Killer Psychology and Cold Truths: From BTK to the murder of Celeste Rivas

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
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. We're talking true
crime all the time. It's Sunday, December seventh, and we
hope you had a fantastic weekend. I'm Stephanie Leidecker, joined
here of course with Courtney Armstrong and Body Move In,
and we have a very special guest tonight. We're joined
by the esteemed criminologist, doctor Catherine Ramslin. We'll be talking

(00:42):
to her about everything from interviews that she's done with
serial killers as well as some modern trends that she's
seeing pop up in the area of true crime. Plus
also forensics expert Joseph Scott Morgan is here to break
down the latest in the Luigi Mangion trial, in the
new developments in the David pops Our investigation, and all

(01:02):
the details surrounding the death of fourteen year olds. So
let's read this. Hernandez, first of all, welcome to the show.
We're so happy to have you here.

Speaker 3 (01:10):
Well, thank you for having me and I'm looking forward
to this.

Speaker 2 (01:13):
Yeah, and just to get a little business taken care
of at the top. You know, some of us know
you most recently from the Brian Coberger investigation, and I
know you are a professor of his, and listen, that
is not what you're here to talk about, and we
respectfully understand that. If there's anything about that that you
want to share or reasoning, great, but just so we're
sort of checking that off the list as we get

(01:34):
into it, because you know, buying torture kill BTK, there
are so many minds to discuss, which is what we'll
be kind of focusing on in this in this episode
sounds good.

Speaker 3 (01:46):
I can't talk about him because he was my student
and students have protection content and grades, and that's the.

Speaker 2 (01:55):
Way I knew him, understood, completely understand. So BTK, I
know that is something that you've studied so closely. I
think we all have sort of seen some of your
work even around that case specifically, and it's one that
we've touched on a bit in previous episodes, but certainly
not with the benefit of you with us. So and again,

(02:15):
if anyone's just joining us right now and wants to
share Live eight eight eight three one crime, or you
could always leave us a talk back on the iHeartRadio
app So BTK before we even get there, Courtney, do
you want to set up a little bit of the
backgrounds of that case in case someone's listening who's not
as familiar. Absolutely so.

Speaker 4 (02:36):
Serial killer Dennis Raider also was known as BTK, standing
for Bind Torture Kill. So Dennis Raider terrorized Wichita and
Park City, Kansas for decades. Radar murdered ten people between
nineteen seventy four and nineteen ninety one, and then he
stopped killing, but continued to sort of relive his crimes

(02:59):
through fam So for years, the serial killer Dennis Rader
blended into the community. He was a church president, a husband,
a father, a cub Scout leader and this is all
while hiding his secret life. Now, Dennis Rader resurfaced in
two thousand and four when he contacted the media again,
ultimately leading to his arrest. So, Catherine, if we can

(03:24):
ask what originally drew you to study Dennis Radar.

Speaker 3 (03:28):
There was a woman who decided somehow got him to
agree to write a book with her. When he was
first arrested in two thousand and five, in twenty tens,
which is five years later, I saw her on Facebook
and I had not heard that her book came out,
so I asked her and she told me she didn't
want to write it, and she asked if I wanted to,

(03:48):
So I did and wrote a proposal that had to
pass muster with the victims' families because they really didn't
want a book written about him, but I proposed one
that would be done to benefit criminology, law enforcement, and
forensic psychology. And if they weren't on board with that,

(04:10):
then I didn't want to do it because I wasn't
really interested in just having somebody, you know, glad they're
on about himself, and they were. They thought that was
a good idea, And that's how it all started, really
just by a happenstance. I saw this woman who had
started things up with him and then didn't want to

(04:30):
carry in on.

Speaker 4 (04:32):
Wow, that's so interesting and also just such a life
lesson on following up in general curiosity, because look where
that live.

Speaker 3 (04:40):
I have many examples of that from my writing learner.

Speaker 5 (04:44):
And I read that book, Confessions of a Serial Killer,
The Untold Story of Dennis Raider. It's very, very good.
I learned so much. I read that book many many
years ago to stuck with me, and I think Stephanie
and Courtney can attest to how much I go on
and on and on and on and on about it.
I'm very impressed. But from your extensive time with Dennis Raider,

(05:04):
serial killer dennist Raider, what surprised you the most about
his personality or behavior exactly?

Speaker 3 (05:11):
Well, I mean by that time, I had really studied
a lot of Zerich.

Speaker 6 (05:15):
Oh, I'm sure you know.

Speaker 3 (05:17):
That was twenty ten, and I had been in the
field for some time, and I'd worked with that FBI
profilers and detectives, and so it wasn't that it was surprising.
But I had an interesting moment with him in the
prison where he didn't know I was coming, and when
the guards brought and you don't get it's not like
what you see on TV where you have a you know,

(05:40):
a well a like glass petition between two different rooms
with monitors in a maximum security prison, at least in Kansas.
And so I was watching them bring him in and
he was putting on the what I Hannibal Lecter kind
of grouch thing to them, to the guards. But he

(06:02):
saw me and he did this instant change to this
nice guy. You know, it was pleasant, friendly. It was
just so amazing to watch how fast he could make
that transition, and that, to me was part of the
secret of his success in having this doubled facade where

(06:26):
he'd be a family man and a churchgoer and boy scout,
you know, volunteer, but at the same time be harboring
these very dark kinds of fantasies and he could just
switch in and out so fast.

Speaker 6 (06:40):
Is that the part he called cubing?

Speaker 5 (06:43):
Yeah, okay, so doctor Catherine Ramsen explains this very well.
Dennis Raider had this. It was his idea, I think, right.

Speaker 3 (06:51):
Well, he called it cooping. I thought he smelled it
CEO U, P I n G. But he kept talking
about it like it was different sides, and I thought,
you mean cubing. So, you know, he says that I
came up with it, but he came up with it.
I just spelled it correctly.

Speaker 5 (07:09):
So for those who don't know, cubing is Dennis Raider's
personal term for the way he identified separate blocks or cubes,
each containing like different versions of himself.

Speaker 6 (07:20):
No, it's one cubetile like a Rubik's cube, right, Yeah,
I know.

Speaker 3 (07:25):
It's just well, it's like I wish I could I
had my I carry around my little cube to share people.
One cube multiple sides, so if you can imagine, each
side has a label like husband, father, you know, serial killer, burglar, etc.
He can shift those sides around depending on the circumstances.

(07:49):
He can pivot very quickly from one to another. He
has multiple faces, but he's only got one face out
outward at any given time. I'm depending on the circumstances.
He called them life frames. So the reason it's different
and I think better than compartmentalizing is because compartmentalizing conveys

(08:11):
the idea that these are all and containers blocked off
from one another. And that's kind of the way Ted
Bundy described it. He talked about having a security shield,
but with Greater it's like it's all integrated and they're
just all available for whenever he needs them. And when
I saw the speed at which he could make that transition,
I thought, that really works a lot better than this

(08:32):
notion of compartments.

Speaker 2 (08:35):
And does that mean is like emotional IQ is very
high because again, like we're seeing things from different respectives,
very quickly or is that the opposite, that his IQ
would be lower.

Speaker 3 (08:46):
No, it would be that it's he's very superficial. He
doesn't have roots in integrity. It's all about what works
for me right now? How can I do people? How
can I get what I need for me. It's very
it's kind of an infantile narcissism, so it's not a
high emotional intelligence by any means.

Speaker 2 (09:06):
It's very nice when you hear people say that person
is all things all at once, right, they're just sort
of they're playing the room essentially.

Speaker 3 (09:14):
Well, he can be different things. I don't think it's
like playing the room, because I don't think it would
be he'll step from one person to the other. I
think it's more the circumstances. So what he needs to
be to pass is normal, to be in church, to
pray with his wife, you know, these are things he
has to put on. It's like actors who take on

(09:35):
different roles. And I worked with doctor al Carlyle, who
is a prison psychologist who worked with Bundy, and he
came up with this theory about it being like actors,
and we showed that to Rayder while I was working
with him, and he thought that that describes it pretty well.

Speaker 2 (09:53):
Wow. Wow, you're listening to True Crime tonight on iHeartRadio.

Speaker 4 (09:58):
I'm Courtney here with Stephanie Leidecker and Body Move In
and Weird. Are so thrilled and honored to be here
with doctor Catlin Ramsland. If you have any questions, please
hit us on the talkbacks. We'd love to hear from you, Catherine.
Are there any large misconceptions that you feel are still
out there about BTK.

Speaker 3 (10:18):
There are a lot of people who decide that he's
like he killed John Bennie Ramsey, he's a zobeac, you know.
They attribute a lot of unsolved crimes to him. So
that's one thing, but another is that and I keep
being told that I miss things because there had to
have been sexual abuse in his background, or there had

(10:39):
to have been a head injury, or there had to
have been this and that, because they're going with the formulas.
And the reason I wanted to study Dennis Raider is
he was an outlier to the formulas. He shows us
you have to stop thinking in a formulaic way about
these people. Serial killer is not a criminal type. There's
no profile of a serial killer each it's a description

(11:01):
of a behavior, and there are many, many different versions
of what these serial killers are, so stop with the
formulas already. But I think that's the one thing that
I find in people who are they just believe I
miss something because they expect some certain things in his
background when I didn't report on them. Then that's I'm

(11:25):
just not doing it right. And that's been annoying because
I spent fifteen years talking to this guy, a lot
more than most other people have, for sure, and I
don't think I missed things. I think they're just using
formulas to set themselves up with expectations that they believe

(11:46):
have to be true. So they don't have to be true.
These are just ideas that people had, and the more
we've learned, the more we see those ideas just aren't right.

Speaker 5 (11:57):
Yeah, because we I mean even I do that, I
mean talk about it. You know, well you guys will
ask me, do you think this is a serial killer?
But no, there was no cooling off the formula, right,
So we have to get it out of our head
that it's one we don't.

Speaker 3 (12:10):
Even talk about cooling off anymore. That's that's that was
one of the questions were in past twenty years that
was why the guys changed their definition in two thousand
and five. Right, The whole cooling off period was so
vague and vacuous that they finally realized, we can't really
use that as part of a definition.

Speaker 2 (12:32):
It's interesting you say that, because even I think, for
myself and anyone maybe listening who follows true crime, we
ask ourselves this all the time too, Why what's our fascination?
What its are we scratching? And I like to think
that sometimes it's compartmentalizing in our own worlds, right that. Okay,
I understand the formula of something clearly not a serial killer,

(12:54):
but in general in true crime. Therefore, I feel safer
in the world and.

Speaker 3 (13:00):
Are about prediction.

Speaker 7 (13:01):
And when I hear you speak, it's like, it's so fair,
because I find myself doing that in the world, and
generally speaking, we talk about a lot of dark things
all the time, and it's interesting to hear that perspective.

Speaker 3 (13:16):
Yeah, I think. I think my advantage in doing this
work is not that all the work in psychologists, all
the work I did in philosophy, because it lets me
float with ambiguity and with unanswered questions a lot more easily,
I think than many people, because that is a place
that doesn't feel safe, and you have to get used

(13:36):
to it if you're going to be able to do
this work. But people do love their formulas because it
helps us with our expectations and the feeling that we've
got it all figured out.

Speaker 5 (13:47):
So that we can figure it out with the formula, right,
Like the idea we hope almost even like that if
we study it long enough. Maybe I do data analysis professor,
you know, as a profession, and I'm always doing predictive analysis,
so if we can find if we can get enough data,
we can start predicting behavior.

Speaker 6 (14:04):
Right.

Speaker 2 (14:04):
But that I.

Speaker 3 (14:05):
Think the wonderful thing about human beings is that there's
always a bit of unpredictability. No matter how much what
you have going for you in terms of all the
data and data management, there's always something.

Speaker 6 (14:18):
There's always an outlier, right.

Speaker 3 (14:21):
That's why I like the outliers.

Speaker 5 (14:22):
Right, And that's why you decided to start working with
Dennis Reraider because he was kind of like the outlier.

Speaker 3 (14:27):
Yeah, I wanted to understand that, but also use his
case as an example of why we should be careful
about these formulas because it's really hurting our ability to
understand fully a person's life. I studied phenomenology, so my
master's degrees is phenomenology and the idea of you have

(14:49):
to bracket your expectations so that you can let what's
really there show itself to you, because your expectations otherwise
can prevent you from seeing.

Speaker 2 (15:00):
Things, almost like a block. Yeah, yeah, oh my gosh.

Speaker 4 (15:05):
Well, please stick with us because after the break, I'd
love to ask you a few more questions about both
philosophy and phenomenology, which I have never heard of till
this moment, So stick around. Doctor Kathline Ramsland will also
be speaking with us about Eileen Bornos and also how
a fender behavior is potentially changing today. Keep it here
at True Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (15:36):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight on iHeartRadio. We've been
talking true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Leidecker here
with Courtney Armstrong and Body Movin, my favorite girls in
all Things. And we have doctor Katherine Ramslin with us tonight.
And if you're not familiar with her work, she's been
in over two hundred documentaries. You have for sure seen her.

(15:58):
I have seen you in so many that we get
a little starstruck. Almost because not only are you an academic,
but you have a wide net of the many minds
that you've studied. We've been talking about BTK, bind torture kill,
a serial killer who you spent over fifteen years studying.

(16:18):
To me, that is the scariest of all of the
scerial killers, and just in Layman's terms, and forgive me
if they're too layman, but what always struck me about
BTK specifically was two things. One his ability to be
everything to many people, meaning he was a beloved father,
he was a beloved partner. People liked him in the
real world you mentioned earlier, he would go to church

(16:40):
and be you know, philanthropic, people liked him. In fact,
his daughter loves him, and how real that world must be.
Yet you know he would bind in torture and kill people.
You know, he infamously had a very high first kill count,
right that he murdered a fan the first time out

(17:01):
of the gates and then went back to his simple world.
And for me personally, the theory of that is just
as scary as scary can be. It like touches into
every part of human behavior that I could see myself
walking straight into. Right, you believe the facade that sometimes
people are putting forward or how they present themselves, they're

(17:23):
masking perhaps in some cases. And yet the level of
violence he bestowed on people was frankly unparalleled in many ways.
So for you to be studying that is that Is
there anything that I'm missing that? Really?

Speaker 3 (17:41):
Yeah, I actually don't think his level of violence was unparalleled.
Of Ceiling much worse than him by far. He didn't
hold people for long periods of time, torturing them and
putting their head in the tub and drowning him and
pulling it back out and then drowning him again. He
didn't do things like that. He was fairly quick. His

(18:03):
whole idea of torture family.

Speaker 2 (18:04):
At one time, though, that's pretty intense.

Speaker 3 (18:07):
But yeah, he's but he strangled them, he didn't torture.
He didn't. The little girl he did, he hanged her
from a fright. But I would still say I've seen
much more violence than him. I would also I would
also say not everybody liked him. He had a fairly
rigid personality, and there were there were people in his

(18:31):
jurisdiction when he was a compliance officer. I just thought
he was an awful person.

Speaker 2 (18:36):
So I had a family who thought very highly of him.
You know, there were parts of his personal life was
very from what I've read so well, I mean.

Speaker 3 (18:48):
His daughter has completely turned on him. Yeah, so I
don't know what I would say about that. Her book
has certainly moments where he scared her made her uneasy.
So you know, everything has got shades of nuance to it,
and certainly he does. But really with what we're puzzled

(19:13):
to buy with Dennis Rader is his ability to be normal,
to act normally, to have a hold a regular job,
be a family man, have kids, be a father, be
volunteer with the boy Scouts, helping out, being very invested
in his church, and at the same time be always

(19:35):
trolling around looking for the potential of a victim, and
to be breaking into people's houses for burglary, to be
feeling like he needed to dominate people and control people.
So how does somebody hold all of that kind of
fantasy life while also performing as a normal person. I

(19:58):
think that's what really fascinates about.

Speaker 5 (20:00):
Him, performing as a normal person. That's the key right there.
So I have a question, doctor, do you think and
you know, do you you're very studied, do you think
that this normal performing as a normal person. Was that
his like that wasn't his real self? Or do you
think that the cube the side of him that was

(20:23):
bt K, do you think that's his real self?

Speaker 3 (20:25):
I think they're all his real self.

Speaker 6 (20:27):
You think they're all his real self.

Speaker 3 (20:29):
I don't think he's a unified I don't think any
of us are, frankly right. Maybe maybe some of us
have more sense of integrity than others, But I think
I think he had. All of these things are real
to him, and the many conversations I've had with him, letters,

(20:50):
visits and whatnot, I see I see different sides to him.
All of them are real, though, and all of them
are meaningful. But he is a spin doctor. He if
you want to do Bible study with him, that's what
he will be to you. If you want him to
be the monster, he will draw his cave monsters for you,
and he'll be the serial killer if you want him to.

(21:12):
You know, he will be what you want him to be.
He has the ability to do that. And I think
all of them are real in that they are the
way he gets along in life. All of them are,
but he but he's definitely an impression manager for sure, interacting.

Speaker 4 (21:32):
I had a question when you mentioned him sort of
trolling even in whatever facet of his life he was
in for victims. Was there anything in particular that Dennis
Radar looked for in general or yes, I.

Speaker 3 (21:46):
Mean it changed over the course of his period, as
initially he didn't expect that they were in before people
in the Otara house, for example, he thought there would
there would be a mother and the two kids, and
he dispatched the little boy quickly, and then he was
going to kidnap the mother and daughter because he had

(22:06):
a mother daughter fantasy. He's going to take them to
an abandoned bar, and none of that worked out, and
he ended up killing four people Axley, So then the
next one he's going to be more careful about that.
And also they had a dog, so the next one
is going to be more careful with. So he does
have a kind of a type, which would be a
petit woman that he feels that he can dominate more

(22:29):
Taro Julio Taro is dark haired the next one, so
there were some variations. But he wanted them to eat.
Why was he attracted to that note, It was because
he felt he could dominate them and that's very typical
of serial killers. Look, they don't want someone who's going
to resist them and fight them off and run away

(22:50):
and tell the police. They want someone they feel, you know,
pretty quickly bring under their control, which is, you know,
what it's all about for them.

Speaker 4 (23:01):
I will not rest until I hear more about phenomenology.
Just what is that and also how has that impacted
all of your research and work well.

Speaker 3 (23:12):
Phenomenology is a European philosophy. It goes with existentialism, which
is something I taught when I taught at Rutgers University.

Speaker 2 (23:19):
I was a.

Speaker 3 (23:19):
Philosophy professor first, and I was attracted to because it's
a full person philosophy. It allows individuals to be who
they are. So phenomenology in a nutshell is back to
the things themselves. You strip away theory and expectations and
try to just see what a phenomenon is and let

(23:43):
it present itself to you before you start theorizing about it.
So it's really a philosophy of looking at the world
and accepting it for what it is. And so if
you're a therapist, you're going to be letting people be
who they are with that stead of approaching them with
a theory already intact. So it was just it was

(24:04):
attractive to me. I was a therapist for a little while.
I didn't really like being a therapist, but that was
the philosophy that I used when I was.

Speaker 6 (24:15):
Interesting.

Speaker 5 (24:15):
It's almost like expectation management, something I need to get about.

Speaker 3 (24:19):
It's hard to do, too, because you have to bracket
your expectations, and that's there's a certain practic. I mean,
we had a master's program in it. We spent every
day learning to do this and to understand how we
look at the world through particular lenses, and those lenses

(24:40):
can you know, make things look different than they actually are.
So it's a skill, it's a practice, and of course
it has affected much of what I do, certainly letting
a serial killer present himself to me in the way
he wants to before I start thinking about theories and

(25:01):
formulas and whatnot, so it really has affected how I
think about them, how I deal with them, ask questions,
and then later write about them.

Speaker 5 (25:12):
Very interesting. This is true Crime Tonight on iHeartRadio. Whe
We're talking true crime all the time. We are lucky
enough to be joined by doctor Kathlyn Ramsland, and we're
right in the middle of talking about BTK. If you
want to give us a talkback, just download the iHeartRadio
app and hit the little microphone and boom, you're on
the show.

Speaker 6 (25:29):
Doctor Catherine Ramsland, I would like to.

Speaker 5 (25:31):
Ask you about education, since we were talking about that
and BTK. For those who aren't familiar, His first victims
happened in January nineteen seventy four, and then in nineteen
seventy nine. He attended Wichita State University and he graduated
with a Bachelor of Science degree in administration. Do you

(25:55):
think or does the think that Dennis Raider may have
pursued disagree to understand justice or inoculate himself from it,
or do you think it has anything to do with any.

Speaker 3 (26:06):
I think it was actually earlier than seventy nine.

Speaker 6 (26:08):
I thought he graduated in seventy nine.

Speaker 3 (26:13):
No, he was interested. He wanted to be a police officer.
He was interested in law enforcement. He was rejected. I
think at least twice, if not three times. He was rejected,
but he wanted to be so he pursued degrees that
would potentially would get him there. And he did have
one experience where he was in a classroom where a

(26:35):
pathologist was teaching them about one of the victims, one
of his victims, and it was an interesting experience for
him to be talked about, knowing that he's the guy
that did the murder. But I think it was it
wasn't so much to learn how to get away with chrimes,

(26:55):
but certainly that that's a byproduct. The more you know
the the more you're going to be thinking about what
do I need to do. But I think he really
just wanted to be in law enforcement because that was
his personality. It was very much black and white, law
and order, good and evil. He thinks of himself as
a good person who did some bad things.

Speaker 2 (27:15):
I guess that's the case with most people who do
bad things, even right a lot.

Speaker 3 (27:19):
I've heard a number of Sterrey killers describe themselves that way.
They're much more they've spent much more time being good
people than bad people, so that outweighs what they've done
in their mind.

Speaker 6 (27:31):
I guess that's true. I mean, in a sense they
do spend true.

Speaker 3 (27:35):
It equalizes all the actions, all their behavior. Their behavior
is not equal. What they have done to murder and
torture other people outweighs shoveling the walk for your neighbor
during a snowstorm quite far.

Speaker 5 (27:51):
But they're looking at it's black and white, like I've
spent twenty eight years of my life being a good,
good person and one day being a bad person.

Speaker 3 (27:59):
So therefore they Yeah, because they dehumanized their victims rights. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (28:06):
Interesting. Did BTK?

Speaker 4 (28:09):
Did he come up with his own name, with his
own quote nickname?

Speaker 2 (28:12):
Is that correct?

Speaker 3 (28:13):
Yeah? Very quickly, because he wanted to be sure not
to leave anything to chance. He wanted to have it.
You didn't want a stupid name. He wanted a name
that would terrify which to right.

Speaker 4 (28:26):
And I bring it up because you know earlier you
had touched upon the fact that in your experience he
actually wasn't that torturous in the scope of things. Do
you think he was trying to build himself up or
just have the catchiest name?

Speaker 3 (28:41):
Was that his Well, for him, the torture was psychological
more than it was. It wasn't physical. And he did
propose other names like the poet Strangler, so not a
very scary one. But I think he had four or

(29:01):
five ideas before he settled on BTK. But it was
really to get that sense of dominance. I mean, he
had studied the serial killers. Again that was something that
was an outlier. And he had also watched the press.
He watched how media was treating them like Ted Bundy

(29:22):
during the seventies, and so he wanted to be sure
that he had a handle that was going to be memorable.

Speaker 6 (29:30):
Certainly was certainly was.

Speaker 5 (29:32):
And he would write the media and the police departments, right,
he would communicate with both law enforcement and media and
write letters.

Speaker 3 (29:39):
Not at the same time. He kind of alternated, and
it was much more towards the media because he had
a crush on one of the news anchors. Oh, he
had kketb And he also really liked the Witchda Eagle.
That was the paper he liked to read. So he
kind of did both depending on what he wanted to
do or what message he was sending, but more of
his stuff was really aimed toward the media.

Speaker 2 (30:02):
Just to kind of divert from the specific crimes altogether.
I'm just curious, as as a professor, as a scholar,
as a woman, what is your tool and how do
you cope and all these dark corners, you know, we
do it every night. I find that we talk about
pretty dark stuff so regularly and we all have kind

(30:24):
of our tools, but I feel like you, I feel like.

Speaker 6 (30:27):
You really have the tools.

Speaker 2 (30:29):
What can you teach us.

Speaker 3 (30:31):
Now, I'm curious about your tools, but.

Speaker 2 (30:34):
A fair question, by the way, fair question.

Speaker 3 (30:38):
For the past three years, I've worked on a horse
farm volunteer work. I do a lot of the ride
around a tractor, I take care of the horses, I
get eggs in from the chickens, et cetera. And that
all came about because I went to visit a horse
farm and the owner broke her foot and she needed
someone to rehab a horse and she could obviously do it.

(31:02):
And his name was Sonny, and so I agreed to
take him on as a project because he needed to
be able to walk or else. And so I just
kept walking him, and then soon I was riding him,
and now I ride him. In fact, I wrote him today.
I write him four times a week, and he's my
best buddy. And now he has two books.

Speaker 2 (31:24):
And he's an author as well. I'm a recent transplant
to Nashville, so getting around horses is something it's sort
of like new to my world, and it is a
real therapy, grounding tool with all things.

Speaker 6 (31:35):
Yeah, we had a right.

Speaker 3 (31:39):
Well, and the thing about horses is you have to
be very present. You can't be wandering great daydreaming, not
paying attention to be very present, because anything could change
in a heartbeat. I've been trampled by a horse. I
can tell you it can be and can be fast.
But with this experience of just it helps me get

(32:01):
away from everything. I'll write maybe four or five hours,
and I'll go out to the farm and you know,
have shovel stalls. I'll do whatever it needs to be
done at the farm. It just helps me get all
of this stuff out of my head, pay attention to
the horses, and and then I can come back fresh.

Speaker 5 (32:19):
You mentioned that Sonny had two books. What can you
tell us the titles of the book.

Speaker 3 (32:24):
But the first one is just called Sonny Says, and
it's about his philosophical ancestors like son Crates and Sonstotle
and so and so. We were just having fun at
the farm. I took pictures of all the different animals
and made it into a book because I wanted to

(32:45):
learn to self published. And then we decided to put
Sonny in an adventure, so he became the Palomino p I.
It's a book called Sherlock Horse. It just for fun
and it had has been fun.

Speaker 6 (33:01):
Oh that's good. So you learned how to self published
through I.

Speaker 3 (33:03):
Learned how to self published. I would I would say,
don't do it. Don't put pictures. If you're gonna learn
how to do this, don't don't have your first book
with pictures, because that was really hard, I'm sure, but
but it turned out to be fun and now it's
just sort of a diversion.

Speaker 2 (33:20):
That's amazing though.

Speaker 4 (33:21):
And yeah, as Buddy mentioned, we just had an equine
therapist on who did talk so much about the need
to be present around horses, and so yeah, second person,
we shall all take a hint and meet a horse.

Speaker 2 (33:33):
Yeah, and the connectivity I think also that is just
sort of there's reciprocity in that connectivity. So how grounding
that must be.

Speaker 3 (33:42):
And it takes time. It's it's you have to have
a lot of patience, and you know they don't necessarily
choose you just because you've chosen them. So I spent
a lot of time just working on him until until
he finally is like now now he waits for me
at the game in two years.

Speaker 2 (34:03):
I would imagine even in your work, even with the
cases that we've just been discussing too. It's a slow,
long game. You're developing a relationship with somebody who's you know,
even in BTK and Dennis Raider like they they you know,
they have it all figured out.

Speaker 3 (34:17):
Until it's slow and steady, and all the serial killers
always ask about Sonny.

Speaker 2 (34:22):
Is that right? Why do you think that's the case.
It's so interesting to me.

Speaker 3 (34:28):
I just think they it's a side of me they
don't get to see, and it's something that I love
talking about. So I think when when they talk with
me and the phone or something, they want to know
you know that that part has a farm. Snow, there's
what's going on?

Speaker 2 (34:45):
Gee? Can I ask this one very again basic question?
But I'm just I'd be remiss not to when you
are in the presence in somebody who has taken lives
or one life or many lives in the cases that
you have in fact worked on. Even just hearing that
there's so many worse than BTK that you've studied, of
course I want to talk to you a thousand hours

(35:05):
about those as well. Do you get scared?

Speaker 3 (35:10):
I do not get scared, and I do think there's
something about me because I hitchicked across the country when
I was eighteen and rode a motorcycle across when I
was nineteen, So I think there's something about me that's
probably abnormal fearless. I don't know if I fear less,
but I think my fear is probably much more tolerant

(35:34):
of things and more ready to go into things that
maybe other people are afraid of. So I'm not afraid
of working with these guys.

Speaker 2 (35:45):
I must send that in you as well, which probably
brings a real level of comfort or authenticity that maybe
isn't seen elsewhere.

Speaker 3 (35:53):
Well, I think the most important thing with them is
a data on judgment. Sure that all of them will
say that. I think that's that's that phenomenology thing. You
have to be able to bracket your judgments when someone's
telling you horrible things that they've done. I think that's
the most important thing if you want to be able

(36:15):
to establish a rapport where they are going to feel
comfortable talking with you.

Speaker 5 (36:23):
I wanted to switch subjects real quick and talk about
maybe some modern trends in modern offenders, and you know,
we're you know, the rise of the internet means something
I'm very big into and something I'm fairly well known
for and and whatnot, And I think modern offenders in
today's age might be a little bit more driven by

(36:46):
different things than they were in the past, and I wanted.

Speaker 6 (36:49):
To talk to you about that.

Speaker 5 (36:50):
I thought was Okay, what emerging patterns, if any, What
emerging patterns in modern offenders concern you the most?

Speaker 6 (36:58):
If any?

Speaker 5 (36:59):
Some that come the mind are like in cell driven.
There's now a lot of rage baits on the internet
for political reasons. Are there is there one like stream
in modern offending that concerns you the most?

Speaker 3 (37:15):
Yeah, I think. I think anger and humiliation don't get
enough attention in terms of as as motivators, and in
cell is obviously very anger driven. H I think we
need to know more about that because because so many
of our social media influencers know that anger is a

(37:39):
great manipulator. If you get people angry enough that you
know you can you can twist that emotion and get
them to do things that maybe they would never think
to do on their own. So so yeah, I think
there's whole movements that we should be alarmed about. But
I think if you're talking about lone killers individual serial killers,

(38:00):
we're still seeing a lot of the same things that
we used to see. But maybe they're getting more sophisticated
because it's a lot easier to watch a show than
it is to read a medical textbook, for example. They're
getting more sophisticated about the kinds of things they need
to watch out for and the kinds of things that
cops are using. They're aware there's more CCTV cameras everywhere now,

(38:24):
more aware of the IgG, the genetic genealogy investigations. So
I think they're being more careful, but they're still driven
by fantasy. They're still driven, but there's a lot of
anger threaded in that fantasy.

Speaker 4 (38:41):
And I have a question in the same sort of lane.
In speaking, we've all been doing a bunch of work
on the topic of in cells, and in speaking with
sort of some prosecutors, something that they pointed out was
a a quicker as escalation time, whereas in the past,

(39:03):
like people instead of simmering for you know, days, weeks, years,
it's it's just very quickly that people seem to escalate
to violence.

Speaker 2 (39:13):
And then also.

Speaker 4 (39:15):
That a lot of the sort of the lone wolf,
they don't seem to care if they're caught in fact,
they want to go down in a blaze of glory.

Speaker 2 (39:24):
And I don't know if that's because they.

Speaker 3 (39:26):
If they're mission driven, as some of the in cells
have been. Yeah, they you're right. They want to be
out there because they think they're going to inspire a
lot more of the same. Turns out they're wrong because
they don't do that. They think they're going to be
part of some big revolution and it's mission driven. So

(39:49):
that's why they don't care if they're caught, because they
think it's all part of the package.

Speaker 2 (39:55):
Which is so interesting even for law enforcement because even
speaking of in cells, it's also so hard to monitor
a lone wolf online, right, so we're not even seeing
big groupings or clusters or protesters or sort of behaviors
that can be tracked. You know, it becomes a little
bit more innocuous. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (40:11):
I mean, it's one thing to sit around in a
chat room and grouse about this and that, and it's
another thing to get yourself prepared to go do you know,
go on some school campus or movie theater instead of
shooting people.

Speaker 5 (40:23):
Exactly right, But if you're the kind of person that
we're talking about, like maybe that gets amped up quickly
or has all this anger built up. Those people contributing
in those chat rooms are just kind of like amping
that person up right.

Speaker 3 (40:38):
It almostication, giving them afication, right, And this really does
go back into their childhoods quite often. Again, I go
back to humiliation being understudied because they have felt humiliated
and now they have a frame for it, and they
have other people saying, oh, yeah, I know exactly. That

(40:59):
feels like an here's what you should do about it.
And some of them are vulnerable enough to think that
they should do something and feel absolutely justified in doing it.

Speaker 2 (41:10):
Yeah, so's it's so scary. But again, I think the
more we talk about or learn about it, it really
does sort of I don't want to I don't know
what the word is to use exactly. It's not compartmentalized,
but it's sort of I like your analogy of just
being able to let the phenomenon take place, or you know,
like a wave, you can't really predict any of it.

(41:32):
You have to kind of go with that flow and
accept things for how they are.

Speaker 3 (41:37):
Yeah, I mean, if you were to look at the
interrogation of Manassian, for example, Alec Nassian in Canada, who
is following Elliott Roger, you know, Saint Elliott Roger, supreme gentleman.
And so he takes this vehicle and rams it into
people and thinking he's justified, and watching his interrogation, how

(42:02):
confused you is that people don't understand why this is
the right thing to have done, and that he's sure
it's going to be followed with other people doing it
all over the place. So you can just see that
this is a vulnerable mind who got filled with you know,
what other people thought he should do, and then he
took it and did something with it, and now he's

(42:24):
going to spend his life in prison wondering what happened.

Speaker 2 (42:28):
What went wrong? I mean, you know I would even
go so far. I know this is a single killing,
allegedly allegedly alleged, even with Luigi Manngion, for example, you
know that was purpose based, right, if in fact what
accused of and if that manifesto was meaningful, Like, what
impact does the purpose actually have when all is said
and done, And what a strange feeling that must be

(42:48):
today as you're really facing the music. Is there any
advice or anything just as a human being in the world.
You know, you mentioned philosophy and your study of and
obviously forensics and criminology. Is there any advice you have
for us just to kind of navigate the world in
the best way and safest way possible question, Doctor Catherine.

Speaker 3 (43:14):
I'm not the right person. I rode a motorcycle crossic
country without knowing how to ride.

Speaker 2 (43:20):
No, it's okay. I just out of an airplane or two,
and I found myself in some sticky situations. So that
is a very human experience. That just shows that you
play all in.

Speaker 3 (43:29):
I think you watch your back, you careful of who
you allow to approach you, who you open your door to,
who I don't know. It's hard to generalize it is.
I have to see what your specific situation is like
if I entered your home, I'd be able to say

(43:50):
you should do this or that.

Speaker 2 (43:51):
But it's too hard to gig very safe us assured.
But you know, just as we navigate.

Speaker 3 (43:57):
Or even just the problem is if people are good
at seeming normal, you're not going to spot right our issues.
You're not going to spot what they're thinking. And if
they target you, they're going to be very careful to
make sure you don't suspect until too late.

Speaker 2 (44:13):
Yeah, that's so fair.

Speaker 6 (44:15):
It's so so fair, it's so scary.

Speaker 5 (44:17):
Doctor Katherine Ramslin, thank you so much for spending this
hour with us. Your insight is incredible and invaluable, and
I know that I'm going to take it to heart
moving forward for listeners who want more. Her newest book,
You Can't Hide, is out now and it's a fascinating
look at the psychology behind defenders. We're so grateful you
have joined us tonight. Thank you so so much from

(44:38):
all of us. We admire you, thank you, definitely marry.

Speaker 6 (44:41):
You, and we referenced your work quite often.

Speaker 2 (44:44):
Thank you.

Speaker 5 (44:45):
Coming up, forensic expert Joseph Scott Morgan breaks down the
latest in the Luigi case and what investigators are uncovering
in the David investigation into the death of the fourteen
year old celest three us Fernandez.

Speaker 2 (45:08):
Welcome back to True Crime tonight on iHeartRadio. We're talking
true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Leidecker here with
Courtney Armstrong. We have Taha in the control room and
Joseph Scott Morgan, our very favorite forensics expert, also the
host of the hit podcast body Bags, is here to
break down some of the cases that we've been covering

(45:29):
throughout the week from a forensic standpoint, Joseph, there has
been so many times in the last five days that
we've said, why didn't we ask Joseph that? Why did
we ask Joseph that? So we've kind of been stacking
in a few different categories. Obviously, one of the cases
that we've been following so closely has been this Brian
Walsh case. He's the accused wife killer who is now

(45:50):
standing trial of his wife Anna. Very wild week in court,
but at its core, it seems as though he's basically saying, look,
she died of something unexpected, an unexpected death, and I
knew she was dead because she tipped over when I
touched her and rolled off the bed trigger alert. This

(46:10):
is a little heroin. And then I panicked, and I
didn't want my children to have to face the reality
that their mother was gone. So he took it upon himself,
which he's now admitted to, to dismember her body and
take versions of those body parts and place them all
around his area, including in a dumpster allegedly close to

(46:34):
his mother's house. That's all I got. Cork can give
us a little bit more on the case specifics, but
what the we have to talk about this, Joseph.

Speaker 4 (46:43):
We do have so many questions and just to get
a lay of the land. So the murder trial of
accused Massachusetts's wife killer Brian Walsh has continued this entire
past week. Jurors now have seen gruesome forensic evidence. It's
been pulled from a trash facilla as well as the
family volvo. This includes, I mean, it is quite a list.

(47:06):
It includes a blood stained clothing, a tievek suit, tools,
pieces of a rug and all of this while a
state please crime lab scientists walks them through how each
of those items were documented and what they might say
about the disappearance as well as the presumed killing of

(47:26):
Anna Walsh, who is of course accused murderer Brian Walsh's
now deceased wife. So alongside that, there's been digital forensic
experts that have laid out Brian's extensive online searches about
body disposal, decomposition and cleaning DNA. But what do you
think should we start with the physical forensics such as

(47:50):
the what Joseph, what are the thoughts about the tiek suit,
the goggles, the cutting tools, bloody rug pieces.

Speaker 8 (48:00):
Thanks for having me tonight, guys with you. Oh, I
love you guys. Y'all are the best. You know what
it says to me because so many of these memberment
cases that I cover, either on my podcast or on
national news platforms, they're always so incredibly disorganized. This guy
had a plan, and I cannot tell you. I think

(48:23):
that probably out of all of the cases that I
have covered relative to dismemberment, this is the first one
where a taiebek suit has been involved.

Speaker 2 (48:32):
Wow.

Speaker 8 (48:33):
Yeah, And you know that's something for those that don't know.
You know, that's something in forensics that we wear and
we kind of a little aside. We refer to them
as bunny suits. And if you've never been in one,
they you lose about five pounds of waterway, you know,
when you're working in one of these things. So he's

(48:54):
gotten his hands on one of these things as preparation
because he understands something very from an elemental level about forensics.
You begin to think about transfer, transfer of any kind
of biological evidence, you know, like on either his clothing
that he has or on his person, you know, just

(49:15):
the bare skin. He was thinking about that also goggles.
I find that interesting because goggles most of the time
when we work in the lab. I know, just in
my morgue that I have at my university, I and
my kids where eye protection do you know why? Because
there's a splash factor involved. Anything can transfer into your eyes.

(49:38):
Had he thought that far ahead? You know? And so
that brings us to whatever tools that they may have recovered,
the utility of those tools, how was he going to
be used in them? Because he's he's obviously thinking about
this transferring onto his person, not just his clothing, but
back into his face. That's amazing to me because when

(50:00):
you begin to think about premeditative events, this is a hallmark.
You know, this is a hallmark here is.

Speaker 2 (50:07):
It possible at this point once a body is dismembered
as he's claiming he did. This is Brian Welsh the husband,
because there's a couple of exacerbating factors here when there's
nobody right so you know, to this moment on his
body has not been found. He's admitting that he dismembered
it out of panic. He did not kill her, in
his opinion, but rather disposed of her. There's no universe

(50:31):
now if in fact, Anna, may she rest in peace,
has in fact been dismembered we're never getting the body right,
so this becomes some kind of a version of do
people believe him or not? You know, if it's hard
to get convictions without a body, we thought it was
incredible that somebody would have the nerve to say I

(50:53):
had nothing to do with her murder, yet I dismembered
her body. And then yet even this week, we've heard
audio tapes of him leading messages for the person that
she was allegedly seeing, and how calm and cool he
was in the days thereafter. After an event like this,
it's impossible to believe. But without a body, is it

(51:15):
possible that he might only get a couple of years?
Because the parts are so just different.

Speaker 8 (51:21):
It's very, very difficult. There's a Latin term that I
love that the courts use is corpus delecti. Many people
have heard that term, and it means body of the crime.
Sometimes I will use it in conversation relative to human remains,
because absent the corpus delecti, the body and the body
is the evidence here, right. I'm not trying to be

(51:41):
disrespectful by saying that, but it is the core element
of this case, because they're in live essential elements. First, off,
we have to think about the cod the cause of death.
You know, how exactly did she die? One fascinating aspect
of this and I found this when defense opened. They

(52:02):
actually implied, they implied at least that she had died
as a result of something that's referred to in some
circles as sudden adult death syndrome or and you've heard
of SIDS. So what they're implying is this healthy. She
appears to be the picture of health, just suddenly drops
over graveyard debt and he happens to be there, and

(52:25):
he's trying to save his children, the horror of all
of this. So we cannot there's no way to prove
that because we can't examine the remains. You know, we'd
look at the brain, we'd look at the lungs, we'd
look at the heart, all of those sorts of little
things there that's gone. And the other part of this
is the evidence that's left behind that connects the tools

(52:48):
that he used on her body. Okay, so again this
is very graphic, and I'll try to be gentle with this,
But when you think about if folks at home will
think about taking a traditional carpenter saw and sawing a
piece of lumber many times, and I know a lot
of people have experiences. Have you ever started sawing a

(53:10):
piece of wood and all of a sudden it jumps
out of the groove and you have to start over again.
Did you know that that happens in dismemberment? And so
every time that metallic body touches that surface, that firm surface,
it leaves a mark. It leads a mark that is
unique to a specific tool. So absent the body, we

(53:34):
had nothing to compare it to. All we have is
this memory of this woman. We have his statement where
he says that she was in fact dead, but scientifically,
how did she come to her end? And that's the
crux of this whole thing, you know, was she strangled?
Did she have a massive heart attack? Did a meteor
fall out of the sky and strike her in the head?

(53:55):
I don't know, But absent the corpus DELECTI be a
question that will remain unanswered unless you know, like manner
from Heaven, knowledge falls in the midst of us all
of a.

Speaker 9 (54:06):
Sudden, Brian, he's claiming that she died of sudden unexplained death,
which I've never heard that term before. Are you familiar
with that, and then.

Speaker 2 (54:16):
I think you've answered some of this.

Speaker 9 (54:17):
But is there a world where something like that, like,
is there enough of a body part left where we
can figure out whether or not she did die.

Speaker 6 (54:25):
Of this unusual debth?

Speaker 2 (54:28):
No, that's not even a thing like Joseph, I have
to assume. I'm just going to jump in for one second.
There is no way that that is an actual term.
It's literally that's an equivalent of me saying, oh my goodness,
the person I love they just died of the I
don't know what disease that's commonly seen in this part
of the land.

Speaker 8 (54:48):
No, let me pause you there. I used to work
with an old pathologist and he and there were cases
I worked with him, and he was one of these
kind of country old country docs, and he used to say,
God called, and there are these cases where there's some
kind of pathological process that takes place that you still

(55:10):
can't discover, you know, and you're left scratching your head
and oh, by the bye. You have to understand that
cardio respiratory arrest is not a cause of death. A
lot of people will sign death certificates that way. That's
not a cause of death. That's a mechanism. There's a
causal factor that underpins all this. But yes, there is

(55:31):
in fact a world where a sudden adult death syndrome
does happen and there's no explanation, just like precious little
babies that Dove SAIDs.

Speaker 2 (55:40):
And by the way, we wouldn't be able to buy
the bye. You're my favorite when you say that, you're
the only person that I say by the bye with.
But by the bye, by the bye, it's unprovable, right,
so it just leaving doubt at the bare minimum. This
guy's you know, this guy's a fraud of an art dealer.
He certainly isn't a medical examiner or a physician to
be able to make that distinction. Why wouldn't he call

(56:01):
nine to one one?

Speaker 8 (56:03):
You know, I got to tell you I'm a cynic,
as you guys know, I try to be a happy cynic. However,
I got to tell you somebody did some reading prior
to preparing this opening statement. Okay, because now the cat's
out of the bag. You've unleashed this thing into the court.
It's in the record now. The people that are trying
the case have heard it. The people that are hearing

(56:25):
the case have heard it. So that little kernel is
planted in their brain. What's going to be very interesting
from a defense standpoint. Are they going to put up
a cardiopulmonary position that will come in or maybe their
own pathologists that we'll talk about sudden adult death syndrome,
for instance, Is it possible, doctor, that someone can suddenly die?

(56:48):
You see, now you've shifted, You've created that doubt, and
now you're just now he becomes a sympathetic character. He
didn't want to injure his kids. He didn't want to
scar the many further. So he dismembers, Mom, I don't know.
It's beyond the pail. As far as I'm concerned.

Speaker 2 (57:07):
It's beyond the bail.

Speaker 4 (57:08):
And this has been in my crawl all week long,
and now I'm so glad we got to speak with you.
We spoke to a legal expert earlier this week because
it seems so egregious. But listen, this is true crime tonight,
and we are lucky enough to be here with forensic
expert Joseph Scott Morgan. We're talking about Acquys, Massachusetts wife
killer Brian Walsh. If you have any thoughts, particularly about

(57:31):
the alleged sudden, unexplained death let us know, hit us
up on the talkbacks on the iHeartRadio app. So, Joseph,
we were talking earlier about not just the fact that
Brian Walsh purchased goggles, he also went so far as
to purchase booties so foot productive wear as well. And

(57:53):
I just wanted to lay out so we have the information.
The tools that he brought include a hammer, a hatchet,
a hacksaw, shears, wire, snaps and hate.

Speaker 2 (58:08):
It's like it is, It's just like a Long Island
serial killer list, like this is that is a real
horrifying scary list. And according to your point, murder a
murder kit, a murder kit, seeing it laid out as
evidence on the white sheet, and when you see it
laid out that way or like this, this is what
you see in the scariest movie you've ever watched.

Speaker 8 (58:28):
Yeah, it is. And I'm thinking about utility here. I'm
wondering what made him Why did he think that he
needed non powered tools. I'll put it to you that way,
because it's far more efficient to use something like a
skill saw or saws. All that that you see with
the the agitating blade goes back and forth, you know,
and you'll cut you know, sheet rock out with it,

(58:49):
and you use all kinds of things. Ten snips are
very interesting, sheet metal shears, those sorts of things. He
knows that there's work to be done, and you know,
he doesn't occupy the same space that myself and colleagues
such as myself understand. You go into the morgue and
we have a very specific set of tools that we use.

(59:10):
I'm not channeling Liam Neeson there by the way. There
there is a specific set of tools that we use
that we've learned to use for you know, a couple
of centuries now, and they all have utility, and they
make clean cuts. You're talking about y'all, y'all have talking
about a hacket here. Just let that sink in just

(59:31):
for a second. Okay, this, Yes, it's a sharp, forced tool,
but there's also a blunting effect with this, so you've
got crushing that's going on as well. Does he have
any kind of history of butchery. That's that's a question
that's been asked for years and years about cases. Even
you know, if you go back to Jack the Ripper,
you know that people talk about, well, he may have

(59:52):
been a surgeon or a barber, and these sorts of
things understanding human anatomy. Again, this circling back, this brings
us to this idea of preparation. And if that doesn't
send a chill up your spine and everyone that's listening
and following this case, I really don't know what would.

Speaker 3 (01:00:14):
Well.

Speaker 4 (01:00:14):
A chill has certainly gone up my spine. Thank you
very much for breaking that down with your expertise.

Speaker 2 (01:00:20):
We appreciate it so much.

Speaker 4 (01:00:21):
And listen, stick around because forensic expert Joseph Scott Morgan
will be with us and we're going to be digging
into the forensics, into the David the Pop Star and
seles reevs.

Speaker 2 (01:00:32):
Henrandez case. True Crime Tonight. Welcome back to True Crime
Tonight on iHeartRadio. We've been talking true crime all the time.
I'm Stephanie Leidecker here with Courtney Armstrong. Listen, we have

(01:00:54):
Taha stepping in to the microphone straight from the control room.
And as always on Sunday nights, we have our most
favorite forensics expert, Joseph Scott Morgan hosted a hit Bodybags podcast.
If you haven't listened, you have to listen. He has
three episodes a week and again, the way you break
down forensics Joseph is clearly like no other. We've been

(01:01:17):
talking about the Brian Walsh accused wife killer case and
we've gotten some dms and some questions, and I know
Courtney has some burning ones still too, So why don't
we just jam through as many forensics questions as we can?

Speaker 4 (01:01:32):
So just a little bit more information that came out
and trial that we'd love clarity on from you. So
things in addition to the tools we talked about and
the tie thatc protective clothing, things such as hydrogen peroxide, sponges,
wipes and other cleaning related materials came up. So this

(01:01:52):
is also in addition to some digital forensics which talks
about Google searches about not only the best way to
dispose of a body, but how long DNA lasts, whether
you can identify someone from partial remains, and what cleaners
will remove DNA from wood floors, what information sticks in

(01:02:13):
your medical mind that we don't know.

Speaker 8 (01:02:15):
Well, I'll put it to you this way. We're recovering
DNA all human remains that have been dead for a
thousand years now. So no, no, you can't if you
find human remains. Now, the question is how viable is it?

Speaker 2 (01:02:29):
All?

Speaker 8 (01:02:29):
Right? So let's just say that we recover are they
not we I don't have to do it anymore. I
just get to talk about it. That's the best thing.
Let's just say that we recover a dental element like
a tooth, I compare teeth. Okay, this is why I
do it.

Speaker 5 (01:02:45):
Now.

Speaker 8 (01:02:45):
This is kind of a little mini crime lab. If
you think about bones, all right, bones are a leather
breadcase for carrying and transporting DNA information and it's beautiful,
it works very very well. Okay, Teeth are like a
titanium briefcase for carrying DNA. So because they're self contained,

(01:03:07):
teeth are not bone. So let's just say, for grins
and giggles that we recover a tooth. And we're just
talking a tooth. That's not necessarily going to point you
in the direction of a cause of death. However, it
is an element that could lead to that could lead
to an identification. Okay, not to mention if you had

(01:03:28):
a tooth. If we continue this logic, this train of logic,
we think about any kind of restorations that are done
on the toos. What was she known to have cavity
that was filled or partial? Or was there crown or
anything you know that might end up that way. She's
been gone some time now, and i'd actually I think
it leads and forgive me, I don't know if I'm

(01:03:50):
completely accurate, but I had heard about this idea of
placing remains in trash cans and they may have been
conveyed somewhere. I'm thinking landfill. Landfills are horror shows for
recovery of remains. I've had to do it a couple
of times. It's something that it would be on my

(01:04:10):
top ten list of things I would not want to
repeat in my life because it's an absolute nightmare. That
is what referred to as an aerobic environment. You have
anaerobic and aerobic think about aerobics doing oxygen, I mean
doing exercise, You're driving oxygen in that oxygenated environment. At
a molecular level, everything is in a state of cay

(01:04:33):
so it breaks down very very difficult, even if you can
find it and it's compacted. The question is where all
of her remains disposed of in that manner. It seems
rather convenient, you know, in order to do it, and
we've covered a lot of cases over the years where
that has in fact happened and remains are not always
found because you will have people that will say yeah,

(01:04:53):
you know, they roll over and say, yeah, you know,
I disposed of the remains in a trash can. The
trans trash can was conveyed. We could do an entire
dissertation on how landfills work because it's incredible, I mean,
the volume that they have to deal with. Then we
think about these other elements that are left behind. I
think it scenes. You know you had mentioned about cleaning supplies. Yeah,

(01:05:16):
they work to a certain degree. But when you get
these agents like blue Star and of course famously luminol
that's reactive with blood and it only lasts for a second.
By the way, I think people think that it will
just say there forever and ever and glow. It doesn't.
You have to have your camera ready and the lights
are off when you snap that image because it fades.

Speaker 2 (01:05:38):
You can what you put in like a black and
white photo. I'm imagining that it takes the crime scene
blood and it illuminates it so you can see a
highlighter in a black room.

Speaker 8 (01:05:50):
It is and actually it's got kind of grotesque, I know,
but it's got kind of a lovely glow to it.
It's it's almost a blue illuminescence, if you will, And
it's striking when you see it, and dependent upon the
dynamics of the deposition, you can see patterns. You can
see footprints, you can see arterial spray, you can see

(01:06:12):
swipes and wipes, Okay, like if somebody's trying to clean up.
You'll see if you guys have if anyone at home
has ever had like they've used a mop, like an
old string mob that's filthy, okay, And you're trying to
clean your floors and you look down the floor and
it's like, oh my god, it's like a mud hole
on my floor now because mop is filthy. It actually

(01:06:34):
looks that way many times the mop strings do. And
you'll see that in smears where people have gone over
and tried to clean it. It doesn't completely eradicate it. However,
the more chemicals you apply to it, it degrades it.
And the further out in time you go, how much
more so, So you're talking about things like potentially bleached
hydrogen peroxide, and there are other agents, and on a

(01:06:56):
show like this, I'm not going to go into everything
I know, okay, to talk about eradication of evidence that
that wouldn't be cool. But I'm just I'm just saying
people always miss something. It's such a messy affair, and
most people that commit dismemberments don't understand that going in.
That's why you wind up with partial dismemberments because they

(01:07:18):
get in the middle of it and they're like they've
got one foot in the boat and one foot in
the water. They don't know what to do at that
point in time because it's an absolute nightmare.

Speaker 2 (01:07:26):
It is the absolute last place that a brain should
go too. I mean, of all of the options that
were on accused wife killer Brian Walsh's list or on
his menu, if you will, hey, call authorities, perhaps she
can be saved. And there's a medical reason that something
has happened. B call a loved one and then nine
one one in a medical authority because you're concerned that

(01:07:48):
your wife may have been you know, maybe she had
an aneurysm or something sudden has happened. That is petrifying
and it's so scary. The idea that you're now going
to say that your wife is never going to be
found for your children to put them at rest. The
idea in Joseph, you and I talk about this stuff offline,
so often the reach to go straight to dismemberment in

(01:08:12):
the human mind, I think is a really crucial piece
of the story. That is a leap that is not
that burying somebody in the ground is better, but of
all the no better things and all the scary, horrendous
things at this point, going there is even the scariest
of all things. And then he's so calm after.

Speaker 8 (01:08:34):
Yeah, And you know, there's multiple there's about five different
types of dismemberment that people are profiled on. Most people
don't know this, and I can't name all five of
them off of the top of my head, but one
of them, primarily is utility, and what you will get
is a dissection of all of the limbs. Okay, so

(01:08:57):
if we just think about taking appendages off of the body,
and that includes the head, both arms, and both legs,
and they never touch the torso, and that's that kind
of has a utility to it because they're trying to
compartmentalize a body in order for purposes of disposal. Then
you'll have people that just straight up desecrat or remain

(01:09:19):
and there's a lot of psychopathology that goes into that.
You know, you'll have people that's another group that are
souvenir takers, you know, those sorts of things. And there's
a whole litany of these things that people have studied
over the years. So you know, you begin to think
about this with him. It sounds it doesn't sound like

(01:09:42):
something that was done by an irrational person, all right,
because we have planning, you know that goes on with this,
a lot of planning. You know. I don't know. Listen,
I've been in my share of tie exsuits, y'all. I
ain't got one around the house. I don't want one
around the house, all right. It's something you have to
It's an active, active bit.

Speaker 6 (01:10:02):
You have to go track one down that's a crazy.

Speaker 10 (01:10:06):
One, you know.

Speaker 4 (01:10:07):
Let's all hope these pinous thoughts, uh, don't are the
first ones that dawn on us.

Speaker 2 (01:10:12):
As she points it out, Stephanie, in any situation.

Speaker 4 (01:10:15):
My goodness, this is true crime tonight, and we are
so happy to be here with forensic expert Joseph Scott
Morgan and he's been breaking down all the cases of
the week. We just finished up with some information on
accused wife killer Brian Walsh. We will stay with this
case as it evolves in the coming weeks. But now
I was thinking we turn our attention to the David

(01:10:39):
Celestiavius Hernandez case.

Speaker 2 (01:10:41):
If that works. Yeah, we have so many questions, Joseph.
Of course, do you want to give us a little
setup on that case? Absolutely so.

Speaker 4 (01:10:50):
Los Angeles County Criminal Grand Jury has heard evidence and
this is in regard to the death of fourteen year
old Celestriebus Hernandez. Her remains were found back in September eighth,
and it was in the front trunk of the tesla
that was registered to the pop Star David. While the
District Attorney's office continues presenting evidence in what's being described

(01:11:12):
in court filings as a quote investigation into murder, So
they're not saying murder yet, but in investigation to murder,
the LAPD is now publicly correcting gruesome rumors about both
the condition of Celestia Hernandez's body and stressing that key
forensic tests that include toxicology as well as autopsy work

(01:11:37):
are still pending.

Speaker 2 (01:11:40):
So, Joseph, what what do.

Speaker 4 (01:11:44):
You make of all of this misinformation information? You know,
it's been people have said that or police now are
saying that selest remains were partially dismembered, that she was
not decapitated, and that a lot of the online rumors
simply aren't true. So do you learn anything from about

(01:12:06):
intent or planning?

Speaker 8 (01:12:09):
Yeah, you can. I mean, there's still utility to this.
You know. One of the biggest questions I've had with
this case. I love these many months now has it
been months? It has been months?

Speaker 2 (01:12:20):
Yeah?

Speaker 8 (01:12:21):
Oh my lord, yeah, yeah. So one of my questions
has been throughout this scene. First off, where would she
if there is a dismemberment? All right, I don't know
who to believe it to the point I really don't,
you know. I mean, because we've heard so much and

(01:12:42):
there have been quote unquote reliable sources all over the place.
And remember I said, quote unquote, but let's just run
with this and say that she was dismembered. Where exactly
did this dismemberment take place? I have thought for some
time that, because you know how I was talking about

(01:13:03):
typologies with dismemberments, you do have these individuals that fall
into a category of panic dismemberment, like, oh my lord,
what do I do? And it's almost like a you know,
in law, there's a term called in koheate, which means
you intend to do something, but you don't complete the deed,

(01:13:25):
and that can happen, I think in a case of
kind of panicked dismemberment. But still we do have the
word dismemberment floating around. Something has been separated from the remains. Okay,
we don't know which appendage, we don't know what degree.
Was it a foot? Singly a foot singularly a foot?
Was it an entire leg? Was it both legs? Was

(01:13:46):
an arm? They're saying she was not decapitated. I'm thinking,
what was? She partially dismembered somewhere in a panic, and
they have her remains stowed somewhere else in the house,
and she begins, forgive me to become very foul and intolerable,
that smell. They don't know what to do with her.

(01:14:08):
So is it at that point in time that the
remains are then kind of sequestered into the tesla? All right?
And still there? Then the tesla has moved around, you know,
because of the foul or no one trusts me. Once
you've been around it, you don't want to be around it,
particularly civilians. It's just not something anyone ever gets used

(01:14:28):
to and I've had those thoughts. There would be with
any dismemberment, there's generally a copious amount of biological evidence.

Speaker 2 (01:14:39):
I have a question about just the idea for being
frozen trigger alert. Going to keep it very graphic less
as clean as possible, But there have been reports, or
at least has been written that David the Pop Star
potentially traveled to hit in our room, so he traveled,
you know, there have been reports that David the Pop

(01:15:00):
Star travel to Santa Barbara, either by himself or with
one or two others undisclosed information there. The assertion is
that perhaps she was dismembered there and in order to
contain the odor that would be months after her you know,
this would go so long beyond you know how that

(01:15:20):
would be tolerable to quote you that maybe that's why
she was frozen and frozen for as long as could be.
And then once that seemed like not a good idea,
they took her frozen remains and put that in the front,
which would kind of check both boxes that's happening between
the medical examiner and the LAPD, which is maybe there

(01:15:42):
were in fact some soaked fingerprints. Maybe that did really
maybe that was the reason that her body didn't have
the same odor that you're describing for as long as
as long as she was allegedly in there. I know
the timeline is still a work in progress and evolving.
Does that track what it freezing human remain? Actually maybe
we answer this right after the break. But with that,

(01:16:05):
here's what you gotta think about, Joseph. The question is
wood freezing remains actually prevent the odor from being that noticeable?
And does that match the potential timeline in celest revis
her name Issus case. And by the way, we're going
to be right back true Crime Tonight. Stick with us.

(01:16:34):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight on iHeartRadio. We've been
talking true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie here with Courtney.
We have Taha in the control room, and of course
you're joined by forensics expert Joseph Scott Morgan, our very
own and also he's the host of body Bags, the
hit podcast. Please check it out. We are knee deep
in all things David the pop star and the case

(01:16:57):
of fourteen year old Celeste Revus her name as the
question being, there's been a lot of back and forth
in speculation that perhaps her body was frozen or water
logged upon being found. And is it possible that if
your body is in fact frozen, that decomp would slow
or the odor would slow, which would explain why she

(01:17:20):
wasn't identified in the car sooner?

Speaker 8 (01:17:23):
Yes, yes, and yes. Okay, However, let's go to the
water logging thing. I want to dispel this really quickly.
There's something that happens. I think fingerprints came up at
one point in time about identification. There's a process that
happens with decomposing remains. When we begin to think about fingers.
If folks will just think about being in the pool.

(01:17:43):
You remember, Mamma used to look at you. You'd say,
let me see your fingers, and back in the day,
that was an indication you've been in a pool too long.
So your fingers get pruned up, right. Well, that happens
with the decomposing dead. And one of the things that
we do in order to lift a print is that
we inject fingertips with what's called tissue builder, and it
literally makes the fingertips swell. Okay, so we can roll

(01:18:07):
a print that's not indicative of water logging. That's a
natural process. So let's just get that off the table
from Jump Street. Now, if you want to talk about freezing,
here's something interesting that we've never talked about on True
Crime tonight, and that is histology. And histology is the
microscopic study of tissues. Now, let me ask you guys

(01:18:30):
a little quizzlet here. Heat. Heat makes things do what
melan span right? Hot air expands, you know those sorts
of things. Heat will cost pavement to crack all that.
So if heat does that, what does coal do makes
it tracked? Right? So if when you look at the tissues,

(01:18:53):
and I'm not going to go too deep into this,
but when you look at the tissues microscopically, even the
decomposing tissues in a body that has been frozen, you'll
actually see these little spaces and gaps at a cellular
level where the tissue has contracted down and it doesn't
go back. There's no elasticity to make it pop back

(01:19:15):
any longer. Isn't that kind of cool? So that's something
that can be either debunked or verified microscopically. You know,
with La County and if this is on the table,
those people are pretty dog on bride out there. I
can imagine that the histo service there at La County

(01:19:38):
Corner would have done this. You take samples on every case,
all right, but in this particular case they will take them,
and that leads us into another area because everybody is
right now and rightly so it is begging to find
out about toxicology. Okay. So generally with toxicology on a

(01:19:58):
standard autopsy, what we lean on is what we call
aortic blood. We go into the A order, which is
the major vessel coming off the heart, and you draw
the blood from there. Uh. We take Victor's fluid from
the eyes, we take urine, uh, and we take bile. Okay,

(01:20:19):
but in a case, and what were the date again
that they've moved us dates further back in time. I
think April or something like that. Bat spring, right, So
it's so convoluted, it's we know it's a protracted period
of time.

Speaker 9 (01:20:35):
I think her remains were found or I know her
remains were found in September eighth.

Speaker 2 (01:20:39):
Is that what you're referring to?

Speaker 4 (01:20:40):
No, I think I think Joseph, you're referring to should
this trip to Santa Barbara, which has been spoken about
quite a bit, that much has been made of it,
we don't know exactly what but that happened back in
the spring. It didn't designate exactly March April May.

Speaker 2 (01:20:57):
That backs it up.

Speaker 4 (01:20:58):
And then also according to the private investigator Steve Fisher,
he helped on the timeline a little bit as well,
and what he said was that the tesla sat in
different spots around the Hollywood of Hills before being left
on Bluebird Bluebird Avenue on July twenty ninth. So that

(01:21:20):
of course is already July twenty ninth to September eighth.

Speaker 6 (01:21:24):
That's a long time, and it is.

Speaker 8 (01:21:26):
A very long time, particularly in that sweltering Los Angeles
heat was right, it was particularly hot. I know, I'm
preaching the choir guy, it's particularly hot summer for you guys.

Speaker 2 (01:21:36):
And I just think it's impossible that that would have
gone so long. Just having worked with you for as
long as I have, Joseph, it just seems like that
wouldn't fly unless there was another exacerbating condition, maybe like
freezing or something.

Speaker 8 (01:21:50):
Well, that kind of leads me to this idea of
how are we going to get the talks? Okay, now, okay,
let's just give me a little rope here, all right.
So there are certain areas with decomposing remains that we
go to to try to at least get not a

(01:22:11):
quantitative amount, because you can't do it, y'all. You can't
apply a number to it because in our world we
work on things that are called therapeutic levels. Even heroin
has got a therapeutic level if you look in the text. Okay,
that means it's still compatible with LFE. If you've got
this on board, and drugs have half lives and all
that stuff. We can get into that another day if

(01:22:31):
we do a thing on toxicology, however, with yeah, we
should with this case if her remains are as compromised
as they are saying they are. Here's the regions we're
going to go to at the morgue. We're going to
go to major muscle groups. Okay, so think by all right,
like the quads. You go deep into the quads, you

(01:22:55):
try to retrieve a sample of muscle tissue. From there,
you go to the brain. Okay again, forgive me what's
left of the brain. Now, surprisingly one of the most
resilient organs and by the way, the filthiest organ in
the human body deliver You go to the liver, liver
holes onto toxins, Okay, we go there and they are

(01:23:18):
a couple of other areas, but those are going to
be the primary reading. What do we do with it? Well,
we take those samples and we put them in a centrifuge.
Everybody knows what a centriuge is. You've ever been to
a fair and you've been in the thing that goes
around around the floor falls out. That's a centrifuge, all right,
So we put these samples in a centrifuge and literally

(01:23:39):
spin them down until they're liquefied. Then we draw them
up and we submit it for toxicology. Now, you can
find major drug groups in there. You can find opiates,
you can find benzos, you can find cocaine, metabolite. I
don't know if you can find THCHC. But you can
find all of these elements. But still, one of the
big nagging questions with the young woman's death, let me

(01:24:03):
rephrase that and say, girl, is was this a drug
related thing? Well, y'all, I got to tell you you'll
never have that answer. You're not going to be and
I hope I'm wrong. I truly hope I'm proven wrong.
I can't imagine you would have a quantitative amount because
if we have blood, urine, vitreous, bile, all those things
that we do on a regular fresh, freshly passed away person,

(01:24:26):
we can get those levels. We can nail it, man.

Speaker 6 (01:24:28):
But you're talking about y'all.

Speaker 8 (01:24:29):
Y'all have talked about months, man, and if it was
a poisoning, there are certain things we can look for
in the hair. But you know, we're really kind of
out on a limb there because you're talking about things
like heavy metals and all those sorts of things. So
I don't I don't have a lot of hope for
talks here that that was.

Speaker 2 (01:24:48):
Going to say. That was my big question. It was
in terms of the timeline, even with our hair follicles.
I know we've done many cases together where it's very
simple to be able to find a full toxicology very
clearly regardless of time I'm in this case, it seems
like it's gone well beyond the scope or timeline that
it typically would to get a toxicology back. I think

(01:25:08):
we've theorized, theorized by the way, this is a theory
theory theory, not so allegedly. Maybe there was an incident
where Celeste odeed in some way or was slipped a
drug and odeed from that, and then everybody in the
house panicked, not so similarly to the last case we covered,
and in that moment of panic, this is what the
next solution becomes to prevent the music tour from being

(01:25:33):
interrupted or for preventing, you know, my buddy David to
come down in flames. Maybe he had nothing to do
with it, but it's is it true that at this point,
based on sort of what little we know about Celeste's body,
that we might actually never know the answer to that?
And is that why there maybe hasn't been an arrest made.

Speaker 8 (01:25:53):
Yeah, I think that that could be be part of
the hold up. It's always it almost feels like a
in my experience, and I'm just talking about my little
selic supple, y'all. I don't encompass the entire world. Everybody
has different experiences in the medical legal world. It always
kind of felt like fools there. And when I'd get
these bodies that are so in an advanced state of decomposition,

(01:26:16):
You're holding your breath, You're hoping you're going to get it,
and stuff never comes back in a timely fashion. Stuff
rarely comes back and obtain what we think a timely
fashion in the fresh dead. How much more so when
you've got somebody that's been down for a protracted period
of time. I think I would be very curious if
the authorities in LA have not asked Quantico to get

(01:26:36):
involved in this and take advantage of their skill set
that they have because they deal with cases from all
over the USA, they deal with cases.

Speaker 2 (01:26:46):
All over the world.

Speaker 8 (01:26:47):
If the FBI is involved in it, and look the California,
California has quite the resources out there, I just I
just don't know, because first off, we ain't heard peep
out of them. I don't anticipate here anything out of them, really,
anything of substance. You know what I'm saying.

Speaker 2 (01:27:07):
This is true crime.

Speaker 10 (01:27:08):
Tonight, we are here with Joseph Scott Morgan, forensic expert extraordinaire,
and we are discussing the case involving the pop star
David and the fourteen year old remains of celest Revas Hernandez.

Speaker 4 (01:27:21):
So, speaking back on the Medical Examiner's office, Joseph, there's
been this kind of interesting and public back and forth
between the police and the Medical Examiner's office. So, speaking
to a legal expert earlier this week, his take was.

Speaker 2 (01:27:42):
We said, is this unusual?

Speaker 4 (01:27:44):
He said yes, especially to publicly air this dirty laundry
lack of a better word, and he.

Speaker 2 (01:27:49):
Said, kind of the prosecution to stick together.

Speaker 4 (01:27:52):
But in your experience, what would make the Medical Examiner's
office appear to want to provide information and officers want
it not to be released.

Speaker 8 (01:28:07):
Because they're scientists? I think is one of the elements
to this. They you know, we in science, we have
this this need to release information and you know, full
full view kind of things. Let's keep in mind, y'all.
Maybe they're working this like a homicide. Has anybody been
charged with homicide here? They still have yet to declear

(01:28:29):
this a homicide? Correct, So the font from which all
of the data should spring is actually the corner. You
see what I'm saying, because you know, if you don't
have enough information to call this a homicide, and I
know I'll get pushedback on this, but you just look
at it from a reality standpoint. Are the police involved

(01:28:52):
in this sense? Just think about it, because the police
do not make a ruling of a manner of death
or manner you know, one of the five manners. They're
the ones that and many times the medical legal world
will run contrary to what the police do. You know,
this happens a lot. I've been in not fights, but
you know what I'm saying, you go, it's a conflict model,

(01:29:14):
you know, kind of like court. We have our interests
are completely different than those of the cops. You know,
the cops have not moved forward with this as a
standard homicide investigation. They have to have something to hang
their proverbial hats on here, and to this point, apparently
the slash corner has not provided that. So right now

(01:29:38):
the ball is literally in the court of the coroner's office,
unless somebody associated with this young man rolls over and
has an epistomal moment, as we say down here in
the South, come to Jesus moment and wants to say,
you know, this is what happened. That ain't happening to

(01:29:59):
this point, I have it's seen it. I mean, maybe
it'll just shocking.

Speaker 2 (01:30:03):
It's shocking. It's shocking that either nobody is screaming from
the rooftops. Help there's an active killer out there who
took my you know, fan or friend, Celeste, you know,
Revis Ernandez's life. If I'm David the pop star, help
help help find the person who did this, Nor has
anybody turned on each other. And we've all been in

(01:30:24):
this for way too long. That's rare. Usually a couple
of months in somebody's looking at a lot of jail time,
they're feeling a little less cozy about who they're, you know,
taking a hit for dare I say? And we haven't
seen that yet, So this becomes one of those cases
that is so incredibly confusing.

Speaker 8 (01:30:43):
Yeah, there's no substante point of leverage here. And may
I harken back to the Pikedon massacre. Yes, we think
about that.

Speaker 2 (01:30:51):
They were at least related. They were related, which will
may be different than your friends that are you know,
your hanger on her crew that are partying at your
Hollywood Hills house for twenty thousand dollars a month. You
would think maybe one of them would turn coat.

Speaker 8 (01:31:08):
Yeah, but in Pikdin you had a point of pressure
there and apparently that doesn't exist at this point. At
least they're not showing their cards. I got to tell you, y'all,
I have yet cover caase like this where there has
been like a total shutdown of data that's been released.

Speaker 2 (01:31:27):
And listen, we have loved having you. I hate to
do the fastest wrap up ever, Joseph, but body for
sure wants to talk about the Luigi Mangione ghost gun.
So in the coming days we'll unpack that as well
and listen anyone listening, We hope you have a beautiful
start to the week. Here's to Monday, Let's do it.
Thank you for listening. We will be back with breaking

(01:31:47):
news tomorrow as well, so so much more of this
to come, Joseph Scott Morgan body Bags, make sure you
check it out. Thank you for listening to True Crime tonight.
Coritney Taha and I and Joseph, we love you and
we've loved spending the evening with you. We'll catch you tomorrow.
A

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Killer Psychology and Cold Truths: From BTK to the murder of Celeste Rivas

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

Killer Psychology and Cold Truths: From BTK to the murder of Celeste Rivas

Stuff You Should Know