“I Have Killed For You”: The Shocking Murder of Bonnie Woodward, OceanGate’s Titan Submersible, and the Case Against Matthew Farwell — What Really Happened in Canton?

Jimmy Hoffa mystery potentially solved 50 years later — tickets starting at $30 USD to attend the event. Host Stephanie discusses TSA nightmares and how Global Entry members are being spied on daily. Scott Ruskan, a coast guard rescue swimmer, was deployed to Camp Mystic in Texas amidst flooding near the Guadalupe River. He described it as one of the most difficult flying conditions he’s faced. Tune in for all the details.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
This program features the individual opinions of the hosts, guests,
and callers, and not necessarily those of the producer, the station,
it's affiliates or sponsors. This is True Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (00:19):
Welcome to True Crime Tonight on iHeartRadio. It is Tuesday,
July eighth, and yes, we have a stack knight of headlines. Listen.
We have a couple of new updates and the Brian
Coberger case, also the Barry Morphew case and his secret
life apparently in Arizona. And we're digging into a new
one called the Bonnie Woodward case. If you haven't been
following that, it is one that you definitely want to

(00:40):
stay with us for. Also, Karen Reid, there's a connection
to a case that we had heard about along the
way that also mirrors a little bit some of the
troubles that the Canton police were actually experiencing. So that's
kind of top news right now. But first, I'm Stephanie
Leidecker and I head of KAT Studios with Courtney Armstrong.
Body Move. We've been here every night two hours live.

(01:03):
We want to hear from you. Eight eight eight three
one crime. Join the conversation. Please leave us a message
on our talkbacks. It's the iHeartRadio app top right hand corner.
Just push the button, leave us a message and boom,
you're on the show. By the way, I just want
to say we have been getting some great listener cases.
You know, you guys have really been you know, feeding

(01:23):
us some of your cases that you're curious about things
that are happening kind of in and around your neighborhood
and area. And we are digging in, We get them,
we are following up and we are hearing it. So
much more on that to come, keep it coming. But first,
you know, let's just switch gears to the biggest news
story in the country. Is this tragedy happening still in Texas.

(01:44):
We want to acknowledge it. Our hearts are with everyone body.
I know, we've been following it all day. If you
want to just give us the update there.

Speaker 3 (01:52):
Yeah, So it's really tragic and this is in Texas.
Heavy rain poured into parts of central Texas over the
fourth July weekend and it's been you know, dumping more
than a month's worth of rain in some places and
killing unfortunately, killing more than one hundred people, including twenty
seven children. According to officials at least one hundred and

(02:12):
sixty people are still known to be missing. I mean,
this is devastation, you know, and it's you know, how
do you even talk about this without just it's just
so sacrid.

Speaker 4 (02:22):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (02:22):
Yeah, it's just so sad that it happened so quickly.
I've seen people online, you know, I'm really into the
chatter online. That's kind of my thing. And people are
just so cruel online, you know, like why couldn't they
just run away from it? And I mean, this stuff
happens in an instant. You know, you're normal, and then
all of a sudden there's thirty feet of water coming

(02:42):
at you. This isn't something that sneaks up, you know,
and no one's really seven from it.

Speaker 2 (02:46):
Yeah, it's incredible, body brutal and.

Speaker 3 (02:49):
Poor, black or white, it doesn't matter, you know, it's
it's it's tragic. So the majority of those killed were
in Kerr County, where thirty children have died, including those
that can Mystic Camp. Mystic was a Christian girls camp
perched you know, on the banks of the Guadalupe River
in Texas. It's you know, kid little girls go there
to laugh and have fellowship and prayer with you know

(03:10):
their other friends and it's just it's just very, very devastating.
But we do have some heroes that I think solu
to you have really emerged.

Speaker 2 (03:20):
You know, people are risking their lives, you know, real time,
and you know there's several for us to point to
right now.

Speaker 4 (03:26):
Yeah. Scott Ruskin is one. Oh my goodness. He yeah,
is a Coastguard rescue swimmer. He's based in Corpus Christie
and he was deployed to Camp Mystic, which Body was
just speaking about, and he said it was one of
the most difficult flying conditions he's ever faced. It was
the first mission in his one year.

Speaker 3 (03:43):
Can you believe that he's only twenty six, Yeah, his
first mission. What a stud I mean, I mean, that
is incredible. So, you know, I mean, obviously this is
a tragic situation, but you know, this is a show
of tragedy and sometimes it's just a lot, especially when
you're talking about children. We wanted to kind of talk
about some of the heroes and hype them up a
little bit. So in the spirit of that, Scott he's

(04:06):
you know, this is his first mission.

Speaker 4 (04:08):
He says.

Speaker 3 (04:08):
When I got on the scene, there were two hundred
kids looking to someone for comfort and safety. They don't
know my experience, or my rank or my age. They
just see someone who's here to help. And I had
to live up to that. The real heroes, I think
are the kids on the ground. I mean, what a guy,
what a guy that is a well paved hundred person
five kids today, I.

Speaker 4 (04:26):
Mean, that's a miracle. It reminds me of mister Rogers.
Look for the helpers. Yeah, even even in tragedy, even
in whatever is happening, look for the helpers. And like
Scott Ruskin, they are there.

Speaker 2 (04:40):
Body brought her a puppy to work today, so I'm sorry.
Everybody say hi, I'm sorry. He's married. By the way,
he's adorable, so no stress about that. And also, just
like to that note, just a quick thing. Listen, these
types of disasters are in fact happening so quickly. And
again the country is big, and we hope everybody is safe.
But like pack year ago, make sure you have your

(05:01):
canned food. Make sure you have small bills in your house.
It's an important one. Nobody ever has real cash, right,
You're if the cash machines go down for some reason
and you're having to kind of barter for what money
or I mean barter for water. God forbid, you need
dollar bills, right, you never have a stack of small
bills at the ready and keep your gas tank as

(05:23):
full as possible at all times.

Speaker 3 (05:24):
That's so hard because I just use all my gas
as soon as it's in my tank.

Speaker 2 (05:28):
Of course, all you small bills pizza, you know, it's
a true delivery that comes to the door suddenly. You're
you know, bouncing into your earthquake kit if you're anything
like me. But you know, just something to just be
aware of in this hideous wake of tragedy.

Speaker 3 (05:41):
It's so sad. So just before daybreak on Friday, the
fourth of July, like this is a public holiday, like
this is a very important holiday for everybody. Right the
fourth of July, the river rows twenty six feet in
about forty five minutes. That is, I live in Las Vegas, right,
So we have a lot of flash flooding here because
it's a desert and so the ground is really hard.
So the rain when it does rain, it just like slides,

(06:03):
it doesn't like get soaked up into the ground. So
we have a lot of flash flooding here and I
can't listen. It's nothing like what they're experiencing in Texas.
But I could be at a red light, and you
know those are pretty short, a couple of minutes and
it starts raining, literally flash flooding. Stop just rolling down
the street. Nothing like twenty seven feet I'm talking like
maybe two or three feet, but it happens so quickly,

(06:25):
and I witnessed it with.

Speaker 2 (06:26):
My own eyes and kind of another little small tag
along thing that I just actually ordered. We're not promoting
this at all. I don't know the brand. We don't
know the brand. But you know how you cut yourself
out of a seatbelt, God forbid there's a flood or
water comes gushing into your car.

Speaker 3 (06:38):
Well, I have one of those for my window, a puncture.

Speaker 2 (06:41):
Yeah, oh really, what do you do for that? You
just it's like a little no out with it.

Speaker 3 (06:45):
It's like a pole and it also has a compass
and a fishing pole on it. But it's like a
survival tool. I don't know why, but because of the
flash flooding, you stab your window with it and it
shatters the window so you can get out.

Speaker 2 (06:56):
That's clever. I'm yeah, okay, adding that to my link.

Speaker 4 (07:00):
We should do a whole We should do a whole segment,
and you know, Stephanie said, nothing is sponsored or anything
but just nuts and bolts of what to have, because yeah,
you never know when.

Speaker 3 (07:10):
One of the best things I bought was it's a
little portable radio like the analog radio, AMFM radio, a
solar charger. I mean, it was fourteen dollars and it works,
and it winds up. You wind it up so that
you don't even need batteries, and it also petrifies me.

Speaker 2 (07:25):
But it's also like you, if we're prepared, there's something
slightly comforting in that. Not that there's anything comforting about
what is happening right now, but you know, it does
happen in a flash, so it really done. You know again,
our hearts are with you, Texas. We can't say that enough.

Speaker 4 (07:40):
Absolutely, and we'll keep everyone up to date as more
information comes out. This is true crime Tonight. We are
on iHeartRadio. I'm Courtney Armstrong here as always with Body
Moven and Stephanie Leidecker, and right now we're talking about
how to keep yourself safe in all kinds of situations.
We will also be talking about Bonnie Woodward and many

(08:02):
other things. We want to hear your thoughts, give us
a call. We're at eighty to eighty three to one
crime or hit us on the talkbacks on the iHeartRadio app.
You go to the top right corner and do you
just leave us a message and you're on the show
and we have a talkback right now.

Speaker 5 (08:15):
High ladies, first time caller. This was Brian Kahlberger planned
this way in advance, if you remember correctly, his professor
knew Bundy, talked to Bundy and wrote an article or
books or whatever on Bundy. That is why he chose
Washington State so he could pick her brain on more
on Ted Bundy.

Speaker 2 (08:37):
There was a big article about this. Yeah, even at
KAT we have interviewed her specifically, and look that can
be seen both ways. You know, she caught a lot
of heat early days, like oh, she gave the syllabus
to a killer and no, she was teaching a really smart,
wonderful class that was highly reputable. And on the flip
of that, you know, who could know that Brian Coberger

(08:58):
really was taking that information and applying it as a massacre.

Speaker 3 (09:03):
Right, and you know this, I could talk about this
for two hours, I mean easily, right, this is like
my favorite subject. Yes, but yeah, you know, I did
he plan to go to the sales because she was there?
I think did he choose that because she is an
excellent professor, you know, and or did he choose it
because of Ted Bundy?

Speaker 4 (09:22):
Interesting? I mean, who's to know. I think we all
slightly predict or at least I certainly do. There will
be interviews. I think Brian Coburger, you know, given the
fact that he searched for himself so many times after
the murders and was looking for parallels with Bundy and
posing like Bundy, I think he's going to be a
person who wants to have the attention and peraps through

(09:46):
that attention, we will at least garner something into what
was going on in his brain, and maybe we can
learn something from that. I don't know.

Speaker 3 (09:54):
I kind of sometimes wonder if that wasn't part of
all of this, right for the glory grab right for
him to be you know, studied and you know, be great. Listen,
he will never be great. He will never never, he
will never be great as what he took. First of all,
the victims were, by all accounts, incredible human beings, and

(10:14):
he will never never attain what they did in their
short lives, you know, throughout his life.

Speaker 2 (10:20):
That's so true. And by the way, Courtney, I misremembering this.
Didn't we know for a fact that he was listening
to the Idaho Massacre podcast behind closed doors, but in
being in prison or in jail when he was still
in Moscow.

Speaker 4 (10:32):
We were told that. We were absolutely told that I'm
try yeah, which was very serie and we talked about it.
Oh my god, it was an.

Speaker 3 (10:39):
Odd you'll let me ask you something.

Speaker 4 (10:41):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (10:42):
Does it make you feel because immediately I'm like, oh
my god, he heard me talking about him. That's immediately
what I go to. What do you go to when
you hear something like that? Do you get grossed out?

Speaker 4 (10:51):
Because I do. I got skeeveed out. That's exactly I
got schemed out of just thinking of him hearing my voice.
I don't know my voice near yeah, yeah, yeah, horrific murderer.

Speaker 3 (11:01):
I mean, I was just a guest and I'm creeped out.

Speaker 6 (11:04):
Oh.

Speaker 2 (11:04):
It actually definitely scared us. It really does make you
think for a moment, is somebody getting a kick out
of this? And that's unnerving. Now at the time, listen
now as we say this, it's very scary. What if
you're innocent. At the time, we didn't know if he
was guilty or not guilty. This was early on season one.
I mean, maybe I'm the only one that was a

(11:24):
little slow to this, but at the time, maybe he
was listening to everything regarding his case because he wanted
to know what the chatter was. Sure that kind of tracks, right,
That's how we sort of justified not being scared by it.
But it does speak to what we now know is
more of maybe somebody looking for more glory after all
is said and done. And you know, that's a scary,
unnerving piece of this case.

Speaker 3 (11:46):
Like see, he dedicated his life to his education, right, well,
the latter part of his life to his education, and
I mean he could have gone on to do great things.
And here we are.

Speaker 4 (11:55):
Here, we are listen, stay tuned. We have a big night.
We're going to be getting into to the Sandra Birchmore
case and it's parallels to Karen Reid. We're going to
find out more about the Titan submersible and we are
hopefully going to be hearing from you. Give us a
call eight A eight to three to one crime True
Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (12:26):
Welcome back to True Crime tonight on iHeartRadio, we're talking
true crime all the time. Listen, remember the Titan submersible.
It is that terrible tragedy that happened in that submarine.
So we're going to be getting a little bit deeper
into that case because again, there's so much to take
away from that one. And also, Sandra Berchman, this is
a case that we talked about a little bit in

(12:47):
previous episodes. There's this very real connection between this case
from twenty twenty one and the recent Karen Reid case. Courtney,
do you want to jump in and give us the
update there?

Speaker 4 (12:57):
Absolutely so. Former police officer Matthew Farewell was charged with
killing a woman whose death was originally ruled a suicide.
So Sandra Birchmore, who at the time was approximately three
months pregnant when she was found dead. This happened in
twenty twenty one in Canton, Massachusetts, and she had told
before her death officer Matthew Farewell that she was pregnant

(13:20):
with his child. So that's the kind of setup. The
two of them met eleven years prior, back in twenty ten.
Santra birch Moore was only about twelve years old and
she had joined the Stouton Police Explorers program and she
attended it for several years and Matthew Farewell he was

(13:43):
there as a volunteer and that's how they met. So
she was very underrated at the time and he obviously
was not as a volunteer.

Speaker 2 (13:51):
Was O.

Speaker 4 (13:52):
No, he was not. He was, I believe twenty six
when it started. A couple of years later twenty twelve.
Documents state that Farewell began using different messaging to communicate
with her. And at this time she was fifteen, he
was twenty six. So again a big difference.

Speaker 2 (14:10):
Now that's like not just a big difference. Who hasn't
like chased an older you know, relationship at that age
you think you know everything? Fifteen is illegal.

Speaker 4 (14:19):
Right, Absolutely it is. And he is accused of sexually
assaulting Birchmore since she was fifteen years old. It was
sometimes it's believed that it was sometimes violent. Definitely sexual
relationship between the two of them, and also Officer Ferrell
would tell birch Moore, oh, you need to delete these

(14:41):
types of messages from her phone and from Facebook. So
he was well aware this was.

Speaker 3 (14:47):
He knew what he was doing was wrong. He acknowledged
it of right or yeah, disgusting.

Speaker 6 (14:53):
Kay.

Speaker 4 (14:54):
So back in October of twenty twenty, and this is
according to court documents, Sandra Birchmore she he told Officer
Farewell that she was pregnant, that she wanted to keep
the child, and she said, I will keep silent about
your criminal acts. Basically, I won't let anyone know that
when I was underage we were having sex, which, as

(15:16):
you said, Stephanie, is illegal. So shortly after so that
was in October that she said I want to have
a baby with you. In December of twenty twenty, she
learned that she was pregnant, and a month after that,
this is January twenty twenty one, Sandra Birchmore's friend actually
called the police department where the officer worked, to report

(15:40):
this relationship, and apparently Officer Farewell was enraged. Very shortly
after that, Officer Farewell he asked Sandra Birchmore, can I
have a key to your apartment? This is again in Campton, Massachusetts,
and he begins what people alleged to be casing her apartment,
and once he had access, he was inspecting her bedroom.

(16:00):
He was going through her closets and Sandra Birchmark. She
found this behavior understandably really upsetting. She mentioned it to friends,
and what he has been found guilty of is strangling
her in her apartment and then staging it to look
like she committed suicide. But security video from her apartment
shows the very last day Sandra was alive, that security

(16:24):
video from the lobby showing him entering the building and
he was wearing a hoodie and a surgical mask.

Speaker 3 (16:30):
Yeah, he's trying to kind of I've seen this video.
He's trying to kind of like hide his identity, right,
Like he's trying to like shield who it actually is,
because you can see him go into the lobby, press
the elevator button, get on. Yeah, he's trying to like
he knows the cameras.

Speaker 2 (16:43):
All right. Well, he's smart, you know, he's you know,
he's a law enforcement officer, that's right.

Speaker 3 (16:49):
Okay.

Speaker 4 (16:50):
A couple of days after the last time that Sandra
was seen alive, Canton police officers conduct a well being check.
She has found and they said she had been dead
for days and it was ruled again a suicide. So
here's where we are. And the officer, he is a

(17:11):
married father of two with a third who was born
just days after or even hours after Sandra Bertmore's death,
which is really an insane time for anybody who's about
to expect a child. It's learned of the investigation that
the officer he made and deleted Google searches like can
you revoke consent in Massachusetts?

Speaker 3 (17:33):
You can't give consent if you're underage.

Speaker 4 (17:35):
If you're underage, you that's right. He Ultimately, so this
disgraced officer, he resigned from the police department during this
ongoing probe, and the police chief reveals investigations of an
internal investigation. Now four officers have been accused and denied

(17:57):
of having relationships with this pool or girl.

Speaker 2 (18:01):
How many four four? Oh my gosh, yeah, counted one, two,
three four. And by the way, it was speculated then
and got a lot of heat, but frankly the Karen
Read connection, which will get too soon, kind of overshadowed
that a little bit potentially.

Speaker 4 (18:15):
That's right. So this girl, who again joined the program
when she was twelve years old to you know, learn
about police officers, gets embroiled into all of this. Ultimately,
a federal investigation revealed in their case against Matthew Farwell
that he did go and indeed murder her. And it
has since come out very recently in a DNA analysis

(18:38):
that Sandra Birchmore's unborn child was not actually fathered by
Matthew Farwell.

Speaker 3 (18:45):
Really did they say, who's did it belong to? Any
of the four they did?

Speaker 4 (18:49):
That has not been revealed, That is not known. But
the federal prosecutor, he was quoted saying, listen, he doesn't
have to be the father. He just has to think
that he's the father, and that is what gives him
the motive to be homicidal.

Speaker 3 (19:02):
Oh my gosh, you're listening to true crime tonight on iHeartRadio.
I'm Body Moven and I'm here with Stephanie Leidecker and
Courtney Armstrong and we're in the middle of talking about
the murder of Sandra Birchmore. Courtney was there there's something
this this police officer that is accused of murdering Sandra Burchmore.
He has a twin brother, right, there's something with him.

(19:25):
Because I followed this a while ago, Yeah, lost track
of it. There's something with his brother. He recently like
lost police certificate. Is he involved in some way because
he basically can't be a cop anymore.

Speaker 4 (19:37):
Do we know his twin? I don't, but we should definitely.

Speaker 3 (19:40):
Well maybe somebody out there does and they can call us.

Speaker 2 (19:42):
Yeah, please like jump in and join the conversation.

Speaker 3 (19:45):
I'm going from memory here.

Speaker 2 (19:46):
And just in case you don't know that Karen Reid
case too, because that is a big ticket item because
that's obviously the retrial that happened so recently. Karen Reid
was you know, charged and was tried twice for allegedly
murdering or running over her then boyfriend with her lexus
on a very stormy night. She since has been released.
It was a miss, you know, she was found not guilty.

(20:08):
And remember that Canton police officers. It's been a little
bit brought into question about how that investigation was handled,
particularly because the victim in that case, John O'Keefe, was
also an officer and they were at this house and
a party. Also many officers, same department, also same prosecutor
as her case. So there are some very real parallels

(20:32):
between the Karen Reid case. Impossible law enforcement misconduct.

Speaker 4 (20:37):
That's right. It's the Norfolk County DA's office, Stephanie that
handled both cases. So that does absolutely raise concerns from
the public, and it should about is their conflict of interest,
is their personal bias, is their lack of transparency, and
these prosecutors are to a default protecting their own. So

(20:58):
it's a really it's a pretty messy case. Quickly, I
just got re caught up. Yeah, so he was one
of the four. The twin brother was one of the four.

Speaker 2 (21:08):
I knew the twin brothers were both having a relationship,
a sexual relationship with an underaged girl who mysteriously is
found dead by suicide just right after announcing that she
may be pregnant with one of the officers. By the way,
it is important to note, Courty, I don't want us
to because I got a little stuck on this fact

(21:28):
myself earlier today. It was discovered today that this particular
officer that allegedly was impregnated this young girl, that those
tests came back negative. However, that's today. He was arrested
a while ago and thought perhaps or at least had
been told perhaps right that he was the father. So
whether he was or wasn't is kind of a little irrelevant,

(21:50):
although very important, and we don't want to disparage anybody.
So again, allegedly allegedly allegedly, he claims his innocence, but
as long as he was under the feeling that he
was potentially going to be outed for having a relationship
with an underage girl, that still tracks.

Speaker 4 (22:06):
It does.

Speaker 3 (22:06):
And I want to just be clear. The twin brother
that also had a relationship with her didn't start the
relationshipship until after she was eighteen, so he did not
still brothers. I know it's weird, but yeah, I just
want to.

Speaker 4 (22:20):
I mean, it's a it's a good clarification.

Speaker 3 (22:24):
I don't want to accuse this guy of something that
you know, but it was still inappropriate though, So he
got desertified. He's no longer a police officer.

Speaker 7 (22:32):
Wow.

Speaker 4 (22:33):
Okay, probably because she was in the program run by
the police and it as a minor. So we will
continue to be following this. There's a court hearing. It's
scheduled for August fourth, so a couple of weeks from now.
And again, the other officers have yet to be charged
with while this investigation continues.

Speaker 3 (22:53):
So yeah, and he doesn't. The twin brothers not facing
any criminal charges. He just can't be a cop anymore.

Speaker 2 (22:59):
Wow. By the way, what a bummer for the great
cops that are doing such good work in that department
and also in the area. So this is not a
stain on many, but it's important that we sort of
discuss the ones that are sort of spoiling the pool, right.

Speaker 3 (23:12):
I want to know who the other three were. Were
they all cops or you know, what's the situation there.
I'm going to follow up on that.

Speaker 4 (23:18):
Yeah, and I think a lot more will come to
clarity as the trial begins.

Speaker 3 (23:23):
Yeah, for sure. Well, coming up next, we're going to
be diving into the Titan submersible explosion. Why did it
continue to operate despite so many people saying there were problems?
Don't forget to give us a call at eight eight
eight thirty one crime, or set us a talk back
on the iHeartRadio app with your thoughts on any of
the cases we're discussing, or let us know if the
case you want us to start digging into. Thank you

(23:44):
so much, stay right here, it's your friends.

Speaker 2 (23:45):
No, Welcome back to true Crime Tonight on iHeartRadio. We're
talking true crime all the time, so listen. Later on
the show, we're going to be talking about the Titan
submarine and the tragedy that occurred there. Also the Barry

(24:06):
more few case some new developments potentially on his secret
life in Arizona. But first we have a talkback.

Speaker 8 (24:12):
Hey body, Courtney and Stephanie. I'm Adrian from Australia. I
wondered if you'd heard about the mushroom trial everyone's talking
about down Under. The verdicts came from the jury this
week was a very exciting end to trial. It's been
going on for about ten weeks now. It's a weird
case where a woman served a deadly meal that killed
three of her relatives. Look it up mushroom trial Australia.

Speaker 2 (24:35):
Wow. First of all, how exciting that you can listen
in Australia. Thank you all so much for leaving that
talk back. I'm not familiar with that case at all.
That she may be kill people with her mushrooms in
her meals.

Speaker 4 (24:47):
Yes, with her beef Wellington. By the way, hearing your accent, A,
it is very cool that we're in Australia and b
I'd lived there for six months and it's maybe my
favorite sound on earthysis.

Speaker 3 (24:56):
All my producers for the mall were it was an
Australian production company and so when I hear an Australian accent,
it makes me so warmentingly because they were such lovely people.

Speaker 2 (25:04):
Yeah, what is it about an Australian accent love an
Australian everyone, Yeah, yeah, no doubt, no yelland also so fun.
Oh I loved you so great.

Speaker 3 (25:15):
I loved to But the mushroom, I mean, this was
a cool This was They deliberated for six days, that was.
That's a long deliberation.

Speaker 4 (25:22):
That is.

Speaker 3 (25:23):
So she's accused of killing like her mother in law,
Courtney and her.

Speaker 4 (25:27):
Yeah it's Aaron Patterson. She's fifty years old. She is Australian,
just like you, listener. And she was found guilty after
that long deliberation body of murdering three folks attempting to
murder a fourth by serving them beef Wellington, least with
these poisonous death cap mushrooms.

Speaker 3 (25:46):
Death cap mushrooms intentionally.

Speaker 2 (25:48):
It wasn't as though she was like unknowingly well she
said deadly beef Wellington.

Speaker 3 (25:54):
She says that. She says she was just trying to
improve the taste of the beef Wellington, and so she
added these mushrooms, right.

Speaker 4 (26:02):
That's right. However, the jury disagrees, as did the prosecutor.
So the defense did claim total accident, but the prosecution
said that she had deliberately used them, and this was
she served this lunch to her former in laws Don
and Gale said yeah, and her mother in law's sister.

(26:24):
Those three humans died and then Heather's husband, Ian Wilkinson
was alive, but was also an attempted murder.

Speaker 2 (26:34):
So she was just trying to wipe out her in
laws in her husband's entire family with mushrooms. This is incredible.

Speaker 3 (26:41):
But here's why I don't Here's what I don't know,
And maybe our listener can call.

Speaker 2 (26:45):
In, Yeah, call us back, we need more info.

Speaker 3 (26:48):
What I don't know is if her defense was, oh,
I was just trying to improve the taste, why didn't
she get sick because she didn't eat it right? Obviously?

Speaker 2 (26:57):
Sometimes, I mean I cook a lot and for so
all set I'm terrible at it. So Courtney Armstrong is
a great cook. Body you and I maybe I need
to I'm going to die, right, I cannot cook. It
would kill intentionally with our food, you know it? Just
I mean, I know enough to know that a certain
mushroom may not be appropriate.

Speaker 4 (27:17):
Well, the evidence suggests that Aaron Patterson did because she
had online searches about these quote death cap mushrooms. No,
and she also admitted to dumping out a food dehydrator
and lying about it. So no, I don't think it
was an accidental. Let me spice up my Wellington and
it was an accident, not the.

Speaker 2 (27:37):
Case, tragic story. I'm so glad we got tipped off
to that one.

Speaker 4 (27:41):
Yes, and she's facing a potential life sentence and we
will definitely come back when we know what the sentence is.
But thank you so much for that talk though.

Speaker 3 (27:48):
Yeah. I love that we're in Australia. I had no idea.
That's exciting. It's so fun. So I'm going to be
talking about the Titan. Yes, you guys, I know very little. Yeah,
I listen, this is kind of getting crazy town with
this Titan a little bit. There's been a couple documentaries
that have come out about the Titan and about all
the experts who worked on the Titan, because listen, these

(28:09):
are really smart people. There's obviously experts in their field
that are building this and you know, consulting on it
and working on the boat that has it, that dumps
it into the ocean and all that. Well, apparently the
guy that ran it stocked and rushed. So his goal
was to use like super cutting edge technology to open
up the deep sea for civilians. Right, It's kind of

(28:30):
like SpaceX, you know, how Elon Musk is opening up
or trying, you know, for regular people to go into space.
He was kind of doing this for you know, the
unexplored depths of the sea, because there's you know, the
ocean is completely un explored. So he that was his
goal of ocean Gate was to make you know, the
titan accessible or the Titanic accessible to everyone. Like how

(28:52):
exciting would that be? Never for me, a claustrophobic, I
would die. However, other people really want to go see it.
So what happened was they use this carbon fiber hole. Listen,
I'm not a scientist, It's okay, So keep that in mind.

Speaker 2 (29:04):
You are close to a scientist.

Speaker 3 (29:07):
I'm a data scientist.

Speaker 2 (29:08):
Yeah, I really are. So I'm edger in my seat
right now. I'm buying all there's this.

Speaker 3 (29:13):
Carbon fiber hole, this carbon fiber hole, and it's it's
experimental material that's used because it lowers like the cost
of everything, right, so obviously they're going to choose this,
but it's never really worked at these depths with this pressure. Okay,
So it can't constantly withstand the pressure of the depth
that the Titanic is at. And there's two of these

(29:35):
holes that were built for the Titan submersiabule. Because the
first one cracked, yes, first one cracked, right, yes, And
expert after expert after expert tried to warn him like,
this is not the this is not sustainable, this is
going to kill people.

Speaker 2 (29:50):
And it's not safe.

Speaker 3 (29:51):
And it's not safe. And so ocean Gate equipped the
Titan with the all these internal acoustic monitoring systems to
detect real time i'm sounds from the whole such as
like creeks and cracks and pops and doodads right, indicating
like stress of the whole. And the system was part
of oceans Gates real time whole health monitoring is what

(30:13):
they called it. And it's intended to alert the crew
of any microfractures that are happening and listen, with these
kinds of pressures, a microfracture is a death sentence, right
of course, I mean you can't, okay. So ocean Gate
used these acoustics to in place of third party certifications
or traditional pressure vessel testing methods.

Speaker 4 (30:35):
So it sounds like corners were being cut just in
order to get to the great unknown and maybe even
make a name for yourself. If you're the CEO right listen,
you're listening to True crime tonight. We're talking true crime
all the time. I'm Courtney. I'm here with Stephanie and Body,
and we want you to be here with us. Right now.
We're talking about the Titans submersible. But we are up

(30:56):
for anything you are, So give us a call eighty
eight one crime or send us a talk back. So Body,
in terms of potentially cutting corners, didn't. Several employees express
safety concerns.

Speaker 2 (31:09):
Oh and had to be like lost very impactful important jobs.

Speaker 3 (31:14):
Yeah, like really important.

Speaker 2 (31:16):
There are important people too that were scientists.

Speaker 3 (31:18):
Yeah. I watched a documentary. I think it was on HBO.

Speaker 2 (31:22):
The Netflix one has very good.

Speaker 3 (31:23):
I haven't seen that one yet, but I watched the
one on HBO, and there there was a lady who's
like a really smart lady. I can't remember what her
role was, but she was like literally let go and
she's on the ship, like she took a little booie
and left because there was a rush, yeah, or rushed
off didn't. He was like, it's kind of been explained

(31:44):
like a cult. Either get in line or you're out,
like he was. He would ignore them, he would threaten them,
or he would fire him. He straight up said that
it would be nothing for him to spend fifty grand
to ruin someone's life. He proceeded to put money where
his mouth was. After David Lockridge, he was the head
operator of the company's submercibles, was fired after expressing his

(32:04):
concerns about the safety of the vehicle. This guy, Lockridge
proceeded to file an OSHA complaint, expressing his consounds like
he went to OSHA. Yeah he was ocean Gate, to
which ocean Gate responded by countersuing him for breach of contract.
So yeah, Oh and my friend Michelle by the way,
the science teacher, she's incredible that I told you guys

(32:25):
about before. Yeah, she said they bought they she's obsessed
with the Titan, you guys, Okay, So she just texted
me and she said they bought expired carbon fiber. So
carbon fiber is like literally fiber, it's intertwined and it
could it can go bad.

Speaker 2 (32:40):
And he knew it, by the way, he knew cutting
every corner. It wasn't as though he was operating in
a vacuum. He was operating with real information in front
of him. And there has been chatter or it was alleged, allegedly,
allegedly allegedly that this guy's Courtney Armstrong's favorite word of megalomania.

Speaker 4 (32:56):
Megalomania, that's what yes, you did was.

Speaker 2 (33:00):
A megalomaniac or a narcissist who was like a one
track mind and had you know, was putting pennies before humans,
but also that he may have had a death wish.
You know, there was that infamous video if you guys
haven't seen it of when this occurred, which was such
a huge tragedy. Remember there was.

Speaker 3 (33:16):
A father and a son, many people was coming to Laysia.
I was cut off from society when this happened. I
always have any idea.

Speaker 2 (33:23):
Yeah, awful, and nobody knew where he was. And then
we now know that there was a video of his
wife who was watching and there was this boom that
was very unusual and allegedly allegedly allegedly she really was
not very reactive, as though he was on a death
wish and was putting these other humans in this in.
They're enthusiasts, right, They're like, we love the Titanic. This

(33:46):
is their wish to be able to have this moment,
and he has taken advantage of them with potentially a
wish to die in his own and go out big.

Speaker 4 (33:54):
I wonder, and I don't know, and I'm excited to
watch all of these documentaries. You guys have me very
fired up about this, But I wonder if it's a
death wish. Again, I don't know this man. I just
heard his name for the first time, or is it
You want to believe so firmly that what you have created,
you are the one to provide greatness to the world,
to explore the deep seas, and you believe even in

(34:16):
the face of evidence.

Speaker 3 (34:18):
They were using these acoustics that you mentioned as like
they're warning and you just can't do that. You have
to have actual systems in place because an implosion happens
in milliseconds. In milliseconds, and this is true crime adjacent
because the US United States Coastguard is looking at filing
criminal charges.

Speaker 2 (34:36):
So Diddy, I know, we've taken a Diddy break for
a hot minute, but there's been some new developments today
in terms of his sentencing hearing. So, body, what do
you have?

Speaker 3 (34:44):
I mean, this is kind of news to me too.

Speaker 4 (34:46):
Today.

Speaker 3 (34:46):
This happened today, and I don't really know all the
wonderful details, but I'm going to go through it pretty quickly.
So today there was a hearing for to hear arguments
on why Diddy should receive an earlier sentencing date, but
it was adjourned without any arguments being presented. So defense
attorneys and federal prosecutors initially agreed to a September twenty

(35:07):
second sentencing date, so they scheduled his hearing to propose
his date to the judge. Well, all of a sudden,
they just said abandoned the hearing and said, noah, we're good.
And so it's not immediately clear why the defense apparently abandoned,
at least for now, their attempt to secure expedited sentencing.
But it was abandoned, and nobody knows why.

Speaker 2 (35:28):
Well, they're probably getting their ducks in a row because
they want did He home much sooner, you know, to
see the defense's team. You know, October seems like a
lifetime away, given he was found not guilty. If you
haven't been following did He was found guilty on the
major charges that would have put him behind bars for life.
He has been brought up on guilty charges for the
two lesser charges. And listen, this is a very divisive topic.

(35:50):
Don't get me started. But you know, look, he's been
found not guilty. Now he's serving time and was denied bail.
Is October appropriate? Is December appropriate? Probably according to his
defense team, tomorrow is appropriate.

Speaker 4 (36:03):
But this is very curious to me. And as you said, body,
it's it's just coming out because then apparently attorneys for
both sides sent yet another joint statement, so prosecution defens
is on board. They sent it to the judge saying, hey,
guess what, you know, we actually agree to what you
originally said, Judge. Let's go ahead and keep what you

(36:24):
said for October third. It's so odd to me.

Speaker 2 (36:28):
Huh, we should have Jarrett Farantino on to discuss this,
because I don't.

Speaker 4 (36:32):
That is curious. It is curious.

Speaker 2 (36:33):
It doesn't really track. We have to assume that did.
He thought he was going to be maybe home the
night that the initial verdict came in. He was denied
bill because you know, Cassie Venturin, another victim, also said
they felt that they were in danger. Should he be
sent home? That is something that we all know he did.
He himself claimed to he was a violent guy, So

(36:55):
that doesn't really track. I'm so curious if anybody has
the answer. Call us a three one crime.

Speaker 3 (37:00):
And then a juror came out and basically said, yeah.
A juror came out and said that they're kind of
insulted that people are saying that did he got off
because of like celebrity influence, and that you know, the
quote was highly insulting and belittling to the jury and
the deliberation process, and that the juror said that they
heard a legal pundit on Thursday night imply that Comb's

(37:21):
celebrity may have played a role in the verdict. And
this juror said, you know, we spent over two days deliberating.
Our decision was based solely on the evidence presented and
how the law is stated. So the juror did not
want to be named because you know they're going to
get harassed, right absolute, But I can see if I
can spend you spent what seven and a half eight

(37:42):
weeks of.

Speaker 4 (37:42):
Your life doing a civic duties, doing a civic duty,
but we'll see I hold out hope. Prosecutor Maureen Comy.
She has said the only things exceptional about this defendant
are his wealth, violence, and praisiness, and she wants severe incarceration.

Speaker 2 (37:59):
Wow, and you're listening to True Crime tonight. We're talking
true crime all the time. We'll be back. If you
lose any of this, catch us on the podcast right after.
Welcome back to True Crime tonight on iHeartRadio. Courtney, you've

(38:21):
been following this Alexander brothers case in Miami. Well, and
there's a new development there.

Speaker 4 (38:27):
Yeah, speaking of trials, we will not be covering. So
we mentioned this just a couple of days ago that
a guy named o had Fisherman. He had been charged
with sexual battery. This was along with the Alexander brothers,
Orin and a Laon and it stemmed from an alleged
twenty sixteen assault. Well, guess what, one day before Charles

(38:50):
supposed to start, he has been cleared and what Yes,
the charge was dropped. This guy produced O Hot Fisherman.
He produced a timestamp video and it was apparently good
enough evidence that showed that he was on a boat
close to the place where a woman said she had
been attacked, but it was basically he said, here's my

(39:12):
video alibi and it's been dropped.

Speaker 3 (39:14):
Wow, if he can prove, if he can prove he
wasn't there, right, like mm hmm, that's how it should work.

Speaker 2 (39:19):
And he was being wrongfully accused, yet he had spent
time in custody awaiting this trial. So yeah, that's a travesty.
What do you make of.

Speaker 3 (39:27):
Well, I mean is it a travesty though? I mean,
if he's innocent, he's innocent, right.

Speaker 2 (39:31):
Right, But if you're being wrongfully accused and you have
to spend time, yeah, awaiting trial, right, grind bars away
from your loved ones and your family and your names
in the press. And yes, that's absolutely you know your
life might be wrecked as a result, and you have
video proof that you were being wrongly accused. That's dangerous stuff.

Speaker 3 (39:49):
Oh, it absolutely is, Yes, of course, yes, yes, so.

Speaker 4 (39:52):
You know this man is off. What will be coming
is the Alexander brothers will will have their day in
unless I guess things shockingly change, and that is set
for the top of twenty twenty six, for January. And
this case involves more than sixty victims who said they
were assaulted by one or more of the brothers. Wow,

(40:14):
so that is all to come and all three of
the Alexander brothers are pleading not guilty. And now as
we await that trial in twenty twenty six, let's go
to a talk.

Speaker 9 (40:25):
Back a true grab tonight. I had a quick question.
I was just listening to that standard birche more question,
and do you guys think psychological abuse or grooming to
be treated on par with physical violence in the sentencing?
Hoping you guys can answer it.

Speaker 3 (40:39):
I mean grooming for sure. I mean grooming is, yeah,
one hundred percent.

Speaker 2 (40:44):
What grooming is, just in case someone's not totally aware
of what that word even means, because you know, to
some it sounds like brushing your hair right and shutting
your legs. You know, really grooming is somebody who's with
very big mal intention, who wants to kind of suck
a victim into their world. It's kind of like, you know,
the guy that's I'm spacing on a good example, but

(41:05):
you know, promising great things. It's fine, and it's fine
with people that.

Speaker 3 (41:09):
Are steady, you know, young and impressionable and you know,
are looking for guidance in their life. And that now
they've got this adult giving them attention and whatnot, and yeah,
they're susceptible. And so that's that you're that's grooming. And
you know, I'm sorry, Courney, what oh.

Speaker 4 (41:25):
It's going to say, Yeah, criminal grooming just more on
what you're saying it is. It's it's manipulative, it's deceptive,
and it's a process who is employed by you largely predators,
to establish a relationship, an emotional connection with someone who's vulnerable,
whether they are a minor or whether there's some kind
of at risk adult, and they they start the grooming

(41:46):
process with what feels like a really comfortable dynamic, and
it can manifest into really nefarious things like sexual abuse,
like financial fraud or other illegal facts. Right.

Speaker 3 (41:59):
But you know the issue is going to come into
because grooming is not physical. It's not something you can see, right,
So you know, courts require evidence beyond a reasonable doubt,
which can be hard to obtain in non physical cases.
You know, it's a slippery slope of concerns, and you know,
some worry that people will over misuse false allegations and

(42:19):
you know, exaggerated claims without sufficient evidence. So I do
think it's a slippery slope. But when it comes to grooming,
I think that absolutely needs to be treated more criminally.
But as far as psychological abuse, it's just hard to
prove because courts require beyond reasonable doubt. But thanks you
for the talk back.

Speaker 4 (42:36):
That was it was a great dook back, and I
actually I have a hard time even with what you
just said, body, I don't know that it should be
used more because what is that line and how slippery
is that slope and where do people fall? And how
is it proven?

Speaker 2 (42:54):
That's the thing, and that's why individual there's no real
broad stroke that you guys going to get into a
fight right now?

Speaker 4 (43:01):
Do you want to?

Speaker 2 (43:05):
No?

Speaker 3 (43:05):
I mean I can see, I've can see why it's
a problem. I mean I just said why it's a problem.
I can I totally understand. Yea, you know the thing,
But I mean, do you just let it go forever
like grooming's okay because.

Speaker 2 (43:17):
You can't prove it. No, it's hard. It's one of
those things that can become when it's like the perfect
example would be in the Epstein case, like we were
talking about yesterday. PS we're having Lisa Bryant, the director
and executive producer of the Netflix documentary Filthy Rich based
on this Epstein story tomorrow. Yes, that's right, it's Wednesday tomorrow. Yes,
signe at the time. So just as a heads up,

(43:40):
but grooming in that example, just for you know, the
clarity would be, you know, Geeling Maxwell, for example, who's
serving time for being maybe Epstein's right hand woman as
a woman to say the young girls, Oh you know,
come it's fine, Oh yeah, come in here, it's fine.
A little massage, it's fine. That's a grooming pro right.

(44:00):
It's not just like, hey, do something dastardly or do
something illegal, or do something that pushes your boundaries, personal boundaries,
I might add, it's like little bit slow and steady
and yeah, taking advantage of the vulnerable.

Speaker 4 (44:14):
And this even reminds me of something I don't even
remember if we spoke about it on the show or otherwise.
But there was a documentary I watched. I believe it
was on Netflix. I believe it was called Quiet on
the Set, but I'll need to double check.

Speaker 7 (44:28):
Oh.

Speaker 2 (44:29):
Perfect. It was a great example of grooming.

Speaker 4 (44:31):
Yes, and it was child stars in the Nickelodeon sphere.
So there you are, and you have these adult producers
and these adult actors, and of course your entire trust
is there and ps your parents. You should feel safe
because your parents are three feet away off set. But
that's enough to gain complete trust in these children and
put them in horrible situations.

Speaker 3 (44:55):
Why I go to look out for quiet on set?
On HBO Max, Yeah, so this is true crime Tonight
on iHeartRadio, I'm body movin And I'm here with Stephanie
Leidecker and Courtney Armstrong and we're just kind of giving,
you know, a little update on all the new headlines
for tonight. Courtney, what about the slippery slope that you're
talking about. Let's I just I just can't. Let's get
back to fighting. Are fighting again? We need a bell?

Speaker 2 (45:19):
Okay, so edge of my seat, IM right in the middle.
What's the solution?

Speaker 3 (45:23):
We just let this one.

Speaker 2 (45:24):
What is the solution?

Speaker 4 (45:25):
So I'm not really there yet. I'm still milling the question. However,
I feel like a lot of people fall into letter
of the law versus spirit of the law. And I
find myself usually on the side of letter of the
law of what is and that's it's a it feels ephemeral,
almost grooming. You know, it's there. How are you proving

(45:49):
it and I don't even know is that illegal?

Speaker 2 (45:52):
Yes?

Speaker 4 (45:52):
I don't know, well it is.

Speaker 2 (45:55):
I'm asking if you know the answer to this join
US eight eight eight on crime. But the Didty case
that we been covering, you know, endlessly, including tonight. Listen,
that's another example. You know, victims were saying that they
were in this necessary bubble, that they were getting employed
within a bubble, or they were in love with somebody
who lived in a bubble that had violence and drugs in,

(46:16):
you know, wild inappropriate behavior, and as a result, little
by little, they're meaning the victims, their boundaries were being stretched,
and next thing you know, you're knee deep into a
situation that on its nose you would never say yes to.
But you know, slow and steady, slow and steady, suddenly
you're you're in over your head. That's the theory.

Speaker 4 (46:37):
I see. I absolutely see what you're saying. I guess
for me, going back to the you know, the letter
of the law, once it crosses over and you are
into what was actually charged of the fraud, the force
and coersion. Okay, then there's force, then there's beatings, and
then there's coercion of I will kick you out of

(46:58):
your house. That's word. You know that I understand in
a sort of black and white manner. Does that make sense?

Speaker 2 (47:05):
I think you're I think you're both right. I think.

Speaker 3 (47:09):
I think you've defended your position. Well, I have an update,
a rather weird one off the wall.

Speaker 2 (47:15):
Jimmy Hoffa, Oh Long Island. Yeah, this is an island,
floor of Long Island. This is I'm from Long Island.
The haf A story was.

Speaker 4 (47:24):
I'm from Detroit.

Speaker 3 (47:25):
Lahafa's Detroit, Like you know, go go go, let's tell
us everything. So has the mystery been potentially solved fifty
years later? Like where he's at? Like, you know, did
Heraldo do the solving in the same do you remember
that lock and key cabinet? Oh my gosh, okay, so
fifty year old mystery who killed Jimmy Hoffa in Where's

(47:47):
his Body? Well, a trio of people have come forward.
I saw this actually being reported on News Nation, and
of course I was like, oh, we got to talk
about this because it's just kind of quirky and interesting.
So they've come forward claiming to have the answers, and
they created an event. This is where I get kind
of like, okay, guys, they created an event by an
investigative reporter, Scott Bernstein. He's a retired federal prosecutor Richard Convertino,

(48:12):
and a former mobster termed informant Novae Taco. They're going
to host an eighty minute presentation at Macomb Community College
that will include the actual name of the person who
killed Jimmy Hoffa. Now here's the rube.

Speaker 2 (48:27):
You gotta pay to go to the Okay, so give
a little of the backstory though to even like, why
would Jimmy Hoffa be killed in the.

Speaker 3 (48:33):
First place, Well, he was kind of like the union
guy right in the for the autoworkers Teamsters. Teamsters is
successful largely in part to things that Jimmy Hoffa did
back in the day. He's an Indiana native. He spent
most of his life as a union organizer based out
of Michigan, and he quickly rose to the ranks within

(48:54):
the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. He was selected as a
union's president in the late nineteen fifties. Both Haffa and
the union allegedly, allegedly allegedly had a lot of ties
to the mob right, yes, yes, okay, allegedly you know,
like when you're watching all this, like all those old
mob document Haffa is always being brought up. So he

(49:18):
disappeared and hasn't been seen since.

Speaker 2 (49:21):
So you know, the theory is that he was buried
in cement, right, that's where like these cements shoes.

Speaker 3 (49:26):
Yeah, that's what we've heard that's been But here here's
the thing we're not going to know. We got to
pay thirty dollars ago this event.

Speaker 4 (49:31):
We're going to want to.

Speaker 2 (49:32):
Know, Okay, so we're going to have to get this answer.

Speaker 4 (49:34):
For We're going to have to I think this money,
it's marketed brilliantly and ps I actually I didn't go
through the entire purchase process, but I wanted to make
sure it was real, and I did. You can buy
buy a ticket at thirty dollars. But the Detroit News
they asked one of the presenters, Bernstein, They said, if
you have this information, why haven't you alerted the FBI?

(49:56):
And his response was, the agency already.

Speaker 2 (49:59):
Knows, agency already knows famous last words.

Speaker 4 (50:02):
Yeah, so I can't wait. We will come back with
the conclusion and listen and maybe I'll have egg on
my face and they do know where he is.

Speaker 2 (50:09):
And also some interesting TSA news I know it's been
a big travel weekend. People are kind of at the
airport's getting back hopefully from some lovely vacations, and we
got some interesting information about this tessay. Global entry paperwork.
People have that because they want to be able to
get through customs very quickly from country to country. And if,

(50:31):
in fact, you go and get your World Entry pass,
if you will, it just makes a line so much
smarter and quicker because they have your information and you
have to do an interview in advance, and it's a
bit of a process. Right, I do not have mine
because it is a bit of a process and you
have to go in person. But we're just learning, you know.
I'll let you guys give the headline there. But it

(50:51):
does seem like there's some information that you sign which
also gives away some privacy that might not be travel
related as correct.

Speaker 4 (51:01):
So yeah, the government monitors Global Entry travelers daily, even
if you aren't traveling, so you do not need to
board a plane or leave your house. And if you
have a Global Entry pass, the federal government can spy
on you daily. As you said, Stephanie, this little nugget
of information it was kind of quietly revealed in a

(51:22):
Department of Homeland Security's latest and annual performance report. So
God bless whichever reporter is reading these reports. But it
didn't just talk about the huge growth in the number
of people in these Trusted Traveler programs, the TSA pre
and Global Entry, but also the number of those travelers
who've been kicked out of the program.

Speaker 2 (51:43):
Yeah, that's really interesting. So I guess the assertion there
is that if you have this entry card, you think
it's for I'm just using this as a silly example. Hey,
I'm going to Partis and going to be in France,
I'm coming back into the United States. We have heard
stories which seems appropriate, like you might have to answer
question or you get pulled aside by you know, listen,
these are tough times. But I think the bigger piece

(52:05):
of this question, and again, if anybody listening knows the
answer to this eight eight eight three one crime, please
call us. It seems like there's this now reach that
stretches beyond just travel privacy, but rather at any time
you no longer would need a warrant, or you would
no longer need a reason or probable cause to be
going into somebody's you know, private files or private photographs

(52:28):
or emails, et cetera. You sort of are giving that
right away. I think I'm understanding that correctly. And if
if i'm not, please it's all I understood me.

Speaker 3 (52:38):
I'm glad I only ever fly to Oakland because I
like you know what I mean.

Speaker 2 (52:41):
I don't pull you aside there nice social media.

Speaker 3 (52:44):
Listen, do not monitor my social media.

Speaker 6 (52:46):
You know.

Speaker 3 (52:47):
It's the thing that I'm posting about.

Speaker 4 (52:49):
It impacts a lot of people, it really does. The
number of known traveler number holders who have TSA pre
check global Entry, it's over thirty one million people. That's
a lot. And in the fine print of applying for
Global Entry, the Department says, quote consent is implied to
constant review. Again, even when you're not traveling. So if

(53:11):
you're sitting there on your couch and writing what the
federal government maybe sees is a little questionable, you could
be up for debate.

Speaker 2 (53:20):
And who's deciding what's questionable? Right? I use clear? I
don't do you guys ever use that. It's like you
put your eyes in the machine and then I don't
know it. It's actually very efficient and I don't know.
I definitely should read the fine print I want to
do a detail that if they have they in the office.

Speaker 4 (53:36):
Yeah, if they have your eyeball biometric Stephanie. I'm not
sure your quote in the Clear.

Speaker 2 (53:40):
First in the Scary movie for sure. Yeah, but yeah
you do you put your you put your eye I'm
not This is not a dig against Clear. I use it,
but it is very efficient. But it is interesting that
they do have your pupils as the identifier.

Speaker 4 (53:54):
Interesting and Global Entry does too, and I yeah, I
remember doing it, So no Paris for us. I think, body,
you're the only one in the Clear, and actually having
traveled with you, Stephanie, I do feel like Clear the
total aside, you got through the lines faster than I
did with Global Entry.

Speaker 2 (54:11):
I don't know what happens there, but it is like
the fastest dash imaginable. So again we're not promoting it.
I don't know the fine print, so just saying it
is interesting though that we do sign up for stuff
sometimes without really realizing the implications. That obviously falls over
into the obvious category of social media and you know,
sort of giving our privacy away, so larger unload. But

(54:33):
I just I totally think it's interesting and we should
do sort of a privacy alert. Yogi agrees, he does,
He agrees.

Speaker 3 (54:41):
He's very emphatic about.

Speaker 4 (54:45):
I think it's Hafa got him. Actually, what does Yogi know?
Is he involved in this present?

Speaker 2 (54:54):
Oh my goodness, Yogi needs a passport? Interesting? So yeah,
that's it. We'll put a in it from there. But
if anybody has any details that they want to share,
we'd love to hear it.

Speaker 4 (55:05):
Absolutely. Okay, here is something that I know. I've been
talking your ear off for many weeks now, and I
got so deeply sucked in. It was at twenty twenty.
I watched again several weeks ago and it was called
I've Killed for You and is one of the most twisty, turny,
kind of unimaginable cases I've seen. In a minute, let's

(55:27):
hear it.

Speaker 2 (55:28):
Tell us everything, Courtney Armstrong.

Speaker 4 (55:30):
So in twenty ten, in a place called Alton, Illinois,
Bonnie Woodward was murdered. You're listening to true Crime tonight,
please call us. We want to hear from you. We're
at eight eight eight three one crime. Follow us along
on body Woodward or whatever you want to talk about.
So there we are. It's twenty ten. This case took
eight years to be solved. But let's just go back

(55:53):
to what happened. Bonnie Woodward two was by all accounts,
lovely forty eight year old nursing home worker, and she
was last seen June twenty fifth. She had four children,
two were biological and two were adopted when a former
husband died. So she was just a real caregiver. If
you know how hard it is to work in a
nursing home as a caregiver's.

Speaker 2 (56:13):
Aid it requires sainthood, you know, it is such a
really tremendously difficult job. And yes, it describes her so well.

Speaker 4 (56:23):
So Bonnie didn't come home from work and you could
set her whereabouts two o'clock. So immediately her living boyfriend, Gary,
he called her and is missing. So Gary, everyone always
knows you go to the romantic partner first. So Gary
is a felon, and the two of them had had

(56:44):
some domestic issues. So Bonnie's missing, Gary's called her in.
All the police know in this moment is that Gary
is a felon. The next day, officers went to where
Bonnie worked at the nursing home and her red truck,
which she loved and saved up four and was incredibly special,
it was left abandoned in the parking lot. The windows

(57:06):
were rowed down, and coworkers in fact had seen her
just the day before when she went missing, and she
was talking to a man. He had short salt and
pepper hair, and he was in a silver car. It
looked like a Chevy Malibu. And coworker said she got
out of her red truck and got into the car.
It looked willingly like the man. Okay, Gary, her Bonnie's boyfriend.

(57:32):
He does not match the description. But you know who
does match the description.

Speaker 3 (57:36):
Let me guess her ex husband or something.

Speaker 4 (57:39):
Very very close, her ex boyfriend. Yeah, that's right, why
so enter So now the police start looking at the
ex boyfriend, Chester, and he has been known to have
short Sultan pepper hair. And Chester's father actually had a
similar car to the one that people said they saw
him get into. And Bonnie live in. Boyfriend Gary very contentious,

(58:03):
bad relationship, No one got along at all when police
so it feels very suspicious. Police dive in when they
find Chester. Turns out he doesn't match the description. His
hair is now long, he has a beard. But the
police did something I found very odd. They decide to
have both Chester and his father who everyone said, Oh

(58:24):
my god, this car must be Chester's father's car. They
had them both in the investigation room at the same time.
Have you guys ever heard of that?

Speaker 2 (58:32):
I think they're not supposed to do that because again,
you're aligning your stories right, So the fear would be
that somebody's confession, or somebody's evidentiary information, or somebody's memory,
it could all get intertwined. So, yeah, you set.

Speaker 3 (58:46):
Even facial even like facial like faces. I look at you,
make you stop talking about something that I shouldn't be saying,
Like I could be giving you the evil eye and
you'll stop talking, you know. Yeah, they would normally not
do that. That's very interesting.

Speaker 4 (58:58):
So that occur. Turns out it's neither Bonnie's living boyfriend
nor her ex. They're both cleared. Okay, we're now three
days into this investigation. Here's where things get weird. So
Bonnie is mother and stepmother to a total of four children,
and three days into the investigation, officers find out that

(59:20):
her Bonnie's seventeen year old stepdaughter, Heather, she had been
reported missing a week before.

Speaker 2 (59:26):
Yes, how is this not getting connected? Like within seconds?

Speaker 4 (59:30):
Because it was sold to a different police department.

Speaker 3 (59:34):
So Bonnie has a stepdaughter and she's seventeen, and Bonnie's
stepdaughter is also missing. Did they go missing on the
same day.

Speaker 4 (59:42):
No, the daughter, the stepdaughter, the seventeen year old Heather,
she had gone missing a week prior, and just it
was never connected because again it was two different local
police offices, but close enough. So now it's a dual investigation.

Speaker 3 (59:58):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (59:58):
Stories unbelieve and a little confusing. So that's crazy.

Speaker 3 (01:00:02):
Well, you're listening to True Crimes tonight, I kind of
want to hear the rest of the story, So stick
around for that and give us a call with your
thoughts eighty eight thirty one Crime, or use a talkback
on the iHeartRadio app. Stay right here with your crimes mappp.

Speaker 2 (01:00:27):
Welcome back to true Crime tonight on iHeartRadio. We're talking
true crime all the time, and listen. We're going to
get to the rest of this story because this Bonnie
Woodward story that we are hearing from Courtney edge of
our seats. But we also have Christine with a call.
Hi Christine, what's your call?

Speaker 6 (01:00:41):
Hi?

Speaker 7 (01:00:41):
Guys, how are you tonight?

Speaker 2 (01:00:42):
So good?

Speaker 7 (01:00:44):
I've been listening and you guys did the segment about
the Titan submersible and what happened. But I have a
question for you guys, kind of an opinion thing. Do
you think that because ocean Gate is an American based company,
do you think that the government should have stepped in
to regulate extreme tourism life.

Speaker 4 (01:01:07):
Yeah, what a good question.

Speaker 2 (01:01:09):
Yeah you think so. I think so.

Speaker 7 (01:01:12):
Jeff Bezos got FAA approval for Blue Origin to take
his Taurus up to the edge of space, and I
know that the time was in international waters, but it's
still an American based.

Speaker 2 (01:01:23):
Company, right right. Oh, it's a very layered smart question.

Speaker 3 (01:01:27):
I don't know. Listen, I'm obsessed with Chernobyl and I
want to go to Chernobyl so bad. And I would
be devastated if I finally had the opportunity to go
and I wasn't allowed to because the United States. Listen,
let's pretend to chernobyls in San Diego or something, Okay,
Like I would be devastated, pretty big trip. The government
was like, you can't do that. Like, I'm the one

(01:01:49):
who's taking the risk. I understand the risks. I know
that I'm going to Chernobyl. That's I could probably die.
Like I know that go to dopl if you could
probably die because I'm obsessed what Chernobyl, Why, I don't know.
I like nuclear reactors. I can't.

Speaker 2 (01:02:04):
I cannot fair fair, fair, Sorry, I digress.

Speaker 4 (01:02:07):
No, that Christine was making was that, Yeah, Jeff Bezos
had to get it cleared by the FAA. That's the government,
right right, I'm talking this out loud. Yeah, and do
we the Titanic that we were obviously just talking about,
they did not have permission.

Speaker 2 (01:02:24):
Correct, No, they didn't file any of the correct information.
And Christine doesn't be and if I'm wrong, but it
seemed as though they were actually avoiding any of the
checks and balances, in fact, maybe even going out of
their way to undermine the checks and balances. Which if
you love Chernobyl and you're putting your life into your listen,
I've gone skydiving for example, right, you know you don't

(01:02:46):
jump out of an airplane and think, oh my goodness,
it's the plane's fault if I if I hit the
ground user error. So we are signing your life away.
I guess for some things, these like thrill adventures. But
I think in the and correct me if I'm wrong, Christine,
I think in the titan example, that the participants, although
they signed all the waivers, maybe they thought that this was,

(01:03:07):
you know, safety tested and had had had some successful
missions before. Would you still go to Chernobyl if you
knew full well nobody had ever gone there and come
out alive on your little vacation body.

Speaker 3 (01:03:19):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:03:20):
Someone's got a cause on that. Don't go to Chernobyl
and die. I would be so sad.

Speaker 4 (01:03:25):
But someone was the first skydiver, right, I.

Speaker 2 (01:03:29):
Mean I know that was by by the way, it's questionable.
And for the record, I hated skydiving and thought it
was so scary and cried the whole way, So I
should not be the barometer. I loved it.

Speaker 3 (01:03:38):
I just I mean, I think it would be important
for those those checks and balances to be certified and whatnot.
But who who does the certification? Is the United States
government because it's it's it's an American company or is
it like what regula what regulatory body decides whether or
not I can go to the Titanic.

Speaker 4 (01:03:58):
Well that's a good point because if it's outside the
bounds of where the government itself is going, who is
setting the standards? Yeah, I think this is obviously such
an intriguing question to all of us. I'm going to
lean to personal responsibility and if you sign up for it,
and you pay with it for your own money, and
you make the choice, and.

Speaker 2 (01:04:19):
So not sure if the person who you're signing up for, like,
for example, I go, well, I guess, I mean, I'm
answering my own question, right, I went tandem skydiving, not
to make this at all about me, but as a
baseline example, I didn't really interview the man who's I
strapped my body to and jumped out of an airplane
with So yeah, that would be user error on my part.
But if people hadn't ever done a skydive before, I

(01:04:42):
don't know that I would recreationally do that. I don't know.
This is a tough one, Christine. I don't know what
they do in Canada, but we need to have some answers.

Speaker 4 (01:04:48):
Yeah, listen, thank you Christine for the call so much.
But you know what, what about climbing? Pretty sure, it's
Mount Everest and there's been multiple deaths. Well, I mean
there's it's all the time right now, It's all the time,
and yet people still continue to go. So should people
regulate that I think the answer is no. I think

(01:05:10):
it's it's an assumed personal risk as long as it
is not hurting others nearby.

Speaker 2 (01:05:16):
But let's just say this. What if I'm using back
the most baseline skydiving example, I elect to go skydiving.
I fill out all the materials, but what I'm not
told is that the plane that I am skydiving on
has like no engine or is ill equipped. It has
not it has not passed regulations so I'm signing up

(01:05:36):
or it's not registered, or it's not registered, it hasn't
been serviced. Like there's some baseline things that you have
to assume are being considered. Like in the submarine, you know,
these people didn't sign up and be like, hope the
guy knows what he's doing. No, they were working under
the assumption that this was the guy, this is the expert.
It's called the titan going to the Titanic. It's their
lifetime dream. They charge so much money, so they're assuming

(01:05:57):
that this guy knew what was up when instead he
was just cooking the books and doing things his own way.
So on the one hand, yes, it's like user error
by like when I like when skydiving, I landed I
was like covered from from chin to me with dirt
because I was just dragged across the thing because like
there's really not a ton of info. But you know that.

(01:06:17):
But I was assuming that the plane would be safe.
If I don't know how to land correctly, that's on me,
I mean, but also every personal responsibility.

Speaker 4 (01:06:25):
Yeah, personal responsibility and everyone who went and Stephanie, maybe
they should have asked, you know, what are where is
your engine or you know the parts that went wrong?
I know it wasn't the engine, Christine.

Speaker 2 (01:06:34):
That was a great question. Thank you for joining us.

Speaker 3 (01:06:36):
Got a thinking, definitely got a sinking, Courtney, Can you continue.

Speaker 2 (01:06:39):
To finishing up to know about Bonnie in this tragedy?

Speaker 4 (01:06:43):
Okay, very very quick recap. Bonnie Woodward forty eight year
old nursing home worker from Alton, Illinois. She goes missing
in twenty ten. She has four children, one of whom
is her seventeen year old stepdaughter named Heather. So if
you have listening, you know that through a twisty turvy investigation,

(01:07:03):
both Bonnie's live in boyfriend and her ex boyfriend, both
who had some messy law backgrounds, they have been cleared
what they did learn in The investigation is that Bonnie's
seventeen year old stepdaughter, Heather, had been reported missing one
week prior to Bonnie going missing, but it was to
a different police department, so now it's a dual investigation.

Speaker 2 (01:07:27):
And they lived in the same residence.

Speaker 3 (01:07:29):
Does correct police when I go missing, right, I'll imagine
you're not going to go missing.

Speaker 2 (01:07:34):
Ever, we won't see if I went missing, God forbid,
I would imagine that the police would want to talk
to everybody that I live with. Yeah, of course they'd
at the Albert house.

Speaker 3 (01:07:42):
It's crazy to me, right, Albert's Yeah, I agree, and
it's crazy. But they didn't really news like this, and
I tried to dig this up, so I don't know
if it was that. Maybe again, Heather was seventeen, and
maybe she would go out of the house, maybe a
couple of days at a.

Speaker 4 (01:07:58):
Time, and okay, you know she's missing. So she's missing,
and the police didn't know because again she was reported
to a different police department. So Heather as soon as
the investigators find out, now there's two people missing from
the same home. Well, Heather resurfaces one week later, and
it turns out that she had been staying away purposely

(01:08:20):
until her eighteenth birthday. And for what it's worth, it's
one of the most odd police videos I've ever seen. Again,
she's an eighteen year old woman at this point, and
this is not poking fun making hey, but she's speaking
like maybe a six year old. I want my I'm

(01:08:41):
not going to mimic her, but I want my daddy
book book. I want to be at the library. In
any case, that's her affect, and there was no it
didn't appear that there there was anything neurologically different about her.
In any case, she's back. It's staggering. The police don't
know how to make heads or tails. What bonnie stepdaughter,
Heather says was again she wanted to be out of

(01:09:03):
the house until she was eighteen. She claims that Bonnie,
by all accounts wonderful, was terrible to her, and she
had been staying with this nice family that she met
from church. What and yeah, So the seventeen year old
Heather had made friends with this boy at church named
Nate and she went to stay with him and his

(01:09:23):
lovely parents. The family is the Carols. They're both upstanding
professionals in the medical field. Okay, no one knows what's
going on. But when investigators do go to dig into
a little bit more where Heather has been, they see
father Roger Carroll of the Carroll family that he matches
the general description of a man with salt pepper hair,

(01:09:45):
as does his car. Yes, and so the Carols, the
Monica and Roger. They ask for a lawyer and immediately
lock it up. But Heather, the seventeen year old, she
continue speaking to officers. Turns out that Heather had gone
with the Carroll family mom, dad, and the sixteen year

(01:10:06):
old son Nate. She went with them to a lake house. Okay,
but on the day of Bonnie's disappearance, Dad, whose hair
matches the description and car matches, he had come back
to where Bonnie was that day a day early and
left Bonnie and the mom on vacation. Why so why,

(01:10:27):
They just said they kind of felt like it, but
it was very suspicious to the authorities. Yes, three months
go by and then this man, Roger Carroll, the dad
who was keeping the stepdaughter of Bonnie for the week.
His fingerprints are found on Bonnie's truck, but this was
not enough to charge him Dad, who by no means

(01:10:49):
new Bonnie. He only knew the seventeen year old daughter.
It turns out he came home from vacation with his
sixteen year old son the day that Bonnie, forty eight
year old went missing and shot her to death. Lured
her to his house and said, hey, I have your
stepdaughter come to my house, shot her to death, and
then made his sixteen year old son, who cracked the

(01:11:11):
case after he was given immunity. They he made his
sixteen year old son help burn her body for an
entire day and night stalking a fire. And yeah, so
Heather was bait to bring her there. And there's no
real rationale. Bonnie never did anything.

Speaker 6 (01:11:28):
I was gonna say, what this guy she did it
because he was remember her, Bonnie's seventeen year old stepdaughter
was staying with their family, and she had said, hey, Bonnie.

Speaker 4 (01:11:40):
Is mean to me, and somehow that leapt to well,
I'll kill her and have my sixteen year old burner
for a day and a night. Really wild stuff.

Speaker 3 (01:11:50):
And you said this is on twenty twenty.

Speaker 4 (01:11:52):
This was a twenty twenty it's striving on story. Yeah,
so even though there was no body, prosecutor secured a
first degree murdered conviction because of the Sun sixteen at
the time, and Roger Carroll received a sixty five year sentence.
But this is now on appeal, so we'll be following
this story and we'll see if it takes as long

(01:12:14):
for me to tell it, which I don't think is possible.
But that is a story of poor Bonnie. Woodward did
a really good job. That is a complicated tale.

Speaker 2 (01:12:22):
And Courtney Armstrong, you finally I finally understand it, like
I've been sort of knocking my head against the wall. Remember,
like you guys all can sell like I can never
follow that. So that was the very first time. Thank
you for you know, laying that out so clearly. It's
so tragic. It's, guys, a monster.

Speaker 3 (01:12:38):
Poor Bonnie. Yeah, so Heather Bonnie, Heather was bat Now
did Heather get accused of anything.

Speaker 4 (01:12:44):
No, and it doesn't appear she doesn't.

Speaker 3 (01:12:48):
She knows act in the interrogation room was for nothing.

Speaker 4 (01:12:52):
I think she was trying to keep herself out of
trouble because she knew that the police were looking for her. Wow,
But no, she didn't think the main and who killed
Bonnie actually did it.

Speaker 2 (01:13:02):
Okay, that's weird, that's unbelieving.

Speaker 3 (01:13:04):
I'm gonna have to watch this twenty twenty.

Speaker 4 (01:13:06):
Yeah, it's it's quite a watch.

Speaker 2 (01:13:08):
Wow. Well you know again, I know we just talked
about this, but you know, we have a huge show tomorrow.
So even though we're wrapping up tonight, we want to
make sure that you guys are sticking with us. Lisa Bryant,
director and executive producer of the Netflix documentary centering around Epstein,
will be answering questions, so make sure you call us.
It's been an amazing night. Our hearts are with Texas everyone,

(01:13:29):
so please send a prayer and love. We wish you
all well. Be safe. Good night,