February 20, 2025 • 46 mins
The infamous Huck’s footage exposes critical flaws in the prosecution’s theory, reinforced by a criminologist’s analysis of stabbing murders—setting the stage for Innocence activist Jason Flom to intervene and alter the course of Bevely’s legal battle.
Email us with thoughts, suggestions or tips at investigatingmurder@iheartmedia.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):
Murder on Songbird Road is a production of iHeart Podcasts.
Previously on Murder on Songbird Road. The trial transcripts and
Julia Beverly's interrogation video provided incredible insights into the prosecution's
case against Beverly.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Always who I've left shirts you there for?
Speaker 3 (00:26):
I should have just take her with.
Speaker 4 (00:29):
That speaks to her innocence. It does.
Speaker 1 (00:32):
Beverly voluntarily agreed to be questioned without an attorney. She
also consented to the collection of her DNA.
Speaker 5 (00:39):
There was a lot of red flags.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Let me say that if I was training here, I
would have stopped him and said, you need to change
your gloves.
Speaker 4 (00:46):
They're not going to test everything. They're just not.
Speaker 6 (00:49):
But all the critical things, which had they been brought
up on cross examination, would have absolutely laid waste to
the state's case.
Speaker 1 (01:00):
None of Jade Beasley's electronic devices were forensically tested none.
Speaker 6 (01:06):
Why that they didn't even look at any of those
devices to find out if Jade was active in order
to build a timeline, a real timeline is unbelievable to me.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
I'm Lauren brad Pacheco, and this is Murder on Songbird Road.
(01:51):
As I began writing this episode, I received an email
from the Investigation Secretary of the Williamson County Sheriff's Office
approving my request for survey aolence footage from Huck's gas station.
The video showed Beverly driving up, depositing something in one
of the waste containers, and then leaving. After watching it,
Bob and I compared our thoughts.
Speaker 6 (02:12):
The thing that concerned me the most is did she
drive around to the back to go to a dumpster?
Because we had started hearing rumblings that she had gone
to the.
Speaker 4 (02:22):
Back either first or last.
Speaker 6 (02:25):
And that she had dumped things in that dumpster as
well as this this small receptacle that is in between
the pumps. So that concern in terms of if I'm
thinking Julie is not guilty of this crime, that concern
has been obliterated. She clearly did not go to any dumpster.
What we were told that she did is exactly what
(02:46):
it appears that she's doing, which is she pulled up
to that receptacle in between the two pumps like you
see it. Ninety nine point nine percent of all gas
stations she's in there for I don't know, fifteen twenty
seconds gathering whatever garbage is in the car, and then
you see her step out.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
And then you have Mudge giving her hypothesis of what
Beverly was throwing away. From the trial transcript, here's Special
Prosecutor Jennifer Mudge hypothesizing what Julie Beverly was discarding at Hucks.
Quote there goes the knife, there goes the real shoes
she was wearing.
Speaker 4 (03:25):
Unquote.
Speaker 1 (03:26):
Keep in mind the prosecution also bundled into their speculation
of what that small plastic bag contained a shower curtain
and utensils recovered at the dump, none of which could
be traced back to Hucks, let alone the murder scene
back to Bob.
Speaker 6 (03:43):
In theory, we're talking about clothes that would more likely
than not be absolutely saturated in blood, and the bag
would be heavy theoretically, if you're talking about one of
those small plastic grocery bags, I mean, aren't you worrying
about like blood dripping out onto like you're leaving traces
(04:05):
of blood droplets on the ground or smearing it on
the they like when you watch the video, it looks
like somebody who's pulled up to a receptacle and a
gas station that's throwing some shit out of their car.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
In that video, you see Beverly pull up between gas pumps,
pause for a second as she appears to partially prop
the passenger door open while rummaging about before stepping out
and tossing a loosely gathered bag in her right hand.
With that one hand. Beverly then gets back in and
drives off in the same direction she came from.
Speaker 4 (04:40):
And nothing more like. She doesn't get out and look around.
Speaker 6 (04:43):
She's not having to re you know, reconfigure the bag
in her hand.
Speaker 4 (04:47):
There's no pushing it into the can.
Speaker 6 (04:49):
It looks to me like she's got it in one
hand and she just drops it. There's no Oh, should
I maybe put some other garbage on top of this
garbage so that the next person doesn't see a bag
of bloody cloth, none of that extent.
Speaker 5 (05:01):
It doesn't even look like it's fastn't it doesn't.
Speaker 6 (05:04):
It looks like it's the other handle because those typically
those plastic bags.
Speaker 1 (05:07):
Have too Again, remember what the prosecution contends was inside
that bag. It's the clothing she was wearing, the shoes
that she was.
Speaker 5 (05:18):
Wearing, and the murder weapon.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
And then you go to what they retrieved at the dump,
and they inferred was tossed as well, which would have
been the shower curtain. Bob and I have discussed how
the defense could have but did not push back. I
would have had all of those things and ask someone
to put them into a comparable sized plastic bag so
(05:45):
people could get the idea of what it would look
like to have shoes, clothing, towels, murder weapon, shower curtain.
Speaker 5 (05:54):
If they could even fit it. I'll go step further.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
I would have tried to pack a bag that size
with all of those things, and I would have shown
that it probably wouldn't have fit in that eighteen inch opening.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
Yeah, not without pushing it in.
Speaker 1 (06:13):
No, bring a comparable sized garbage can into the courtroom
and have somebody do it with one hand.
Speaker 5 (06:21):
You wouldn't have been able to just toss it.
Speaker 7 (06:23):
Right.
Speaker 6 (06:23):
She's dropping it in. Yeah, she literally just kind of
leans over and just drops it in. Everything that you
would think about what would be going through a normal
person's mind if that is what they're disposing you do
not see in this video. Imagine that you are driving
up to a gas station and you are disposing of
(06:45):
bloody clothes that link you to.
Speaker 4 (06:47):
A murder that just occurred, that you.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
Committed spoiler alert, I wouldn't have done it at a
gas station with cameras everywhere.
Speaker 4 (06:56):
There's not a chance.
Speaker 6 (06:58):
There's not a chance in terms of a trial, the
fact that there was no resistance. Not only am I
testing the theory out that it's impossible to shove that
much stuff.
Speaker 4 (07:13):
And you have to take into consideration.
Speaker 6 (07:16):
Bloody towels or rags that were used to also clean up.
You can see what you're throwing out and where you're
doing it, and there's no way that that is a
bag of bloody clothes a murder weapon and shoes and.
Speaker 4 (07:32):
Rags or whatever you use into shower.
Speaker 6 (07:35):
Like, does that mean that she didn't do it? Not
necessarily in and of itself. Does it mean that I
don't think there's any way in hell that that's what
she was disposing of? There absolutely one, Like I would
die on that hill.
Speaker 1 (07:52):
Special Prosecutor Mudge also contradicted the claim Beverly was wearing
flip flops. Quote so she tells police she had on
flip flops. It's December, she just went to Walmart flip flops, No,
and that they fell off her feet while she is
walking or pacing around the kitchen. Have you ever paste
(08:15):
around your own kitchen and your flip flops just fell
off of you.
Speaker 6 (08:21):
I can't tell what kind of foot where she's wearing.
Does it look like she's wearing the flip flops to you?
Speaker 1 (08:26):
Yeah, because it doesn't look like she's wearing shoes. You
can see the color of her arms, and she looks
like she's wearing cropped leggings, so you can see that
it doesn't appear that she's wearing shoes, which is right
in keeping with what a flip flop would look like
on a foot. Keep in mind that Special Prosecutor Mudge
(08:50):
scoffs at the thought that she would have been wearing
flip flops to Walmart. But it's interesting if you groll
the footage before Beverly even pulls up multiple people, there's
a guy who gets out and he's wearing a cutoff
like T shirt with the sleeves completely removed. It's December,
(09:12):
but it was unseasonably warm. I also think that if
you had just murdered someone, and you know, remember the
prosecution contends this was after the murder, she would have
been covered with bloody scratches and bleeding hands.
Speaker 5 (09:29):
Why would she.
Speaker 1 (09:30):
Have been out and about in a T shirt, and
so again we have the magically clean then bleeding again hands.
So her hands were bloodied, the prosecution contends when she
was murdering Jade, then meticulously and miraculously they are cleansed
(09:51):
because she goes back to the office and types without
any blood anywhere for another fifty one minutes.
Speaker 5 (09:59):
Then she further cleans.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
Up and goes to hawks to dispose of everything comes
back in her hands are bloody again.
Speaker 4 (10:07):
It's a magic bullet theory. I mean, it doesn't add
up to me.
Speaker 6 (10:12):
The whole time frame of the state just never made
any sense. And the main reason is for what you
pointed out, which is that the fact that she got
back on the computer and worked for damn near an
hour which requires.
Speaker 4 (10:28):
Her to type.
Speaker 6 (10:29):
She's not on a mouse just clicking, she's having to
draft emails.
Speaker 4 (10:34):
She's using the keyboard.
Speaker 6 (10:36):
And if you've got an active bleeding wound on your hand,
the concept that there's not one iota, not one speck
of blood anywhere in that office, anywhere, on that keyboard, anywhere,
on that desk nowhere is implausible to me. That is
a really really bad fact for the state, which again
(10:59):
should have been absolutely highlighted by the defense in this case.
Speaker 1 (11:03):
And speaking of blood, there's something else. Beverly's friends claim
she was triggered by the side of it. My name
is Katie, and your relationship to Julie.
Speaker 8 (11:13):
I would consider her best friend.
Speaker 1 (11:14):
How long have you known Julie? And how did you
guys first meet school?
Speaker 8 (11:18):
About second or third grade. She was very squeamish. She
didn't like blood. She didn't like violence, so I never
and I never saw her around it. I mean, her
brother's rustled around and we messed with her sometimes, but
I never saw her in violent situation. She just tried
to avoid it.
Speaker 5 (11:34):
Wouldn't you say that she didn't like blood?
Speaker 1 (11:36):
Are there any specific examples that you remember.
Speaker 8 (11:41):
Just like movies like Nasty Story movies and stuff like that.
She was just not into it.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
Even if Beverly didn't have a history of avoiding blood
and gore, her gender also places her as somewhat of
an anomaly in terms of stabbing murder. According to this man.
Speaker 7 (11:58):
Name is Arthur Larigio.
Speaker 9 (12:00):
I am a professor of criminology and of psychology at
Laola University of Chicago.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
Stabbing murderers if you use the term murderer, you're going
to be talking about a man nine out of ten times,
at least in the United States.
Speaker 5 (12:21):
The agent of the.
Speaker 9 (12:22):
Socioeconomic background can vary, but it's usually a younger rather
than older man, and socioeconomic background is usually at the
lower end of the continuum rather than the higher end
of the continuum. If the person who is the perpetrator
(12:43):
of a stabbing is successful in killing the person, there's
likely to have been some forerunners. That's not going to
be the only incident in which there's been a perpetration
of violence. Mental illness is usually not a factor in
(13:03):
stabbings or any other kinds of killings.
Speaker 10 (13:07):
Usually as at doesn't mean that it's not. It's just
as in as common as people imagine that it is.
Stabbing offenders typically have prior violent criminal histories. I think
that they probably have some prior acts of violence in
their record, but that's.
Speaker 4 (13:25):
Not always the case.
Speaker 9 (13:27):
Alcohol and drugs absolutely influence the likelihood of a stabbing.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
Attack in terms of the demographic patterns among stabbing murderers.
In terms of gender, particularly, what do you attribute that
nine out of ten likelihood of it being male?
Speaker 7 (13:45):
Too?
Speaker 9 (13:47):
Part of it is the biological nature of being male,
as well as the manner in which none are socialized
from boyhood on. There's less restrictions placed on their engagement
of violent behavior. Violent and aggressive behavior is sometimes rewarded
(14:09):
or is sometimes not discipline in the way it might
be in a girl. And so it's a combination. There's
a strong biological component to violence, and it has to
do with the presence of testosteron. There's violence that's instrumental,
(14:30):
that's conducted to accomplish a goal, that would be premeditated violence,
and then there's a motive violence that comes about with
an increasing escalation, and many times the mode of violence
involves drugs or alcohol. More alcohol than drugs. There aren't
(14:54):
many drugs that cause people to become violent in the
way that alcohol does.
Speaker 1 (14:59):
It's interesting because in this case there is a belief
that meth could have played a role.
Speaker 9 (15:05):
Oh sure is a drug that also is related to violence.
Not would be a drug that I would not at
all be surprised to hear played a role.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
Murder on Songbird Road will continue after the break. Now
back to Murder on Songbird Road. Going back to the trial,
we want to address a misconception that many people following
the case at the time, even people who attended the
(15:42):
trial had or continue to have regarding what was actually
found at Hucks as opposed to the Southern Illinois Regional Landfill.
And it likely involves this exchange from trial between the
prosecution and Lee Stewart, a special agent to the Illinois
State Police, which we'll read verbatim, what was the reason
(16:06):
you were wanting to excavate a portion of that landfill?
Speaker 6 (16:10):
Investigators use phone records through Miss Beverly's Verizon cell phone
and combined that data with various surveillance video footage to
see that a vehicle matching the description of her.
Speaker 4 (16:22):
Vehicle drove to a Howks and Marion.
Speaker 6 (16:25):
When the vehicle pulled up into the Howks parking lot,
it pulled up next to a pump, and the driver
of the vehicle pulled out an object out of the
vehicle and put it into a trash can at.
Speaker 7 (16:36):
The gas station.
Speaker 1 (16:37):
Okay, so you were searching for trash.
Speaker 4 (16:42):
We were searching for trash. They could be involved in
the commission of this crime.
Speaker 1 (16:47):
As the testimony continues, note how the word trash morphs
to also cover not just what was discarded at Hugs,
but what was excavated at the landfill?
Speaker 5 (17:00):
Okay?
Speaker 1 (17:00):
So were there any items of evidence collected through the trash?
Speaker 4 (17:06):
Yes?
Speaker 5 (17:08):
What were they?
Speaker 7 (17:10):
So?
Speaker 6 (17:12):
There were two broken knife blades, one with serration on
one side and one with serration on both sides, and
then a curtain, a multi colored curtain.
Speaker 5 (17:25):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
And these items were as you previously testified too, Were
they compacted with medical waste and contaminated soil like the
process that you previously testified to, yes, all right, Looking
at people's exhibit three sixty five, is that the curtain
(17:46):
you described?
Speaker 7 (17:48):
Yes?
Speaker 5 (17:49):
And three sixty six? What is that?
Speaker 4 (17:52):
It's a knife blade with some serration.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
And three sixty seven the other one.
Speaker 6 (17:58):
Is a knife blade with serration on the bottom side there.
Speaker 1 (18:02):
Okay, those items would have been collected and turned over
to the investigating agency, is that correct?
Speaker 7 (18:09):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (18:11):
And in the photographs of the knives, I notice some
well did you notice anything in the photograph of the
knives on the knife blades?
Speaker 6 (18:24):
Some discoloration in this area here down here on that
one and it's broken off.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
They also have some soil on them, yes, right there?
Nothing further, you're honor all right? What do you make
of that? Exchange.
Speaker 4 (18:44):
It's ridiculous.
Speaker 6 (18:45):
It's the thing that upsets me the most about this
entire trial that any of this evidence was admissible in
any way, shape or form to allow them to bring
it in under the guys that well, look, we're not
going to allow them to say that it's the murder
weapon or that the curtain is from the house. But
(19:06):
they did all this work, they had twenty people out.
Speaker 4 (19:10):
There for hours.
Speaker 6 (19:11):
That concept that they allowed that to come in to
this trial and the impact that that had on the
jury is to me going to be one of the
major factors in the appeals. I will not be surprised
if this is one of the reasons that this case
gets overturned, that the conviction gets overturned and it's remanded.
Speaker 4 (19:34):
It is that big of a deal that.
Speaker 6 (19:37):
They allowed these knives to come in that had nothing
to do with this crime, this shower curtain which was
not from that home, which like, what is the implication
from it, Well.
Speaker 1 (19:51):
There's also a very slippery transference of the use of
the word trash.
Speaker 4 (19:56):
Yeah, that's how they did it.
Speaker 6 (19:57):
So in terms of kind of the fiering aspect of it,
when you're putting together that particular cross examination in conjunction
with what Mudge had described it happened. They're combining the
thought of what trash is from trash that's being thrown
(20:18):
in a garbage can, that it's the same thing as
trash that was pulled from a landfill. It's slick loyering
to make it sound like they're one in the same
to that jury is what's so scary and disingenuous.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
What's also interesting is there was this disconnect. We couldn't
figure out why so many people thought that these things
were found at the trash from Hucks. That's why, because
you could have been sitting in the same room. And
it's just clever wording. It's wordplay, and it's deceptive.
Speaker 4 (20:54):
It is.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
When we spoke to Brenda and Bailey, very very very
sincerely and authentically, there was a very real disconnect about
what was found at hops.
Speaker 4 (21:09):
How could there not be having.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
Seen the video, you and I were waiting to see
the cargo out of frame and circle back to where
there's some other dumpster.
Speaker 5 (21:19):
Right, there was no dumpster involved.
Speaker 6 (21:22):
They thought in their minds that they saw her go
to a dumpster. That's how impactful that one little portion
of testimony was in terms of planting a seed that
did not exist. That concept of that's her disposing of
(21:42):
the murder weapon as well.
Speaker 4 (21:43):
As the bloody clothes is huge.
Speaker 6 (21:47):
It's huge evidence for them, and it was done in
a way that the judge made a horrific mistake allowing
that evidence to come in at all. And then it
was compounded by the way that they used some word
salad trickery to get the jury to think that they
were talking about something that they weren't, which is the
garbage can. Again, I will be surprised if, in fact,
(22:14):
this case is remanded that that will not be one
of the major factors that cause it, because that has
a massive impact when you're kind of lacking any kind
of other physical evidence in the case like this, there
just isn't really any physical evidence like that becomes smoking
(22:35):
gun type evidence.
Speaker 1 (22:37):
It's also interesting to note that Officer Sloan, the same
officer who claimed on the stand to have questioned a
woman walking a dog or looking for a dog in
a black hoodie but didn't get her name or address
but knew she was a resident, also testified about observing
a bitemark on Beverly's arm. Here's that testimony as it
(22:58):
appears in the trial transcript.
Speaker 6 (23:02):
I was later called to transport her to the Williamson
County Sheriff's office.
Speaker 5 (23:06):
And did you do that?
Speaker 7 (23:08):
Yes?
Speaker 4 (23:09):
I did.
Speaker 1 (23:09):
Did you ask her any questions along the way, No,
I did not.
Speaker 5 (23:14):
Did she say anything to you along the way.
Speaker 6 (23:19):
She didn't make any statements. I believe she inquired of
Jade's status at.
Speaker 1 (23:25):
One point when you were transporting her. Did you notice
any wounds to her?
Speaker 9 (23:30):
I did.
Speaker 4 (23:31):
I noticed a bite mark on her forearm.
Speaker 1 (23:35):
And here's the cross examination by the defense. When you
came back to drive Julie up to the sheriff's department, she.
Speaker 5 (23:44):
Went voluntarily correct.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
Yes, she wasn't handcuffed or anything like that.
Speaker 4 (23:51):
No, I don't believe so.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
But she was wearing a large black sweatshirt at that point.
Speaker 4 (23:57):
I do not recall what she was wearing.
Speaker 1 (24:00):
You don't recall No, did she have the blanket on her?
Speaker 4 (24:07):
I believe she left the blanket there.
Speaker 1 (24:11):
But you don't know if she was wearing a full
long sleeve sweatshirt at that point.
Speaker 4 (24:17):
I do not recall what she was wearing.
Speaker 5 (24:21):
All right, what are your thoughts on that?
Speaker 4 (24:25):
You know it's selective memory.
Speaker 7 (24:28):
Right.
Speaker 6 (24:29):
So the thing that Thiene's getting at is that you
can't tell me what she was wearing, but I have
it on good authority she was wearing a long sleeve
black sweatshirt, which means that you wouldn't be able to
see her forearm. And again, like, this is the same
cop that we're dealing with that dealt with that either
(24:52):
critical or not critical person dressed in black walking the dog.
And this is like a low key, really big point
because either this guy's completely fabricating what he saw while
he's driving, or he's got a really bad memory. We
know that she was wearing a pullover hoodie, So the
(25:13):
question then becomes, how is this guy noticing a mark
on her arm?
Speaker 4 (25:19):
Does he have X ray vision? See Superman?
Speaker 1 (25:23):
And there's another interesting cop connected testimony. The neighbor who
happened to supply the second video reference to car footage
used in the building of the prosecution's timeline also happened
to know one of the responding officers, one who happened
to stop by his house on the way to responding
to the nine one one call. Here's that neighbor's testimony.
Speaker 6 (25:45):
I actually went to the correctional academy with officer Ward
from the mary And.
Speaker 4 (25:50):
Police Department, and that's who it was. So he stopped
and he.
Speaker 6 (25:55):
Told me that they too were looking injection for a
male suspect.
Speaker 1 (25:59):
Here's no I withdraw that, and here's how the exchange continues. Okay,
after that, were you made aware that the police were
no longer looking for a male in black?
Speaker 6 (26:14):
Yes, my wife, she's my ex wife now, but my
wife at the time she worked for the Marriyan Police Department.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
I already find it suspect that the second camera footage
comes from somebody who went to the academy with one
of the officers and his wife works for the Marriyan
Police Department.
Speaker 5 (26:34):
That's just too convenient that.
Speaker 1 (26:36):
Then that's a pretty cozy It's also pretty convenient that
the footage obtained from the home was deemed to be
forty four minutes off so as to sync with the
also off time of the Hucks footage and sell tower pings.
But none of that was challenged. We'll be right back
with Murder on Songbird Road. Here again is Murder on
(27:06):
Songbird Road. Do you have any thoughts that you just
want to add about Leah being removed from the courtroom
because she made jurors uncomfortable.
Speaker 4 (27:20):
It's really really problematic.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
As alluded to in our last episode, one of Beverly's
close friends, Leah, who had traveled to support her during trial,
was asked to leave the courtroom because members of the
jury found her problematic.
Speaker 11 (27:35):
Do I look threatening to you? I was removed from
the courtroom because I was threatening the jury by sitting
in the front row.
Speaker 5 (27:42):
What were you doing?
Speaker 11 (27:44):
She was sitting looking I was behind her, I was
looking around. I was the darkest person in that courtroom
or her trial. And they did everything they could do
to get me out of that courtroom expeditiously, including asking
Julie to ask me to leave, which they did.
Speaker 9 (28:01):
They allowed Julie to walk over to her.
Speaker 11 (28:02):
And because Julie asked me to leave, I stepped out.
They were worried that they were going to have a
mistrial because I was intimidating the jury.
Speaker 5 (28:09):
That's what by sitting there, thing said that the jury members.
Speaker 11 (28:13):
The all white jury, they were intimidated because I'm black,
the all white jury.
Speaker 5 (28:18):
They had called the bailiff over and so we took
a recess. And during the recess, so I.
Speaker 11 (28:22):
Said I was taking pictures of their vehicles, and they
were worried that I was going to follow them home
and or have I took pictures of their license plates.
And then I was sitting there downs that I was
staring them down and giving dirty looks. I'm not in
there smiling. It was Julie's trial. I was distraught. But
(28:44):
they said that I was a threat, that I was
threatening the jury. How many out of.
Speaker 5 (28:47):
Twelve said that I was a threat? I think four.
Speaker 11 (28:51):
Four out of the twelve jury members had a problem
with me, specifically just sitting there for the trial.
Speaker 6 (28:57):
Back to Bob, this isn't a situation where she's out
of order. She's not screaming, yelling, saying, and she's merely
looking at the jury trying to figure out the same
way that I am every time I'm sitting in there,
are they buying this? Are my points hitting home? She's
allowed to look and observe at anything that she wants
(29:21):
to this whole concept of staring, staring into someone's soul.
Speaker 4 (29:29):
From out in the gallery. But like the reality Lauren
is is that is how the jur that we spoke
to felt.
Speaker 1 (29:38):
We have indeed spoken to a juror whose anonymity we
will protect. They shared their side of the Leah situation.
Here's the jur It.
Speaker 12 (29:46):
Was when we were leaving at the end of the
day one day, but there was somebody sitting in a
car with a big Justice for Julie's sticker on it
that was taking videos or pictures of must walking out.
Speaker 7 (29:57):
At least that's what it looked like. It was a
I mean, it was a black Ford car.
Speaker 12 (30:02):
So for us, it was scary, you know, like you
hear stuff sometimes on TV, like people following jurors homely
killing the whole family type stuff, and you don't know
what anybody's like. Did we necessarily think that? I don't
know what anybody else.
Speaker 7 (30:19):
Thought, But I don't know why I was scared.
Speaker 1 (30:21):
Without consulting the parties, the trial judge privately questioned four
jurors and chambers. Though unrelated during the process, concerns about
the black car and the jurors observations of Leah in
the courtroom appear to have merged into a single issue.
Speaker 6 (30:38):
The bigger point about the whole Lea situation is that
it really does kind of illuminate the mindset that you're
dealing with down there. It's like Leah can't been the
only person who's looking at the jury. Recently, I went
and watched a trial from beginning to end. It was
(30:59):
three weeks long, and I spent an awful lot of
time looking at the jury hard. I'm trying to figure
like they're the only people that they're the only people
that matter in that courtroom. They are the twelve people
that are sitting there deciding somebody's fate. I'm I'm watching them.
Are they paying attention? Are they making faces? How are
(31:22):
they reacting to that evidence?
Speaker 4 (31:24):
It's just what you do.
Speaker 6 (31:25):
They are kind of mandatory viewing if you're sitting in
on a trial, like you watch the jurors because they
are the beginning and the end of it all.
Speaker 5 (31:34):
Yeah, the power rests with them.
Speaker 6 (31:37):
The bigger question then becomes is what is going on
extemporaneously around them that's making them have this fear? What
else is going on that's making them feel like, man,
is my life in danger?
Speaker 7 (31:52):
Here?
Speaker 1 (31:54):
Beverly was asked to have Leah removed because it was
going to prejudice the jury against her. Ironically that it
was a reflection on Beverly that it was her friend
who was making the jurors uncomfortable, and when you go
(32:14):
back and you actually read that portion, they were originally
talking about a black car, not a black woman. Also
problematic our reports we've received about what the court clerk
allegedly sent back with the jury foreman as the jurors
went back to deliberate the verdict.
Speaker 6 (32:31):
You and I have been trying to kind of nail
down the concept of what was sent back to the jurors.
To compound this even more, what they were sitting with
in that deliberation room, and we know that they're sitting
there with that box and knives back there, the knives
(32:51):
that have nothing to do with the crime. Wrap your
mind around that.
Speaker 5 (32:58):
I cannot wrap. It's so judicial, and the fact.
Speaker 1 (33:01):
That it is common practice that while deliberating, a jury
can ask for more things, for more clarification. But we
now have multiple sources confirming that the jury foreman was
(33:22):
handed by the court clerk a box that contained those
random utensils retrieved from the dump and autopsy photos as
they were heading into deliberation. Multiple people who were in
the courtroom have expressed they witnessed the box of evidence
being sent back with the jurors prior to deliberation. Here's
(33:46):
Renee High Tower.
Speaker 13 (33:47):
I remember the box going to the foreman and they
were still in the jury box when it was given
to them, and they were sitting there.
Speaker 5 (33:57):
For a moment, and then he carried it out as.
Speaker 1 (34:00):
They left, and who handed it to the foreman the clerk.
So the court clerk handed the jury foreman a box
before they.
Speaker 5 (34:10):
Went into deliberation.
Speaker 4 (34:12):
Correct.
Speaker 5 (34:13):
Did you know what was in the box at the time?
Speaker 13 (34:17):
I assumed it was evidence, but I couldn't see in it.
Speaker 5 (34:21):
I could see things sticking out of it, but I
couldn't see in it. What were you told? It was
after the fact.
Speaker 13 (34:27):
As they were taken out for deliberation, we were all
walking out, and that's when Beane told me. She said
she had never seen anything like it, that they gave
the jury the whole box of evidence.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
This is Beverly's friend Katie's recollection.
Speaker 8 (34:40):
I do remember.
Speaker 14 (34:42):
I think it was the bailiff, I'm not really for
sure who it was, somebody handing one of the men
in the jury something and he kind of just sat
there and looked at it with a dumbfounded look, and
then they got up to leave to go deliberate. I
just remember him just loo looking at it, just downfounded,
like what am I supposed to?
Speaker 7 (35:03):
What is this?
Speaker 14 (35:03):
What am I supposed to do with it?
Speaker 1 (35:05):
And this is what we were told by an anonymous juror.
What do you remember about the jury being sent into
deliberation and what do you remember being sent back to
deliberate with in the room.
Speaker 7 (35:21):
A box of all the pictures? And then there was
k lives in a box.
Speaker 5 (35:27):
When you say a box of all the pictures, what
were the pictures.
Speaker 7 (35:30):
Of Drew's autopsy photos?
Speaker 5 (35:34):
How is that not prejudicial?
Speaker 6 (35:37):
Well, it is when you're sending them back and pretending
as if they are the murder weapons.
Speaker 4 (35:44):
It's unbelievable.
Speaker 5 (35:46):
How is that allowed though? And what does that mean?
Speaker 9 (35:49):
Wait?
Speaker 6 (35:49):
Are we trying to figure out how Judge Green was
operating here?
Speaker 4 (35:53):
Like I can't crawl into that man's brain.
Speaker 1 (35:56):
I have formally requested an interview or statement from Judge
Green regarding the so called evidence sent back with the
jurors for deliberation and the removal of Leah from his courtroom. Additionally,
I have asked the judge to address any connection to
the immediate removal of Julia Beverly's son while she was
a pre trial detainee in Williamson County, as well as
(36:18):
other potential conflicts of interests. This includes his affiliation with
the same church attended by the Beasley family and allegations
that he wore pink widely associated with the Justice for
Jade movement on at least three of the six days
of trial. Furthermore, despite denying having a social media presence
at Beverly sentencing, Green does indeed have a Facebook account
(36:42):
that shares mutual connections with the Beasley family. While I
copied the Williamson County State's attorney on my request, it
is gone unanswered.
Speaker 6 (36:51):
We looked at the transcripts of this trial. It's paper thint.
There is no actual evidence of guilt here. They just
never could prove that she was the person who actually
did it, other than by her own misstatements and lies.
When you look at everything else in the totality of
(37:13):
the circumstances, you can see how shaky they thought their case.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
Was, something that is very much underscored by an exchange
from the end of Beverly's three hour interrogation the day
of the murder and how the prosecution had it edited
for trial.
Speaker 4 (37:29):
So do you think when Jade was getting stabbed.
Speaker 1 (37:31):
Was it like this?
Speaker 15 (37:33):
Was it kind of off to the side, because you.
Speaker 12 (37:35):
Know some people swing lower direction, some kind of go
from the side somes over like this.
Speaker 7 (37:41):
Which way do you think it was?
Speaker 9 (37:43):
For what I could see on her back?
Speaker 5 (37:44):
It definitely okay, it.
Speaker 1 (37:46):
Was definitely up and down like this.
Speaker 15 (37:48):
Was it kind of real quick? Was it like go
in kind of wiggle a little bit? I mean, which
way did you do it?
Speaker 7 (37:54):
Okay, here's here's the thing.
Speaker 15 (37:56):
Okay, we know you've been through a lot, you are.
Speaker 9 (38:10):
There's some things that we're gonna.
Speaker 15 (38:12):
Have to pull it out. Then help us through it.
Speaker 7 (38:21):
Okay, help us through it.
Speaker 15 (38:23):
Wish anymore.
Speaker 1 (38:39):
It's one thing to hear it, but I want listeners
to understand how difficult.
Speaker 5 (38:47):
It is to watch it.
Speaker 1 (38:49):
Is Meier is is really over gesticulating every single move
as he makes a stabbing. What's interesting to me about
her reaction. You can see how she's trying to hold
it together, honestly thinking she's being helpful, and in that
(39:13):
moment where she realizes he shifts gears to how did
you do it? Not how did he do it? But
how did you do it? And immediately she reacts with
sincere shock and horror is what it sounds like.
Speaker 6 (39:31):
Well, she breaks she breaks down immediately. It really speaks
loudly to innocence. To me, that whole last minute that
I watched was that's not somebody who did it.
Speaker 1 (39:44):
What I find so interesting about that exchange is what
they chose to cut out before it got to trial.
The last line that they cut out is she may
not have been my blood, but she a daughter to me.
The intention of cutting that out if you think the
(40:07):
person is one hundred percent guilty, what are you trying
to right?
Speaker 4 (40:12):
What are you afraid of? Yeah? Why are they cutting
that out?
Speaker 6 (40:17):
You know, it's like there there is no reasonable explanation
for it other than they're trying to have everything fit
into their narrative, and their narrative has to be that
Julia did not feel that way about Jane.
Speaker 4 (40:35):
And it's just not how it was.
Speaker 1 (40:38):
Sentiments that made this next exchange, taped at the end
of January twenty twenty four, even more impactful for everyone involved.
Without further ado, Renee High Tower, Jason Flomm.
Speaker 16 (40:50):
Hello, Renee, it looks like you're in your car and
nice to meet you. Sorry for what you're going through
Your family. It's awful, but hopefully we can together we
can fix it, at least make it better.
Speaker 5 (41:02):
So Renee's been up since before six.
Speaker 1 (41:05):
In the back seat you will see Julie's eldest son,
Jaden Wave Jayden awesome. And next room is Jaden's cousin
and they all made the three hour drive this morning
at the break of dawn to visit Julie.
Speaker 16 (41:22):
Oh, it's so nice, except for it's not.
Speaker 1 (41:24):
Because yeah, so Renee, I called Jason. Jason had had
dinner several weeks ago with Kathleen Zelner, and I expressed
that you had reached out and that the firm had
responded saying that they were not taking any more pro
(41:44):
bono cases this year a quick aside. Pro bono work
is when lawyers provide free legal services to people who
can't afford them. The term comes from the Latin phrase
pro bono publico, which means for the public good. Chicago
based attorney Kathleen Zelner is one of the most formidable
forces in wrongful conviction advocacy. Notable client Zelner has represented
(42:08):
includes Stephen Avery, Kevin Fox, Ryan W. Ferguson, and nineteen Exoneries,
who were listed in the National Registry of Exonerations. Renee
had already reached out to someone in her office.
Speaker 2 (42:21):
I kind of gave a brief story of her case,
and he called me back and he said that unfortunately
her pro bono has maxed out, but he gave me
a flat fee of twenty thousand for the appeal alone,
just the appeal, And he said that they did call
the appellate court down here and they found out exactly
(42:44):
where it's at, and that no public defender has been
assigned just yet. So they're still waiting on all the
transcripts to come in. And I believe she has like
twenty five and she's got nine of the twenty five
so far, and the most important one of the trial
is not ready.
Speaker 5 (43:00):
A year later.
Speaker 16 (43:01):
Yeah, administrative, bureaucratic nonsense. But yeah, So I don't know
what Lauren.
Speaker 7 (43:10):
I call her.
Speaker 16 (43:11):
LBP told you or didn't tell you.
Speaker 7 (43:13):
So I spoke with Kathleen.
Speaker 16 (43:15):
I mean, twenty thousand dollars for Kathleen's owner is an
incredible price, obviously, but not if you don't have twenty
thousand dollars obviously, then it doesn't matter. But I did
talk to her. We've recently connected and we really hit
it off. I don't know how we didn't know each
other before, but she's a force of nature and she's
really interested in this case, which is great. I confirmed
(43:35):
that when I spoke to her, so I told her, look,
if it's twenty thousand dollars, I'll put the bill for that,
because I think she If anyone can get Julie out,
it's her, and I think she can and she probably will.
Speaker 2 (43:52):
Thank you so much, I don't even know what to say.
Speaker 16 (43:55):
No, I'm happy to do it. This is what we're
here for, and I'm lucky to have the access to
those kind of funds, so I'm excited to get Sorry.
I mean, if this would be the best deal of
the century, if this is what it is, and if
it works, that'll be the best money ever spent.
Speaker 7 (44:09):
For real.
Speaker 2 (44:10):
I so appreciate it so much. Thank you so much,
thank you so much, all of you. I can't even
begin to say thank you enough.
Speaker 16 (44:18):
I swear I would take a little of the burden
off of you for a change.
Speaker 7 (44:21):
So that's good.
Speaker 1 (44:24):
And like that, in an incredible gesture of generosity and compassion,
Renee high Tower and Julia Beverly had something they desperately needed.
Since December of twenty twenty, hope on the next Murder
(44:46):
on Songbird Road, minds are changed.
Speaker 6 (44:49):
This zero chance of somebody just wandering around back here.
Speaker 1 (44:52):
Yeah, and unfortunately this is not the kind of neighborhood
where you would have ring cameras or no way as
knocking on doors, and Marion leads to a major breakthrough.
Oh my gosh, he has tattoos, he would be identifiable,
and the concept of beyond a reasonable doubt is revisited.
(45:14):
Oh my god, Oh my.
Speaker 5 (45:16):
God, that's huge.
Speaker 1 (45:18):
Murder on Songbird Road is a production of iHeart Podcasts.
Our executive producers are Taylor Chaqoine and Lauren Bright Pacheco.
Research writing and hosting by Lauren Bright Pacheco. Investigative reporting
by Bob Matta and Lauren Bright Pacheco, editing, sound design
and original music by Evan Tyre and Taylor Chaqoine. Additional
(45:39):
music by Asher Kurtz. Please like, subscribe, and leave us
a review. Wherever you're listening. You can follow me on
all platforms at Lauren Bright Pacheco and email the show
with thought, suggestions or tips at Investigating Murder at iHeartMedia
dot com. For more iHeart podcasts, Visit the iHeartRadio app,
(46:16):
Apple podcasts, or wherever you get your favorite shows.
Speaker 5 (46:19):
Thanks for listening.
Murder on Songbird Road is a production of iHeart Podcasts.
Previously on Murder on Songbird Road. The trial transcripts and
Julia Beverly's interrogation video provided incredible insights into the prosecution's
case against Beverly.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Always who I've left shirts you there for?
Speaker 3 (00:26):
I should have just take her with.
Speaker 4 (00:29):
That speaks to her innocence. It does.
Speaker 1 (00:32):
Beverly voluntarily agreed to be questioned without an attorney. She
also consented to the collection of her DNA.
Speaker 5 (00:39):
There was a lot of red flags.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Let me say that if I was training here, I
would have stopped him and said, you need to change
your gloves.
Speaker 4 (00:46):
They're not going to test everything. They're just not.
Speaker 6 (00:49):
But all the critical things, which had they been brought
up on cross examination, would have absolutely laid waste to
the state's case.
Speaker 1 (01:00):
None of Jade Beasley's electronic devices were forensically tested none.
Speaker 6 (01:06):
Why that they didn't even look at any of those
devices to find out if Jade was active in order
to build a timeline, a real timeline is unbelievable to me.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
I'm Lauren brad Pacheco, and this is Murder on Songbird Road.
(01:51):
As I began writing this episode, I received an email
from the Investigation Secretary of the Williamson County Sheriff's Office
approving my request for survey aolence footage from Huck's gas station.
The video showed Beverly driving up, depositing something in one
of the waste containers, and then leaving. After watching it,
Bob and I compared our thoughts.
Speaker 6 (02:12):
The thing that concerned me the most is did she
drive around to the back to go to a dumpster?
Because we had started hearing rumblings that she had gone
to the.
Speaker 4 (02:22):
Back either first or last.
Speaker 6 (02:25):
And that she had dumped things in that dumpster as
well as this this small receptacle that is in between
the pumps. So that concern in terms of if I'm
thinking Julie is not guilty of this crime, that concern
has been obliterated. She clearly did not go to any dumpster.
What we were told that she did is exactly what
(02:46):
it appears that she's doing, which is she pulled up
to that receptacle in between the two pumps like you
see it. Ninety nine point nine percent of all gas
stations she's in there for I don't know, fifteen twenty
seconds gathering whatever garbage is in the car, and then
you see her step out.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
And then you have Mudge giving her hypothesis of what
Beverly was throwing away. From the trial transcript, here's Special
Prosecutor Jennifer Mudge hypothesizing what Julie Beverly was discarding at Hucks.
Quote there goes the knife, there goes the real shoes
she was wearing.
Speaker 4 (03:25):
Unquote.
Speaker 1 (03:26):
Keep in mind the prosecution also bundled into their speculation
of what that small plastic bag contained a shower curtain
and utensils recovered at the dump, none of which could
be traced back to Hucks, let alone the murder scene
back to Bob.
Speaker 6 (03:43):
In theory, we're talking about clothes that would more likely
than not be absolutely saturated in blood, and the bag
would be heavy theoretically, if you're talking about one of
those small plastic grocery bags, I mean, aren't you worrying
about like blood dripping out onto like you're leaving traces
(04:05):
of blood droplets on the ground or smearing it on
the they like when you watch the video, it looks
like somebody who's pulled up to a receptacle and a
gas station that's throwing some shit out of their car.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
In that video, you see Beverly pull up between gas pumps,
pause for a second as she appears to partially prop
the passenger door open while rummaging about before stepping out
and tossing a loosely gathered bag in her right hand.
With that one hand. Beverly then gets back in and
drives off in the same direction she came from.
Speaker 4 (04:40):
And nothing more like. She doesn't get out and look around.
Speaker 6 (04:43):
She's not having to re you know, reconfigure the bag
in her hand.
Speaker 4 (04:47):
There's no pushing it into the can.
Speaker 6 (04:49):
It looks to me like she's got it in one
hand and she just drops it. There's no Oh, should
I maybe put some other garbage on top of this
garbage so that the next person doesn't see a bag
of bloody cloth, none of that extent.
Speaker 5 (05:01):
It doesn't even look like it's fastn't it doesn't.
Speaker 6 (05:04):
It looks like it's the other handle because those typically
those plastic bags.
Speaker 1 (05:07):
Have too Again, remember what the prosecution contends was inside
that bag. It's the clothing she was wearing, the shoes
that she was.
Speaker 5 (05:18):
Wearing, and the murder weapon.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
And then you go to what they retrieved at the dump,
and they inferred was tossed as well, which would have
been the shower curtain. Bob and I have discussed how
the defense could have but did not push back. I
would have had all of those things and ask someone
to put them into a comparable sized plastic bag so
(05:45):
people could get the idea of what it would look
like to have shoes, clothing, towels, murder weapon, shower curtain.
Speaker 5 (05:54):
If they could even fit it. I'll go step further.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
I would have tried to pack a bag that size
with all of those things, and I would have shown
that it probably wouldn't have fit in that eighteen inch opening.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
Yeah, not without pushing it in.
Speaker 1 (06:13):
No, bring a comparable sized garbage can into the courtroom
and have somebody do it with one hand.
Speaker 5 (06:21):
You wouldn't have been able to just toss it.
Speaker 7 (06:23):
Right.
Speaker 6 (06:23):
She's dropping it in. Yeah, she literally just kind of
leans over and just drops it in. Everything that you
would think about what would be going through a normal
person's mind if that is what they're disposing you do
not see in this video. Imagine that you are driving
up to a gas station and you are disposing of
(06:45):
bloody clothes that link you to.
Speaker 4 (06:47):
A murder that just occurred, that you.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
Committed spoiler alert, I wouldn't have done it at a
gas station with cameras everywhere.
Speaker 4 (06:56):
There's not a chance.
Speaker 6 (06:58):
There's not a chance in terms of a trial, the
fact that there was no resistance. Not only am I
testing the theory out that it's impossible to shove that
much stuff.
Speaker 4 (07:13):
And you have to take into consideration.
Speaker 6 (07:16):
Bloody towels or rags that were used to also clean up.
You can see what you're throwing out and where you're
doing it, and there's no way that that is a
bag of bloody clothes a murder weapon and shoes and.
Speaker 4 (07:32):
Rags or whatever you use into shower.
Speaker 6 (07:35):
Like, does that mean that she didn't do it? Not
necessarily in and of itself. Does it mean that I
don't think there's any way in hell that that's what
she was disposing of? There absolutely one, Like I would
die on that hill.
Speaker 1 (07:52):
Special Prosecutor Mudge also contradicted the claim Beverly was wearing
flip flops. Quote so she tells police she had on
flip flops. It's December, she just went to Walmart flip flops, No,
and that they fell off her feet while she is
walking or pacing around the kitchen. Have you ever paste
(08:15):
around your own kitchen and your flip flops just fell
off of you.
Speaker 6 (08:21):
I can't tell what kind of foot where she's wearing.
Does it look like she's wearing the flip flops to you?
Speaker 1 (08:26):
Yeah, because it doesn't look like she's wearing shoes. You
can see the color of her arms, and she looks
like she's wearing cropped leggings, so you can see that
it doesn't appear that she's wearing shoes, which is right
in keeping with what a flip flop would look like
on a foot. Keep in mind that Special Prosecutor Mudge
(08:50):
scoffs at the thought that she would have been wearing
flip flops to Walmart. But it's interesting if you groll
the footage before Beverly even pulls up multiple people, there's
a guy who gets out and he's wearing a cutoff
like T shirt with the sleeves completely removed. It's December,
(09:12):
but it was unseasonably warm. I also think that if
you had just murdered someone, and you know, remember the
prosecution contends this was after the murder, she would have
been covered with bloody scratches and bleeding hands.
Speaker 5 (09:29):
Why would she.
Speaker 1 (09:30):
Have been out and about in a T shirt, and
so again we have the magically clean then bleeding again hands.
So her hands were bloodied, the prosecution contends when she
was murdering Jade, then meticulously and miraculously they are cleansed
(09:51):
because she goes back to the office and types without
any blood anywhere for another fifty one minutes.
Speaker 5 (09:59):
Then she further cleans.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
Up and goes to hawks to dispose of everything comes
back in her hands are bloody again.
Speaker 4 (10:07):
It's a magic bullet theory. I mean, it doesn't add
up to me.
Speaker 6 (10:12):
The whole time frame of the state just never made
any sense. And the main reason is for what you
pointed out, which is that the fact that she got
back on the computer and worked for damn near an
hour which requires.
Speaker 4 (10:28):
Her to type.
Speaker 6 (10:29):
She's not on a mouse just clicking, she's having to
draft emails.
Speaker 4 (10:34):
She's using the keyboard.
Speaker 6 (10:36):
And if you've got an active bleeding wound on your hand,
the concept that there's not one iota, not one speck
of blood anywhere in that office, anywhere, on that keyboard, anywhere,
on that desk nowhere is implausible to me. That is
a really really bad fact for the state, which again
(10:59):
should have been absolutely highlighted by the defense in this case.
Speaker 1 (11:03):
And speaking of blood, there's something else. Beverly's friends claim
she was triggered by the side of it. My name
is Katie, and your relationship to Julie.
Speaker 8 (11:13):
I would consider her best friend.
Speaker 1 (11:14):
How long have you known Julie? And how did you
guys first meet school?
Speaker 8 (11:18):
About second or third grade. She was very squeamish. She
didn't like blood. She didn't like violence, so I never
and I never saw her around it. I mean, her
brother's rustled around and we messed with her sometimes, but
I never saw her in violent situation. She just tried
to avoid it.
Speaker 5 (11:34):
Wouldn't you say that she didn't like blood?
Speaker 1 (11:36):
Are there any specific examples that you remember.
Speaker 8 (11:41):
Just like movies like Nasty Story movies and stuff like that.
She was just not into it.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
Even if Beverly didn't have a history of avoiding blood
and gore, her gender also places her as somewhat of
an anomaly in terms of stabbing murder. According to this man.
Speaker 7 (11:58):
Name is Arthur Larigio.
Speaker 9 (12:00):
I am a professor of criminology and of psychology at
Laola University of Chicago.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
Stabbing murderers if you use the term murderer, you're going
to be talking about a man nine out of ten times,
at least in the United States.
Speaker 5 (12:21):
The agent of the.
Speaker 9 (12:22):
Socioeconomic background can vary, but it's usually a younger rather
than older man, and socioeconomic background is usually at the
lower end of the continuum rather than the higher end
of the continuum. If the person who is the perpetrator
(12:43):
of a stabbing is successful in killing the person, there's
likely to have been some forerunners. That's not going to
be the only incident in which there's been a perpetration
of violence. Mental illness is usually not a factor in
(13:03):
stabbings or any other kinds of killings.
Speaker 10 (13:07):
Usually as at doesn't mean that it's not. It's just
as in as common as people imagine that it is.
Stabbing offenders typically have prior violent criminal histories. I think
that they probably have some prior acts of violence in
their record, but that's.
Speaker 4 (13:25):
Not always the case.
Speaker 9 (13:27):
Alcohol and drugs absolutely influence the likelihood of a stabbing.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
Attack in terms of the demographic patterns among stabbing murderers.
In terms of gender, particularly, what do you attribute that
nine out of ten likelihood of it being male?
Speaker 7 (13:45):
Too?
Speaker 9 (13:47):
Part of it is the biological nature of being male,
as well as the manner in which none are socialized
from boyhood on. There's less restrictions placed on their engagement
of violent behavior. Violent and aggressive behavior is sometimes rewarded
(14:09):
or is sometimes not discipline in the way it might
be in a girl. And so it's a combination. There's
a strong biological component to violence, and it has to
do with the presence of testosteron. There's violence that's instrumental,
(14:30):
that's conducted to accomplish a goal, that would be premeditated violence,
and then there's a motive violence that comes about with
an increasing escalation, and many times the mode of violence
involves drugs or alcohol. More alcohol than drugs. There aren't
(14:54):
many drugs that cause people to become violent in the
way that alcohol does.
Speaker 1 (14:59):
It's interesting because in this case there is a belief
that meth could have played a role.
Speaker 9 (15:05):
Oh sure is a drug that also is related to violence.
Not would be a drug that I would not at
all be surprised to hear played a role.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
Murder on Songbird Road will continue after the break. Now
back to Murder on Songbird Road. Going back to the trial,
we want to address a misconception that many people following
the case at the time, even people who attended the
(15:42):
trial had or continue to have regarding what was actually
found at Hucks as opposed to the Southern Illinois Regional Landfill.
And it likely involves this exchange from trial between the
prosecution and Lee Stewart, a special agent to the Illinois
State Police, which we'll read verbatim, what was the reason
(16:06):
you were wanting to excavate a portion of that landfill?
Speaker 6 (16:10):
Investigators use phone records through Miss Beverly's Verizon cell phone
and combined that data with various surveillance video footage to
see that a vehicle matching the description of her.
Speaker 4 (16:22):
Vehicle drove to a Howks and Marion.
Speaker 6 (16:25):
When the vehicle pulled up into the Howks parking lot,
it pulled up next to a pump, and the driver
of the vehicle pulled out an object out of the
vehicle and put it into a trash can at.
Speaker 7 (16:36):
The gas station.
Speaker 1 (16:37):
Okay, so you were searching for trash.
Speaker 4 (16:42):
We were searching for trash. They could be involved in
the commission of this crime.
Speaker 1 (16:47):
As the testimony continues, note how the word trash morphs
to also cover not just what was discarded at Hugs,
but what was excavated at the landfill?
Speaker 5 (17:00):
Okay?
Speaker 1 (17:00):
So were there any items of evidence collected through the trash?
Speaker 4 (17:06):
Yes?
Speaker 5 (17:08):
What were they?
Speaker 7 (17:10):
So?
Speaker 6 (17:12):
There were two broken knife blades, one with serration on
one side and one with serration on both sides, and
then a curtain, a multi colored curtain.
Speaker 5 (17:25):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
And these items were as you previously testified too, Were
they compacted with medical waste and contaminated soil like the
process that you previously testified to, yes, all right, Looking
at people's exhibit three sixty five, is that the curtain
(17:46):
you described?
Speaker 7 (17:48):
Yes?
Speaker 5 (17:49):
And three sixty six? What is that?
Speaker 4 (17:52):
It's a knife blade with some serration.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
And three sixty seven the other one.
Speaker 6 (17:58):
Is a knife blade with serration on the bottom side there.
Speaker 1 (18:02):
Okay, those items would have been collected and turned over
to the investigating agency, is that correct?
Speaker 7 (18:09):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (18:11):
And in the photographs of the knives, I notice some
well did you notice anything in the photograph of the
knives on the knife blades?
Speaker 6 (18:24):
Some discoloration in this area here down here on that
one and it's broken off.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
They also have some soil on them, yes, right there?
Nothing further, you're honor all right? What do you make
of that? Exchange.
Speaker 4 (18:44):
It's ridiculous.
Speaker 6 (18:45):
It's the thing that upsets me the most about this
entire trial that any of this evidence was admissible in
any way, shape or form to allow them to bring
it in under the guys that well, look, we're not
going to allow them to say that it's the murder
weapon or that the curtain is from the house. But
(19:06):
they did all this work, they had twenty people out.
Speaker 4 (19:10):
There for hours.
Speaker 6 (19:11):
That concept that they allowed that to come in to
this trial and the impact that that had on the
jury is to me going to be one of the
major factors in the appeals. I will not be surprised
if this is one of the reasons that this case
gets overturned, that the conviction gets overturned and it's remanded.
Speaker 4 (19:34):
It is that big of a deal that.
Speaker 6 (19:37):
They allowed these knives to come in that had nothing
to do with this crime, this shower curtain which was
not from that home, which like, what is the implication
from it, Well.
Speaker 1 (19:51):
There's also a very slippery transference of the use of
the word trash.
Speaker 4 (19:56):
Yeah, that's how they did it.
Speaker 6 (19:57):
So in terms of kind of the fiering aspect of it,
when you're putting together that particular cross examination in conjunction
with what Mudge had described it happened. They're combining the
thought of what trash is from trash that's being thrown
(20:18):
in a garbage can, that it's the same thing as
trash that was pulled from a landfill. It's slick loyering
to make it sound like they're one in the same
to that jury is what's so scary and disingenuous.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
What's also interesting is there was this disconnect. We couldn't
figure out why so many people thought that these things
were found at the trash from Hucks. That's why, because
you could have been sitting in the same room. And
it's just clever wording. It's wordplay, and it's deceptive.
Speaker 4 (20:54):
It is.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
When we spoke to Brenda and Bailey, very very very
sincerely and authentically, there was a very real disconnect about
what was found at hops.
Speaker 4 (21:09):
How could there not be having.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
Seen the video, you and I were waiting to see
the cargo out of frame and circle back to where
there's some other dumpster.
Speaker 5 (21:19):
Right, there was no dumpster involved.
Speaker 6 (21:22):
They thought in their minds that they saw her go
to a dumpster. That's how impactful that one little portion
of testimony was in terms of planting a seed that
did not exist. That concept of that's her disposing of
(21:42):
the murder weapon as well.
Speaker 4 (21:43):
As the bloody clothes is huge.
Speaker 6 (21:47):
It's huge evidence for them, and it was done in
a way that the judge made a horrific mistake allowing
that evidence to come in at all. And then it
was compounded by the way that they used some word
salad trickery to get the jury to think that they
were talking about something that they weren't, which is the
garbage can. Again, I will be surprised if, in fact,
(22:14):
this case is remanded that that will not be one
of the major factors that cause it, because that has
a massive impact when you're kind of lacking any kind
of other physical evidence in the case like this, there
just isn't really any physical evidence like that becomes smoking
(22:35):
gun type evidence.
Speaker 1 (22:37):
It's also interesting to note that Officer Sloan, the same
officer who claimed on the stand to have questioned a
woman walking a dog or looking for a dog in
a black hoodie but didn't get her name or address
but knew she was a resident, also testified about observing
a bitemark on Beverly's arm. Here's that testimony as it
(22:58):
appears in the trial transcript.
Speaker 6 (23:02):
I was later called to transport her to the Williamson
County Sheriff's office.
Speaker 5 (23:06):
And did you do that?
Speaker 7 (23:08):
Yes?
Speaker 4 (23:09):
I did.
Speaker 1 (23:09):
Did you ask her any questions along the way, No,
I did not.
Speaker 5 (23:14):
Did she say anything to you along the way.
Speaker 6 (23:19):
She didn't make any statements. I believe she inquired of
Jade's status at.
Speaker 1 (23:25):
One point when you were transporting her. Did you notice
any wounds to her?
Speaker 9 (23:30):
I did.
Speaker 4 (23:31):
I noticed a bite mark on her forearm.
Speaker 1 (23:35):
And here's the cross examination by the defense. When you
came back to drive Julie up to the sheriff's department, she.
Speaker 5 (23:44):
Went voluntarily correct.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
Yes, she wasn't handcuffed or anything like that.
Speaker 4 (23:51):
No, I don't believe so.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
But she was wearing a large black sweatshirt at that point.
Speaker 4 (23:57):
I do not recall what she was wearing.
Speaker 1 (24:00):
You don't recall No, did she have the blanket on her?
Speaker 4 (24:07):
I believe she left the blanket there.
Speaker 1 (24:11):
But you don't know if she was wearing a full
long sleeve sweatshirt at that point.
Speaker 4 (24:17):
I do not recall what she was wearing.
Speaker 5 (24:21):
All right, what are your thoughts on that?
Speaker 4 (24:25):
You know it's selective memory.
Speaker 7 (24:28):
Right.
Speaker 6 (24:29):
So the thing that Thiene's getting at is that you
can't tell me what she was wearing, but I have
it on good authority she was wearing a long sleeve
black sweatshirt, which means that you wouldn't be able to
see her forearm. And again, like, this is the same
cop that we're dealing with that dealt with that either
(24:52):
critical or not critical person dressed in black walking the dog.
And this is like a low key, really big point
because either this guy's completely fabricating what he saw while
he's driving, or he's got a really bad memory. We
know that she was wearing a pullover hoodie, So the
(25:13):
question then becomes, how is this guy noticing a mark
on her arm?
Speaker 4 (25:19):
Does he have X ray vision? See Superman?
Speaker 1 (25:23):
And there's another interesting cop connected testimony. The neighbor who
happened to supply the second video reference to car footage
used in the building of the prosecution's timeline also happened
to know one of the responding officers, one who happened
to stop by his house on the way to responding
to the nine one one call. Here's that neighbor's testimony.
Speaker 6 (25:45):
I actually went to the correctional academy with officer Ward
from the mary And.
Speaker 4 (25:50):
Police Department, and that's who it was. So he stopped
and he.
Speaker 6 (25:55):
Told me that they too were looking injection for a
male suspect.
Speaker 1 (25:59):
Here's no I withdraw that, and here's how the exchange continues. Okay,
after that, were you made aware that the police were
no longer looking for a male in black?
Speaker 6 (26:14):
Yes, my wife, she's my ex wife now, but my
wife at the time she worked for the Marriyan Police Department.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
I already find it suspect that the second camera footage
comes from somebody who went to the academy with one
of the officers and his wife works for the Marriyan
Police Department.
Speaker 5 (26:34):
That's just too convenient that.
Speaker 1 (26:36):
Then that's a pretty cozy It's also pretty convenient that
the footage obtained from the home was deemed to be
forty four minutes off so as to sync with the
also off time of the Hucks footage and sell tower pings.
But none of that was challenged. We'll be right back
with Murder on Songbird Road. Here again is Murder on
(27:06):
Songbird Road. Do you have any thoughts that you just
want to add about Leah being removed from the courtroom
because she made jurors uncomfortable.
Speaker 4 (27:20):
It's really really problematic.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
As alluded to in our last episode, one of Beverly's
close friends, Leah, who had traveled to support her during trial,
was asked to leave the courtroom because members of the
jury found her problematic.
Speaker 11 (27:35):
Do I look threatening to you? I was removed from
the courtroom because I was threatening the jury by sitting
in the front row.
Speaker 5 (27:42):
What were you doing?
Speaker 11 (27:44):
She was sitting looking I was behind her, I was
looking around. I was the darkest person in that courtroom
or her trial. And they did everything they could do
to get me out of that courtroom expeditiously, including asking
Julie to ask me to leave, which they did.
Speaker 9 (28:01):
They allowed Julie to walk over to her.
Speaker 11 (28:02):
And because Julie asked me to leave, I stepped out.
They were worried that they were going to have a
mistrial because I was intimidating the jury.
Speaker 5 (28:09):
That's what by sitting there, thing said that the jury members.
Speaker 11 (28:13):
The all white jury, they were intimidated because I'm black,
the all white jury.
Speaker 5 (28:18):
They had called the bailiff over and so we took
a recess. And during the recess, so I.
Speaker 11 (28:22):
Said I was taking pictures of their vehicles, and they
were worried that I was going to follow them home
and or have I took pictures of their license plates.
And then I was sitting there downs that I was
staring them down and giving dirty looks. I'm not in
there smiling. It was Julie's trial. I was distraught. But
(28:44):
they said that I was a threat, that I was
threatening the jury. How many out of.
Speaker 5 (28:47):
Twelve said that I was a threat? I think four.
Speaker 11 (28:51):
Four out of the twelve jury members had a problem
with me, specifically just sitting there for the trial.
Speaker 6 (28:57):
Back to Bob, this isn't a situation where she's out
of order. She's not screaming, yelling, saying, and she's merely
looking at the jury trying to figure out the same
way that I am every time I'm sitting in there,
are they buying this? Are my points hitting home? She's
allowed to look and observe at anything that she wants
(29:21):
to this whole concept of staring, staring into someone's soul.
Speaker 4 (29:29):
From out in the gallery. But like the reality Lauren
is is that is how the jur that we spoke
to felt.
Speaker 1 (29:38):
We have indeed spoken to a juror whose anonymity we
will protect. They shared their side of the Leah situation.
Here's the jur It.
Speaker 12 (29:46):
Was when we were leaving at the end of the
day one day, but there was somebody sitting in a
car with a big Justice for Julie's sticker on it
that was taking videos or pictures of must walking out.
Speaker 7 (29:57):
At least that's what it looked like. It was a
I mean, it was a black Ford car.
Speaker 12 (30:02):
So for us, it was scary, you know, like you
hear stuff sometimes on TV, like people following jurors homely
killing the whole family type stuff, and you don't know
what anybody's like. Did we necessarily think that? I don't
know what anybody else.
Speaker 7 (30:19):
Thought, But I don't know why I was scared.
Speaker 1 (30:21):
Without consulting the parties, the trial judge privately questioned four
jurors and chambers. Though unrelated during the process, concerns about
the black car and the jurors observations of Leah in
the courtroom appear to have merged into a single issue.
Speaker 6 (30:38):
The bigger point about the whole Lea situation is that
it really does kind of illuminate the mindset that you're
dealing with down there. It's like Leah can't been the
only person who's looking at the jury. Recently, I went
and watched a trial from beginning to end. It was
(30:59):
three weeks long, and I spent an awful lot of
time looking at the jury hard. I'm trying to figure
like they're the only people that they're the only people
that matter in that courtroom. They are the twelve people
that are sitting there deciding somebody's fate. I'm I'm watching them.
Are they paying attention? Are they making faces? How are
(31:22):
they reacting to that evidence?
Speaker 4 (31:24):
It's just what you do.
Speaker 6 (31:25):
They are kind of mandatory viewing if you're sitting in
on a trial, like you watch the jurors because they
are the beginning and the end of it all.
Speaker 5 (31:34):
Yeah, the power rests with them.
Speaker 6 (31:37):
The bigger question then becomes is what is going on
extemporaneously around them that's making them have this fear? What
else is going on that's making them feel like, man,
is my life in danger?
Speaker 7 (31:52):
Here?
Speaker 1 (31:54):
Beverly was asked to have Leah removed because it was
going to prejudice the jury against her. Ironically that it
was a reflection on Beverly that it was her friend
who was making the jurors uncomfortable, and when you go
(32:14):
back and you actually read that portion, they were originally
talking about a black car, not a black woman. Also
problematic our reports we've received about what the court clerk
allegedly sent back with the jury foreman as the jurors
went back to deliberate the verdict.
Speaker 6 (32:31):
You and I have been trying to kind of nail
down the concept of what was sent back to the jurors.
To compound this even more, what they were sitting with
in that deliberation room, and we know that they're sitting
there with that box and knives back there, the knives
(32:51):
that have nothing to do with the crime. Wrap your
mind around that.
Speaker 5 (32:58):
I cannot wrap. It's so judicial, and the fact.
Speaker 1 (33:01):
That it is common practice that while deliberating, a jury
can ask for more things, for more clarification. But we
now have multiple sources confirming that the jury foreman was
(33:22):
handed by the court clerk a box that contained those
random utensils retrieved from the dump and autopsy photos as
they were heading into deliberation. Multiple people who were in
the courtroom have expressed they witnessed the box of evidence
being sent back with the jurors prior to deliberation. Here's
(33:46):
Renee High Tower.
Speaker 13 (33:47):
I remember the box going to the foreman and they
were still in the jury box when it was given
to them, and they were sitting there.
Speaker 5 (33:57):
For a moment, and then he carried it out as.
Speaker 1 (34:00):
They left, and who handed it to the foreman the clerk.
So the court clerk handed the jury foreman a box
before they.
Speaker 5 (34:10):
Went into deliberation.
Speaker 4 (34:12):
Correct.
Speaker 5 (34:13):
Did you know what was in the box at the time?
Speaker 13 (34:17):
I assumed it was evidence, but I couldn't see in it.
Speaker 5 (34:21):
I could see things sticking out of it, but I
couldn't see in it. What were you told? It was
after the fact.
Speaker 13 (34:27):
As they were taken out for deliberation, we were all
walking out, and that's when Beane told me. She said
she had never seen anything like it, that they gave
the jury the whole box of evidence.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
This is Beverly's friend Katie's recollection.
Speaker 8 (34:40):
I do remember.
Speaker 14 (34:42):
I think it was the bailiff, I'm not really for
sure who it was, somebody handing one of the men
in the jury something and he kind of just sat
there and looked at it with a dumbfounded look, and
then they got up to leave to go deliberate. I
just remember him just loo looking at it, just downfounded,
like what am I supposed to?
Speaker 7 (35:03):
What is this?
Speaker 14 (35:03):
What am I supposed to do with it?
Speaker 1 (35:05):
And this is what we were told by an anonymous juror.
What do you remember about the jury being sent into
deliberation and what do you remember being sent back to
deliberate with in the room.
Speaker 7 (35:21):
A box of all the pictures? And then there was
k lives in a box.
Speaker 5 (35:27):
When you say a box of all the pictures, what
were the pictures.
Speaker 7 (35:30):
Of Drew's autopsy photos?
Speaker 5 (35:34):
How is that not prejudicial?
Speaker 6 (35:37):
Well, it is when you're sending them back and pretending
as if they are the murder weapons.
Speaker 4 (35:44):
It's unbelievable.
Speaker 5 (35:46):
How is that allowed though? And what does that mean?
Speaker 9 (35:49):
Wait?
Speaker 6 (35:49):
Are we trying to figure out how Judge Green was
operating here?
Speaker 4 (35:53):
Like I can't crawl into that man's brain.
Speaker 1 (35:56):
I have formally requested an interview or statement from Judge
Green regarding the so called evidence sent back with the
jurors for deliberation and the removal of Leah from his courtroom. Additionally,
I have asked the judge to address any connection to
the immediate removal of Julia Beverly's son while she was
a pre trial detainee in Williamson County, as well as
(36:18):
other potential conflicts of interests. This includes his affiliation with
the same church attended by the Beasley family and allegations
that he wore pink widely associated with the Justice for
Jade movement on at least three of the six days
of trial. Furthermore, despite denying having a social media presence
at Beverly sentencing, Green does indeed have a Facebook account
(36:42):
that shares mutual connections with the Beasley family. While I
copied the Williamson County State's attorney on my request, it
is gone unanswered.
Speaker 6 (36:51):
We looked at the transcripts of this trial. It's paper thint.
There is no actual evidence of guilt here. They just
never could prove that she was the person who actually
did it, other than by her own misstatements and lies.
When you look at everything else in the totality of
(37:13):
the circumstances, you can see how shaky they thought their case.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
Was, something that is very much underscored by an exchange
from the end of Beverly's three hour interrogation the day
of the murder and how the prosecution had it edited
for trial.
Speaker 4 (37:29):
So do you think when Jade was getting stabbed.
Speaker 1 (37:31):
Was it like this?
Speaker 15 (37:33):
Was it kind of off to the side, because you.
Speaker 12 (37:35):
Know some people swing lower direction, some kind of go
from the side somes over like this.
Speaker 7 (37:41):
Which way do you think it was?
Speaker 9 (37:43):
For what I could see on her back?
Speaker 5 (37:44):
It definitely okay, it.
Speaker 1 (37:46):
Was definitely up and down like this.
Speaker 15 (37:48):
Was it kind of real quick? Was it like go
in kind of wiggle a little bit? I mean, which
way did you do it?
Speaker 7 (37:54):
Okay, here's here's the thing.
Speaker 15 (37:56):
Okay, we know you've been through a lot, you are.
Speaker 9 (38:10):
There's some things that we're gonna.
Speaker 15 (38:12):
Have to pull it out. Then help us through it.
Speaker 7 (38:21):
Okay, help us through it.
Speaker 15 (38:23):
Wish anymore.
Speaker 1 (38:39):
It's one thing to hear it, but I want listeners
to understand how difficult.
Speaker 5 (38:47):
It is to watch it.
Speaker 1 (38:49):
Is Meier is is really over gesticulating every single move
as he makes a stabbing. What's interesting to me about
her reaction. You can see how she's trying to hold
it together, honestly thinking she's being helpful, and in that
(39:13):
moment where she realizes he shifts gears to how did
you do it? Not how did he do it? But
how did you do it? And immediately she reacts with
sincere shock and horror is what it sounds like.
Speaker 6 (39:31):
Well, she breaks she breaks down immediately. It really speaks
loudly to innocence. To me, that whole last minute that
I watched was that's not somebody who did it.
Speaker 1 (39:44):
What I find so interesting about that exchange is what
they chose to cut out before it got to trial.
The last line that they cut out is she may
not have been my blood, but she a daughter to me.
The intention of cutting that out if you think the
(40:07):
person is one hundred percent guilty, what are you trying
to right?
Speaker 4 (40:12):
What are you afraid of? Yeah? Why are they cutting
that out?
Speaker 6 (40:17):
You know, it's like there there is no reasonable explanation
for it other than they're trying to have everything fit
into their narrative, and their narrative has to be that
Julia did not feel that way about Jane.
Speaker 4 (40:35):
And it's just not how it was.
Speaker 1 (40:38):
Sentiments that made this next exchange, taped at the end
of January twenty twenty four, even more impactful for everyone involved.
Without further ado, Renee High Tower, Jason Flomm.
Speaker 16 (40:50):
Hello, Renee, it looks like you're in your car and
nice to meet you. Sorry for what you're going through
Your family. It's awful, but hopefully we can together we
can fix it, at least make it better.
Speaker 5 (41:02):
So Renee's been up since before six.
Speaker 1 (41:05):
In the back seat you will see Julie's eldest son,
Jaden Wave Jayden awesome. And next room is Jaden's cousin
and they all made the three hour drive this morning
at the break of dawn to visit Julie.
Speaker 16 (41:22):
Oh, it's so nice, except for it's not.
Speaker 1 (41:24):
Because yeah, so Renee, I called Jason. Jason had had
dinner several weeks ago with Kathleen Zelner, and I expressed
that you had reached out and that the firm had
responded saying that they were not taking any more pro
(41:44):
bono cases this year a quick aside. Pro bono work
is when lawyers provide free legal services to people who
can't afford them. The term comes from the Latin phrase
pro bono publico, which means for the public good. Chicago
based attorney Kathleen Zelner is one of the most formidable
forces in wrongful conviction advocacy. Notable client Zelner has represented
(42:08):
includes Stephen Avery, Kevin Fox, Ryan W. Ferguson, and nineteen Exoneries,
who were listed in the National Registry of Exonerations. Renee
had already reached out to someone in her office.
Speaker 2 (42:21):
I kind of gave a brief story of her case,
and he called me back and he said that unfortunately
her pro bono has maxed out, but he gave me
a flat fee of twenty thousand for the appeal alone,
just the appeal, And he said that they did call
the appellate court down here and they found out exactly
(42:44):
where it's at, and that no public defender has been
assigned just yet. So they're still waiting on all the
transcripts to come in. And I believe she has like
twenty five and she's got nine of the twenty five
so far, and the most important one of the trial
is not ready.
Speaker 5 (43:00):
A year later.
Speaker 16 (43:01):
Yeah, administrative, bureaucratic nonsense. But yeah, So I don't know
what Lauren.
Speaker 7 (43:10):
I call her.
Speaker 16 (43:11):
LBP told you or didn't tell you.
Speaker 7 (43:13):
So I spoke with Kathleen.
Speaker 16 (43:15):
I mean, twenty thousand dollars for Kathleen's owner is an
incredible price, obviously, but not if you don't have twenty
thousand dollars obviously, then it doesn't matter. But I did
talk to her. We've recently connected and we really hit
it off. I don't know how we didn't know each
other before, but she's a force of nature and she's
really interested in this case, which is great. I confirmed
(43:35):
that when I spoke to her, so I told her, look,
if it's twenty thousand dollars, I'll put the bill for that,
because I think she If anyone can get Julie out,
it's her, and I think she can and she probably will.
Speaker 2 (43:52):
Thank you so much, I don't even know what to say.
Speaker 16 (43:55):
No, I'm happy to do it. This is what we're
here for, and I'm lucky to have the access to
those kind of funds, so I'm excited to get Sorry.
I mean, if this would be the best deal of
the century, if this is what it is, and if
it works, that'll be the best money ever spent.
Speaker 7 (44:09):
For real.
Speaker 2 (44:10):
I so appreciate it so much. Thank you so much,
thank you so much, all of you. I can't even
begin to say thank you enough.
Speaker 16 (44:18):
I swear I would take a little of the burden
off of you for a change.
Speaker 7 (44:21):
So that's good.
Speaker 1 (44:24):
And like that, in an incredible gesture of generosity and compassion,
Renee high Tower and Julia Beverly had something they desperately needed.
Since December of twenty twenty, hope on the next Murder
(44:46):
on Songbird Road, minds are changed.
Speaker 6 (44:49):
This zero chance of somebody just wandering around back here.
Speaker 1 (44:52):
Yeah, and unfortunately this is not the kind of neighborhood
where you would have ring cameras or no way as
knocking on doors, and Marion leads to a major breakthrough.
Oh my gosh, he has tattoos, he would be identifiable,
and the concept of beyond a reasonable doubt is revisited.
(45:14):
Oh my god, Oh my.
Speaker 5 (45:16):
God, that's huge.
Speaker 1 (45:18):
Murder on Songbird Road is a production of iHeart Podcasts.
Our executive producers are Taylor Chaqoine and Lauren Bright Pacheco.
Research writing and hosting by Lauren Bright Pacheco. Investigative reporting
by Bob Matta and Lauren Bright Pacheco, editing, sound design
and original music by Evan Tyre and Taylor Chaqoine. Additional
(45:39):
music by Asher Kurtz. Please like, subscribe, and leave us
a review. Wherever you're listening. You can follow me on
all platforms at Lauren Bright Pacheco and email the show
with thought, suggestions or tips at Investigating Murder at iHeartMedia
dot com. For more iHeart podcasts, Visit the iHeartRadio app,
(46:16):
Apple podcasts, or wherever you get your favorite shows.
Speaker 5 (46:19):
Thanks for listening.
Popular Podcasts
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!
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.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.