lost someone you love,
I mean six days is not going to bring him back,
but it takes this thing out of it when you're
not struggling for money. So and don't forget, you know,
(20:03):
she's got his kids and her kids. She's got six
kids now between them. Of course she's going to want
some money. Six months after Brian was found dead, Robbin
and Cissy were charged with murder. Internally, the police were
referring to the investigation as the Felmer and Louise case.
The two women would stay on trial as they did
(20:25):
everything else together. We know that. The May two thousand
and twelve trial, the defense talked about the lack of
physical evidence. I mean, we've got no fingerprints here, we've
got no DNA, And they also pointed to the fact
that a local bar had a surveillance camera on the
road and that would have easily proved if Robin and
Cissy were guilty because the CCTV would have picked them
(20:47):
up driving down that road. But amazingly, the cops actually
lost the take. The defense went on to say the
cops were incompetent to their theories just could not be trusted.
And they also showed surveillance of Robin the morning of
the murder shopping for a boat with Brian, and she
could be seen wearing white capri pants and really flimsy
flip flop sandals. No one, they argued he was planning
(21:10):
on murdering their husband in a marsh would be wearing
such an impractical life bit. The defense also performed tests
with the cell phone towers that found when a tower
becomes overloaded with calls, they get bounced to other towers,
meaning Sissy might have been telling the truth. However, unfortunately
for the defense, that test was ruled an admissible in court.
So I want to go back to what the defense
(21:32):
was saying about the outfit, because I think it's pretty interesting.
They argued that Robin, who allegedly was the murderer, would
not have worn white pants and sandals to go kill
her husband. Basically, it's just an impractical outfit to do
such a strenuous and potentially dirty activity. I mean, from
my point of view and from my investigations, I mean
(21:53):
there's a couple of points raised here. I mean, you know,
she was wearing that at the time. But if she
premeditated this murder and she's been dropped off at home,
was to say she hasn't got changed, And then you've
got to decide was it premeditated or not. You know,
if she just decided to kill her husband and hadn't
pre planned it, you know, she's hardly going to be
worried about what she's wearing. So you've got the idea
(22:14):
here of premeditation or not premeditated, So you have to
look into that. And also I'd be interested to know
if she had ever shot a gun, you know, did
she have a gun, did she know how to shoot
a gun? And she got any experience with firearms? And
she'd go to a shooting club, but she's been shooting
with her husband and also Sissy, you know, did Cy
have any experience with firearms. There's no information to say,
(22:36):
you know, whether these women would even know how to
handle a firearm. I know my mother certainly wouldn't. She's
never touched one, so that's something else. I think it
is quite interesting. But I think the fact that you know,
the telling surveillance camera from that bar, that the fact
that police lost it, did they not watch it. First,
where's the evidence in court about what was on that tape?
(22:57):
Even without the footage? You know, if someone has seen it,
then that's another witness. That's a really good point. We
don't know the answer to that. I would imagine if
it had been good for the prosecution, someone would have
come forward and said, oh, I saw that tape. I mean,
how ad you lose the evidence like that? And like,
you know, I can't deny the defense are right really
when they when they suggested the cups are incompetent, but
(23:18):
losing one piece of valuable evidence that would pinpoint who
was at the steam Let's stop here for another break.
(23:41):
The other thing I've been interested in is m if
this theory that you know he wasn't in his car,
they hadn't switched cars, and you know he'd gone down
in in Robin's car, then why aren't we testing the
other car? Steve it had been down there? Look, you know,
why aren't we checking the tires while aren't we checking
you know, marsh soil would attach itself to the underside
(24:02):
of a car. You know, why aren't they scraping to
to do soil matches to find out where the cars
have been or at least where Robin's car has been.
That's another great point. It just seems like a really
ineffective investigation to me. I mean, there's just so many
points that haven't been covered, or at least if they have,
we don't know about it. What about muddy footprints in
the footwell, you know, if Robin's been down there and
(24:22):
shot her husband in this marshy land, you know, and
she and she's got away in her car, why aren't
we checking the footwell of her car? Why aren't we
checking her shoes? Why aren't we checking her clothes to
see if there's any splatterings of this marsh? You know,
there's there's really not much going on here in terms
of pinpointing where she might have been. After both the
prosecution and defense rested, Robin and Sissy remained pointedly emotionless
(24:44):
as the jury deliberated for three hours. By a vote
of eleven to one, the women were both found guilty.
So you might be wondering how this was possible. As
you might know, in nearly every state in America in
eleven to one jury split with Cosmos trial. But Louisiana
actually has a lab that only ten jurors voting guilty
(25:07):
are needed for a murder conviction, not a unanimous decision.
Like most states, people who supported Robin and Cissy called
into question the ethics of this law. So it seems
like up until the very end, there's just some things
here that did not go right, from the police losing
the tape to focusing so much on Robin from the
beginning to now this law that allows a jury to
(25:28):
convict the pair without a unanimous decision. Through it all,
I just don't know if Robin and Cissy got a
fair shake. It doesn't sound to me like they had
a fair trial. But then you know, we have one
juror that was completely convinced that women didn't do it,
but the others were, So you know, what were they
basing that decision on, Because from what I understand about
the case, I wouldn't be finding them guilty. I think
(25:49):
it was a completely inadequate investigation, and they presented very
little in the way of evidence, and you know, there
was no physical evidence. Where's the murder weapon and where
are the belongings that were sing? And you know, why
would you rob your own husband but leave you know,
his watches if you're going to try and make it
like a robbery. Then that was kind of bungled too.
So yeah, I'd be interested to know what it was
(26:12):
that these this jury found so compelling that they convicted them.
And had this trial had been in any other state,
this would have been a mistrial and they would have
walked away. As the judge sentenced the women to life
in prison without a chance of parole. The pair held hands. Today,
Robin and Sissy are both serving their sentences in the
(26:35):
same prison and claim they are closer than ever again.
You can find Suzanne Buchanan on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook
at Soue Buchanan seven zero. Her book, The Curse of
the Turtle from Wild Blue Press is available now wherever
(26:55):
you get your books. Yeah. The only thing I'd like
to say about, you know, been the author of the
Curse of the Turtle, which is the true story of
Thailand's backpack and murders, is that you know, I've also
spent a lot of time investigating cases where there's massive
amount of evidence missing um and where the more questions
you ask, the more questions you have, and where police
investigations have been pretty shoddy, and where families have walked away,
(27:18):
you know, very unsatisfied with what's happened because nothing adds up.
And this case is incredibly interesting to me because it's
very similar to all of the cases that I've investigated
in Kotao on Thailand. So, you know, I really feel
for these kinds of stories because I've spent seven and
a half years investigating crimes, despicious death, evidence that doesn't
add up, you know, theories that just don't make any
(27:41):
sense whichever way you look at it. And as a journalist,
I've always said, if you can't figure out a story,
it's because you've got the wrong information or you don't
have all of the information, and that certainly seems to
be the case with this police investigation, because you know,
whichever way you wrap it up, it still doesn't make sense.
Shameless plug. If you're enjoying Crazy and Love, leave us
a review and listen to season three of our hit
(28:03):
series The Piked and Massacre. New episodes there every Wednesday
wherever you get your podcasts, and don't forget to follow
us on Instagram at Katie Underscore Studios. Crazy in Love
is produced by Stephanie Lydecker, Jeff Shane, Chris Grieves, and
me Courtney Armstrong. Editing and sound designed by Jeff Ta.
(28:25):
Crazy in Love is a production of I heart Radio
and Katie Studios. For more podcasts from I heart Radio,
visit the i heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever
you listen to your favorite shows. Stay safe, lovers,
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!