Sheriff Nanos Under Fire, the Correspondents’ Dinner Attack, and the Aaron Hedges Mystery

Mounting pressure surrounds Sheriff Chris Nanos as perjury allegations head to the Arizona Attorney General amid growing frustration in the Nancy Guthrie investigation. We break down the latest in the White House Correspondents’ Dinner attack case, where the accused gunman is now pushing to remove top DOJ officials from the prosecution. Plus, investigative journalist Jordan Sillars joins us to discuss Blood Trails and the haunting disappearance of Montana hunter Aaron Hedges. 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. We're talking true
crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Leidecker here with Courtney
Armstrong and Body move in. Plus we have producer Ava
with us this evening. Taha had a different obligation, And
of course we have Sam and Adam waiting by the
control room. Now it's Thursday, everybody, and it's May fourteenth,

(00:40):
and we have a stack knight of headlines. So did
the sheriff fleeting the Nancy Guthrie investigation actually get ousted?
He has been highly controversial. Plus, the suspect in the
White House Correspondence dinner shooting has officially appeared in court
of Florida Police officers are actually suing Matt Daani Men
and Ben Affleck for defamation over their movie The Rip.

Speaker 3 (01:04):
It's out on Netflix.

Speaker 2 (01:05):
I don't know if you guys saw this, but there's
so much to unpack here. Plus we'll be joined by
the investigative journalist Jordan Sillers host of the podcast Blood Trails,
a true crime podcast series that explores the wilderness and
hunting culture. So he'll be joining us later in the show. Also,
you can catch that podcast on iHeart as well. Listen

(01:26):
if you want to jump in and join us live
eight eight eight three one Crime. We'd love to hear
from you, and we love the talkbacks.

Speaker 3 (01:33):
And the dms.

Speaker 2 (01:34):
We've gotten some of the nicest, funniest, coolest dms even
as recently as today.

Speaker 3 (01:40):
Lots of celebration over body's.

Speaker 2 (01:42):
Mom Mary, So please know that we're getting them and
we eat it up.

Speaker 3 (01:47):
So thank you, thank you, thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:49):
But first, this Nancy Guthrie investigation, So we remember the sheriff.
He was front and center, kind of calling all the
shots at the beginning of this tragedy as it began
to un and not everybody was super into how this
investigation was handled. And he's come under fire and today
was the day that he was going to find out
his fate body.

Speaker 3 (02:11):
Do you want to give us all the setup? Yeah, sure.

Speaker 4 (02:13):
It seems like a lot of people just don't have
confidence in the sheriff. So the Pima County Board of Supervisors,
they met on May twelfth, so just a couple of
days ago, and it served as a real big turning
point for the sheriff, Chris Nanos, whose department is currently
leading the investigation into the February first disappearance of eighty

(02:33):
four year old Nancy Guthrie.

Speaker 3 (02:35):
Remember she went missing.

Speaker 4 (02:36):
There was that really scary footage from the nest camera
potentially kidnapped. Right, she's the mother of Today Show host
Savannah Guthrie. And you know, this case has now surpassed
the one hundred day mark with zero breakthroughs, right that
we know of, Okay, nothing that we know of, And
it's also led to a one point two million dollar reward,

(03:00):
a lot of calls for the sheriff to hand the
investigation over to federal authorities.

Speaker 5 (03:06):
Right.

Speaker 4 (03:07):
Sheriff Nanos did manage to retain his position. The board's
decision to escalate perjury allegations, though to the state level,
means that his legal and political troubles are really far
from over. There were two things happening today or not
today the twelfth right, yes, so two distinct things. There
was a motion to oust Okay, and this was led

(03:30):
by Republican supervisor Steve Christy. He moved to declare the
sheriff's office vacant and replace the sheriff immediately. This motion
failed because nobody else seconded. So you know, they go,
they do a vote, and nobody said I seconded.

Speaker 3 (03:47):
Wow.

Speaker 6 (03:48):
I have to say, I feel like it's just at
this case itself is at a tipping point and somebody
needs to be blamed and it needs to happen publicly.
I am not saying Sheriff Chris Nanos is blameless and
that potentially the FEDS shouldn't take it over. I think
they should and should have a long time ago, but

(04:10):
this does feel kind.

Speaker 3 (04:11):
Of like speaking conn Yeah. Adding to that, just to
jump into her too. He was so likable.

Speaker 2 (04:19):
He really did get up there right when this all happened,
when tragedy struck and we finally had heard that eighty
four year old Nancy Guthrie had been abducted. He really
did become the frontman right. Some said he was a
bit more of a showman, but was he. I thought
he was very earnest, he presented well, he was very available,
he was giving updates. He was really encouraging the public

(04:40):
to help. Maybe the quintessential misstep was really over the
DNA or the blood testing that he didn't go through
the federal chain of command. I don't know, that's up
for conversation, but it's so easy to Monday morning quarterback.

Speaker 7 (04:54):
You know.

Speaker 2 (04:54):
It wasn't like this guy was out to lunch. He
was working day in, day out, twenty four hours a day.
Maybe not to the level, and maybe that's the bigger conversation,
but to be ousted that also seems well extreme, it does.

Speaker 4 (05:09):
And you know, I kind of agree though that, you know,
maybe the federal authority should take this over. However, a
counterpoint to that would be, where's the other people, the
other people that are missing?

Speaker 3 (05:18):
When do they take over those people? You know what
I mean?

Speaker 2 (05:21):
Like such a good point, do you know what I mean?
When picking and choosing. Yeah, not that we don't want
Nancy to come home safely.

Speaker 3 (05:27):
We do, of course, you know, looks silly to think that.
Can I ask a very basic you know question?

Speaker 2 (05:33):
And maybe any listeners who are joining us might have
some feedback on this as well.

Speaker 3 (05:37):
But the typical protocol would be if.

Speaker 2 (05:39):
Something like this happened, to God forbid, in our own
home or neighborhood and somebody was abducted, those first forty
eight hours obviously, as we know, are so significant.

Speaker 3 (05:48):
So you call the cops, The cops get involved.

Speaker 2 (05:50):
Those are the local authorities, the sheriff in this case,
they start, you know, air quotes, maybe sealing up the
scene or you know, up the crime scene, which I've
seen that go down so many times potentially here as well.
Is it standard that day one, Let's get the FEDS involved,
Let's get Cash Pateel to fly in on a helicopter

(06:13):
and fine Nancy Guthrie.

Speaker 3 (06:14):
That's not typically how it works, right.

Speaker 4 (06:17):
I think in some cases when there's evidence of a
kidnapping that you know, the FBI basically does handle kidnapping cases,
So when there is evidence of an actual kidnapping, then
I do believe the FBI would be called out. However,
Cash Pattel went on Sean Hannity's show, well, I think
last week or the week before he did, maybe it

(06:37):
was a week before, and he said that they weren't
called initially, but then the sheriff responded, I think like
the next day and said, wait a minute, no, there
was an FBI agent with us like immediately.

Speaker 3 (06:50):
So I don't know what is true.

Speaker 4 (06:52):
I'm just repeating what you know both authority people have said.

Speaker 3 (06:57):
So the sheriff is like, no, the FBI has been.

Speaker 4 (06:59):
Involved a whole time, they're not leading the investigation, that's
what they want. But and cash btel is basically saying
we were ousted.

Speaker 2 (07:07):
Yeah, you know from the gain and by the way,
but how do you get ousted if your cash battel
and the FBI isn't that well, you kind of caused
the ousting, not in reverse, like they're trumping the local authorities.

Speaker 5 (07:19):
Right.

Speaker 2 (07:20):
So to me, that just felt like a kind of
if the if the FBI wants to be involved, I
think they get to be involved.

Speaker 3 (07:27):
They don't. That's not the way it's that's not the
way it works.

Speaker 4 (07:29):
I mean, the state state's rights still supersede a lot
of things. But you know, if there's evidence that Nancy
Guthrie was taken out of the country, or there's evidence
that Nancy Guthrie was taken across state lines, then I
do believe the federal authorities would trump anything local. But
I don't know the evidence here. They haven't said and
I could be wrong about that too, Please keep that

(07:50):
in mind, but that's my unerful.

Speaker 8 (07:51):
Well.

Speaker 2 (07:51):
I bring this up because we face this we were
making our documentary. Courtney and I were working together on
this called a Murdered and Missing in Montana. It's based
on Native and American reservations, and you know, infamously Native
American reservations have specific jurisdiction of their own.

Speaker 3 (08:07):
So in missing cases that happen.

Speaker 2 (08:09):
On the reservation, of which there's so many, the FBI
is really the main governing principle there that overrides sovereign
land versus in this case that we're talking about, you know,
being in Montana or in this case with Nancy Guthrie
in you know, Arizona. So you know, I guess it's just,

(08:29):
you know, there's only so much manpower in the world.
It always struck me, though from a distance, maybe not
so dissimilar to any big event that people aren't expecting
or frankly prepared for. Maybe there's a lot of like
bumping into each other, you know, this is the big moment,
and who's on what, and there's panic in the air.
The level of media scrutiny I'm sure was not helping, right.

(08:50):
So now you have, you know, thousands of media feeds
showing up in front of her house, the house seemingly
had been compromised to some extent because it wasn't really
sealed off for long enough.

Speaker 3 (09:00):
I mean, that was such a big misstep. That was
pretty That was a misstep for sure.

Speaker 4 (09:06):
When Brian Inton was able to get on that front
porch and we saw the things that were left behind,
like they didn't even take the door. In my opinion,
I listen, I'm nobody, but they didn't even take the door.
There could have been you know, microscopic evidence left behind
that you know, was critical to this investigation, and it
just kind of seems like they just left everything.

Speaker 3 (09:27):
In my that's just my opinion. I could definitely be
wrong about that.

Speaker 6 (09:31):
It's a popular opinion that the crime scene was not
handled well at the beginning. If you are just joining us,
this is True Crime Tonight, We're on iHeartRadio. I'm Courtney Armstrong.
I am so happy to be spending this and every
Thursday with my buddies Body Moven and Stephanie Leidecker.

Speaker 3 (09:48):
And tonight we were joined by producer Ava.

Speaker 6 (09:51):
So we're talking about the fact that Sheriff Chris Nanios,
he's the guy who is heading up the Nancy Guthrie
case and there's been calls for him to hand that
over to the FEDS. If you have thoughts about that.
Let us know eight at eight to three one crime.
By the way, I was just doing a quick search,
and it seems like kidnapping became a federal crime all

(10:11):
the way back in nineteen thirty two after the Lindberg Windberg.

Speaker 2 (10:16):
Yeah, yeah, so kidnapapp Yeah, why wouldn't they have immediate jurisdiction?
So to me, that would just imply that the FBI
would in fact have governing principle.

Speaker 3 (10:26):
Well, immediately, they didn't.

Speaker 6 (10:29):
Immediately did Nancy Guthrie take a walk? Did Nancy Guthrie?

Speaker 3 (10:33):
Nobody knew, right, right, right?

Speaker 4 (10:36):
So I want to get into this other motion though,
because there were two things that happened on the twelfth, right,
the motion to oust, and that that didn't survive. So
there is no he's not ousted, okay, the sheriff. The
other one was there was this perjury referral and this
was brought by Democrat Rex Scott, and it moved refer

(10:57):
allegations of perjury against Sheriff Chris Nanos to the Arizona
Attorney General's office, and that passed for to zero with
Republican supervisor Steve Christy did not vote.

Speaker 3 (11:09):
He abstained it or abstained? Abstained? Is that a word? Abstained?
I think you said it correctly. But what are these
perjury allegations?

Speaker 9 (11:17):
Though?

Speaker 3 (11:17):
Right? Like, what do you mean perjury? Right?

Speaker 4 (11:20):
Well, there was a legal deposition at some point and
Sheriff Chris Nanos stated under oath that he had never
been suspended as a law enforcement officer. Okay, Well, digging
into his past, it seems that that's not true. There
were records from the l Paso Police Department where he
worked in the seventies and eighties, and it shows multiple

(11:41):
suspensions and a resignation in lieu of termination, and so
he basically lied, right, But Sheriff Christinanos and his attorney
argue that when his testimony was when he was giving
his testimony, he was referring specifically to his career in
arizon Zona, where he has a very clean disciplinary record,

(12:04):
and they claim that his emission of the Texas stuff
in Alpasso in his history there, it was just a
misunderstanding than a deliberate lie, Like he thought he was
just talking about Arizona.

Speaker 3 (12:15):
So I don't know where that's going to go, I
gotta say, I actually believe that.

Speaker 6 (12:19):
I mean, they're asking, sure what they're referencing now that
he was quote lying about and yeah, by the letter
of the law, he well, I don't know the question
actually if he thought that he was speaking only about
Arizona and this was in Texas, but this is forty
and fifty years ago. If someone asked me today, have
you been involved in corporate theft and then brought up

(12:39):
the fact that when I was eight years old, I
stole a piece of bubblegum, I would have left it
out innocent.

Speaker 3 (12:46):
It would have been innocently intended.

Speaker 4 (12:48):
But sure, so, yeah, you just said the seventies and
eighties were forty fifty years ago, and my brain did
like broke what Yeah, to me.

Speaker 3 (12:58):
Still it's like twenty years ago, and like does it?

Speaker 2 (13:01):
It's by the way, that makes less sense, you know.
Is that fair to start dredging up stuff from yesteryear
when we're basing things in the present moment.

Speaker 3 (13:10):
I can imagine, you know, And at the time.

Speaker 2 (13:12):
Too, they were thrown out all kinds of things that
had happened even in his career in maybe more recent times.
I mean, maybe that's fair game, But I think ultimately
you're looking at the totality of this investigation which hasn't
been solved, right, So not a great look if someone
has to go on a talk show and be called
to the carpet about why Nancy Guthrie has not been

(13:32):
brought home, even if it's her body alone. Savannah Guthrie
and her family deserve justice, as does anybody who is
a missing person.

Speaker 3 (13:40):
So that's the thing too.

Speaker 2 (13:41):
No matter how you say, whatever answer they give, it's
kind of a pointing out and pointing to and just saying, oh,
not me, not me, it must have been them, and
tell that's out Guthrie family.

Speaker 4 (13:53):
Right. And as I stated earlier, you know the FBI
director Cash Betel, he publicly accused the sheriff of side
lining the federal agents during those critical first days of
this investigation. But again the sheriff fired back and said
that's not true. And then this one's interesting. The county
accessor Susan Druby. She alleged this is crazy that the

(14:14):
sheriff scolded her for providing leads to the FBI, reportedly
because the extra leads created more work for his department.
I would like to see some evidence of that right,
because you can just say anything. But I would like
to see some evidence of that. So what happens next?
What happens next? Well, because the sheriff is an elected official,
the board of supervisors does have limited power to remove

(14:37):
him directly, right, they just can't fire the sheriff. The
state Attorney General's office is going to review those perjury allegations,
and as Supervisor Heinz noted, a criminal conviction for perjury
would legally force the sheriff out of office under Arizona law.
And it's important to note the Pima County sheriffs I'm sorry,
the Pma County Deputies Organization has already issued a unanimous

(15:01):
vote of no confidence for Sheriff Ris Nanos. So this
is not looking very good for the sheriff, right, And
it's really going to depend on the Attorney General at
this point. If the Attorney General goes, listen, this is
perjury on something that happened fifty years ago, when maybe
it was a misunderstanding.

Speaker 3 (15:17):
I don't know that he's going to get convicted.

Speaker 4 (15:19):
I don't know that they're going to want to waste
a time on it, right, we just waste of time?

Speaker 2 (15:24):
Can I just jump in here like, it doesn't mean
that he did all the right things in this exact investigation. Sure, listen,
that's up for you know, smarter people than me to decide.
I do think he tried, and bringing something up from
fifty years ago is absurd.

Speaker 3 (15:39):
It seems that way.

Speaker 6 (15:41):
Well, listen, stick around when we come back. The accused
Correspondence Dinner gunman gives their plea and that the defense
wants the DOJ officials removed from the case. Plus Ben
Affleck and Matt Damon's new film faces a real life lawsuit.

Speaker 10 (15:57):
Keep it here, True Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (16:11):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight and iHeartRadio. We're talking
true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Leidecker here with
Courtney Armstrong and body move in. And we have our
perfect producer Ava with us tonight, so she is jumping in.

Speaker 3 (16:24):
We're very excited to get to a full night.

Speaker 2 (16:27):
Plus we have a special iHeart guest with us later
in the show who has a new podcast coming out.
So all that and more so, this correspondence Dinner obviously
could have been incredibly tragic beyond measure. So the shooter
has now appeared in court and boy fascinating stuff, Courtney,

(16:47):
do you want to fill us in?

Speaker 6 (16:49):
Absolutely so, you're talking about Cole Thomas Allen.

Speaker 3 (16:53):
That's right.

Speaker 6 (16:54):
He's a thirty one year old man from Torrence, California,
which is right near Los Angeles, and he went into
federal court it was on Monday the eleventh, and pled
not guilty to all charges regarding the attack. So the
defense additionally is attempting to disqualify top Justice Department officials

(17:15):
from the case. And that relates back to their presence
at the event.

Speaker 3 (17:20):
Oh, that's a thing. That's a thing interesting. Okay, that's
a very rare thing too.

Speaker 2 (17:29):
What are the odds that this is a situation that
anybody finds themselves in or frankly not in?

Speaker 3 (17:35):
Right? Okay, absolutely so.

Speaker 6 (17:40):
The incident, in case it's somehow slipped by you, was
this guy, Cole Thomas Allen. The allegation and ps some
of this is on tape, so I don't know. But
allegedly he sprinted through a security checkpoint at the correspondence
dinner and he had a shotgun raised he fired at

(18:00):
a Secret Service officer. The officer was hit in the chest,
thankfully wearing a bullet resistant vest that officer then returned
five shots but didn't hit the defendant, and then Cole
Allen was then tackled. And this happened before he reached
the staircase leading to the ballroom. With President Donald Trump

(18:21):
and JD. Vance and all these other high ranking officials,
what do we think about? I mean, it honestly does
seem like a conflict of interest.

Speaker 2 (18:33):
To be person to do it. I mean, how do
you really pull that off? Yeah, I mean it's a
conflict of inurance.

Speaker 3 (18:41):
Justice Department. Yeah, both things are true here.

Speaker 2 (18:44):
It's a conflict of interest and you can't really replace
every single person in the the Justice Department when it
comes to this. My biggest question is with all of
those big heavy hitters there, I mean, talk about the
security that's needed when the president goes anywhere or the
vice in and as it should be.

Speaker 3 (19:01):
By the way, you.

Speaker 2 (19:02):
Know, I have friends that work at a late night
show in Los Angeles, and if any of the presidential
candidates prior to the election came on the show, they
were scouting for days prior. They had to have secret service,
you know, scouting out every entrance of the studio. I
just find it impossible to imagine that this guy was
able to get full access. We know that he was

(19:24):
there the night before, he stayed in the hotel. That's
the working narrative that because he was a hotel member,
because remember this was held in the beautiful room within
this hotel, that maybe he had access to the elevators,
and those elevators had not been upgraded to the kind
that you need your room cree to go room and

(19:45):
floor to floor. All that would be said the President
of the United States. All of the journalists in the country,
I mean, all the cabinet officials, everybody's in one room.
How is it possible that security was not off the chains?
When you watch that footage of him darting through the
lobby area to basically charge the place, I can't even

(20:08):
believe what I'm seeing.

Speaker 4 (20:09):
Do you see Do you see him go into that
room and the there's an agent with like a dog
that like I think the dog might have like alerted
in some way because the dog like follows him into
the room. And then you can kind of see like
a conversation and then the guy comes out Cole. He
comes out and then starts sprinting. But it's it's very interesting,

(20:30):
Like I don't know that dog.

Speaker 2 (20:31):
That dog thing was weird to me, almost as if
the dog was told to relax, no worries.

Speaker 3 (20:35):
But I've watched that video so many times.

Speaker 10 (20:38):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (20:38):
By the way, even the video is so not so great.

Speaker 2 (20:41):
I mean, my rin camera footage is pretty pristine, I
might add, granted they're probably you know, surveilling with it
much better.

Speaker 3 (20:49):
I mean, and any footage is better than that.

Speaker 2 (20:52):
So you have the president and vice president of the
United States and their cabinet and the key players in
their administration, all of the Department of Justice, and all
journalists all in one room.

Speaker 3 (21:04):
To me, that just seems wild. It makes me nervous.

Speaker 2 (21:07):
That there was that little security put into place for
this to be able to even happen in the first place.

Speaker 6 (21:14):
You know. The other argument is that the defendant indeed
was tackled before getting to the staircase leading to the room.
So I think it could be that's fun it could
be seen.

Speaker 2 (21:26):
That's a fair point. Yeah, that's a fun point. It's
a fair point. And look, there had been listen, this
is also where Reagan got shot. You know, this is
a place that's had this activity and an assassination attempt before,
so they have in fact, at this particular hotel, you know,
done some safety precautions and made a special elevator that

(21:47):
people could go in through.

Speaker 3 (21:49):
I'm assuming the President did just that.

Speaker 2 (21:51):
So they're not completely checked out and they understand the assignment,
but this got really close. It scares me, honestly, if
I was in that room, I'm shaking my head. Even
not having been inside that room. Thank God this didn't
go worse. And I don't know, I can't make sense
of it. So here's the proposal from the defendant. The

(22:17):
defendant side, So what they're asking is for the acting
Attorney General Todd Blanche as well as US Attorney Janine
Piro and the entire office of the US Attorney to
be recused from the case again, since the two were present,
and the defense attorneys specifically argued that the pair's public

(22:39):
assertations of victimhood created the conflict of interest, which I
think is an interesting thing for the attorney to say.
He's saying, listen, you made it quote wholly inappropriate to
oversee the case's prosecution because you went out there and
painted yourself as a victim, is the argument. But how
is act the case just to play devil's advocate there

(23:00):
can to be paused for one quick second, because I
happened to we all were seeing this.

Speaker 3 (23:04):
I watched it live.

Speaker 2 (23:05):
I happened to be watching it like, oh, it was
on in the background, and suddenly all of this mayhem
breaks loose. I felt like they were all pretty on
it pretty quickly in terms of wow, they were like
at the podium given speeches.

Speaker 3 (23:18):
This seems like everyone seemed cool and collected.

Speaker 2 (23:20):
I would have been a maniac screaming and crying on
the top of a table, under a table. They seemed
very composed. But yes, they were victims if this guy
was going to shoot up the place. Whether they ascertained
themselves to be that or not. The reality is everybody
in that room was a victim potentially.

Speaker 4 (23:40):
This is true crime tonight. We're on iHeartRadio. We're talking
true crime all the time. I'm body moving here with
Courtney and Steph and producer Eva. We're right in the
middle of talking about the attempted assassination on the President
of the United States and Cole Allen, the accused, who
was asking for major players in the DOJ to recuse themselves.

(24:01):
Do we think what do you guys think? Are they listen.
Are they victims? I mean, technically a possible attempt on
their lives was made, but we want to hear from you.
Give us a call eight eight eight thirty one crime.
So I understand that the judge is going to decide
if they need to be classified as victims or not.

Speaker 3 (24:23):
Is that correct? If they're victims, can they testify? Yeah,
we would imagine, but they're not going to be able
to oversee anything.

Speaker 6 (24:31):
They won't oversee it. So what the defense is suggesting
is that there's an appointment of a special prosecutor to
ensure fair trials. That's their proposition. Reasonable, Yeah, and you're
totally correct. Body about The judge would need to decide,
and the judges ordered the government to respond to the

(24:52):
defense's request by May twenty second. Regarding all those players
should be especially take.

Speaker 3 (25:00):
Yeah, no, it's moving quick.

Speaker 2 (25:02):
I mean, look, it did seem like there was a
lot of players in that room. It did seem like
it was impossible to not feel the.

Speaker 3 (25:11):
Air of that being very scary.

Speaker 2 (25:13):
How could anybody have an impartial approach to this defense
or to this particular person if they were in that room.
That does seem like a real conflict of interest if
you ask me, right, And the good news is we
probably get a ballroom fact on that.

Speaker 6 (25:32):
Yeah, So next steps May twenty second, is that deadline?
And then on June twenty ninth, the defendant Cole Allen
is next scheduled to appear in court. So we will
obviously keep following in the meantime, have you guys heard
about what's doing with Ben Affleck and Matt Damon's production company.

Speaker 3 (25:52):
I have yes, go ahead philis same court.

Speaker 6 (25:55):
Yeah, okay, So two South Florida police sergeant's names are
Jason Smith and Jonathan Santana. While they are suing Ben
Affleck and Matt Damon their production company for defamation and
it relates to their film it came out in January
of this year called The Rip. So the Rip is

(26:16):
based on a twenty sixteen Miami Lake's raid where over
twenty million dollars was found. It was found in buckets,
it was found behind drywall and was seized. Now, Sergeant
Jonathan Santana, he was the lead detective on that actual case.
The other guy who's sewing the other Plainton plaintiff, excuse me,

(26:40):
Sergeant Jason Smith was his supervisor. Very important to note
Neither of the plaintiffs were ever accused or charged with
any crime associated with the real life bust. But they
argue that now, even though they're not named specifically, that
the film kind of makes them look like dirty cops

(27:00):
and the narrative is inseparable from their real identities.

Speaker 4 (27:04):
So in this movie that they made, do they make
these cops look like they took the money or something?

Speaker 3 (27:11):
They yes, yes, now look a little dirty.

Speaker 2 (27:14):
They look like good guys that maybe found twenty million
dollars in the wall.

Speaker 3 (27:18):
And that's the whole jumping off place. Really, what would
you do?

Speaker 2 (27:22):
You know, so you sort of see that play out,
and it's a tough one.

Speaker 3 (27:29):
That's a tough one.

Speaker 2 (27:30):
On the one hand, like take the compliment they're not
using their names. I think I saw an interview with
Ben Affleck, and by the way, I love them both,
So Matt Damon and Ben Affleck high fives.

Speaker 3 (27:42):
You can do no wrong.

Speaker 2 (27:43):
So please, you know, pardon what I'm about to say.
But they did give an interview, or one of them did,
and I think they set it up pretty accurately. This was,
you know, a story that was true, that this money
was found by these two cops.

Speaker 3 (27:56):
And what would you do? And then they.

Speaker 2 (28:00):
Took some creative license thereafter, so it feels like it
wasn't with malintention.

Speaker 3 (28:05):
But if everybody in the Black Yard is excusing it's.

Speaker 4 (28:10):
Supposed to be like a work of like it's not
based on it's based on the story, but it's not
like a retelling of it.

Speaker 3 (28:18):
Like it's not like a documentary, right of course.

Speaker 2 (28:21):
No, no, totally totally fictionalized. And just the jumping off
place being an interesting one, which is, hey, these two
cops they see, you know, twenty million dollars.

Speaker 3 (28:32):
That money, you.

Speaker 2 (28:34):
Know, technically should go into a safe, you know, within
the police department, and you know, so the film I
only got through the very beginning of it just because
I watched things way too late, not because it was bad.

Speaker 3 (28:46):
So I do recommend it. Those two can't do wrong
in my eyes. But that's a.

Speaker 2 (28:50):
Tricky one if it's death by association in terms of
the story, and it somehow is taking place in the
place that this happened, and people know that you stumbled
upon a lot of money and that's an infamous tale.

Speaker 3 (29:04):
Yeah, that could maybe make you look like a thief.

Speaker 6 (29:08):
Well the defense, I mean, I agree that it absolutely could,
but the defense says that listen, the film is a
work of fiction and it's just protected by standard industry practices.
And they also argue that the plainists the two sergeants
can't identify which specific characters are supposed to represent them

(29:28):
even so.

Speaker 4 (29:29):
The characters don't even have their names, so it's just
inspired by just inspired.

Speaker 3 (29:35):
Okay, they don't have a case. I'm sorry, and they've
always said that, like that's always been.

Speaker 2 (29:40):
Yeah, can you get adam, do we have gabbl sound?
Because body use one? Tell it to the judge body
move in in so mean are innocent? Ben Affleck and
Matt Damon are innocent.

Speaker 4 (29:56):
And you can't even tell who's who's who and it
doesn't relate to them and any way other than a
case in Miami, apparently like it's crazy, it's it's just
it's it's a film inspired by it's not a film about.

Speaker 6 (30:09):
Yeah, right, And if the film even includes a credit
credit role disclaimer stating the sort the stories dramatized and
doesn't portray real people, and also that name setting storylines
were changed to sufficiently separate fiction from reality.

Speaker 3 (30:27):
So it seems like an uphill battle seems like they
should toss though.

Speaker 2 (30:31):
These guys it's Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, they seem
like great Boston guys.

Speaker 3 (30:35):
Can't they just toss them a ten.

Speaker 4 (30:37):
Grand just for they could, But then they're each they
probably could, but that's probably admitting some kind of culpability just.

Speaker 6 (30:45):
Because we like you and it seems like you're stressed.
I don't know that's right. Sounds insane?

Speaker 3 (30:52):
Yeah, that God, I'm not the judge. Don't you know
we need to gabble back, please?

Speaker 4 (30:58):
They wanted to, so I just I just looked this up,
and you know, the specific dollar amount that they're asking
for is not disclosed, but the filing does confirm that
the officers are seeking compensatory damages, legal fees, and a
formal public retraction. So yeah, they can go ahead and
give them ten grand, But they also want them to
say something.

Speaker 2 (31:20):
I'm very sorry, not very sorry. They're just gonna occur
any to me that they're adorable, just saying like this
was not based on these guys in Miami Lakes, despite
what you guys think, it wasn't.

Speaker 3 (31:32):
And here's five k for your for your troubles. Maybe
we'll have to see what happens. We'll definitely follow up
on that.

Speaker 2 (31:38):
And look, we're getting a lot of talkbacks and we
want to get through as many of them as possible,
so let's go to one right now.

Speaker 11 (31:46):
Hey, guys, Miami's Laura. I am actually an infection function
controlled pro professional in Ontario, Canada. I just wanted to
call in with you guys because there was a talk
back that you guys play night where the caller side
of the flight attending it was positive or handed virus,
and actually that's not true. The calm Surius did not

(32:10):
actually have handed virus. She tested negative. So I just
want to encourage you guys to double check some of
these thought buttoned facts before you just play a voice
note like a talk back, because of a lot of
sensationalism right now and a lot of on true backs,
So I just really encourage your guys to double check.
Thank you much, and.

Speaker 6 (32:33):
Thank you Laura very very much. Yeah, it's a more
than fair point, and we accept responsibility. It was honestly,
it was pure human error that we did not see
in the notes of correction on that, and we've since
taken it out of the podcast re airings of the
episode and in order to not spread misinformation in any capacity,

(32:58):
So thank you for the note.

Speaker 3 (32:59):
Totally yeah, and you know what, keep up the good work,
by the way, right like a.

Speaker 2 (33:04):
Year, And that kind of means the bottom line is,
and correct me if anybody has heard otherwise. But I
feel like I'm paying slightly close attention to this. We're
fine on this hantavirus, right, this is These are slow numbers.
I'd hate to be one of these, you know, poor
people who are going back and having to be quarantined

(33:24):
and the mess of that.

Speaker 3 (33:25):
So of course my heart is with them.

Speaker 2 (33:28):
It feels terrible, but I don't see this being our pandemic.
And for me to say that because I get nervous
real quick and I don't feel nervous about this one,
I don't either.

Speaker 4 (33:38):
And you know, it's such a my understanding, and you
guys correct me if I'm wrong, But my understanding is
such a long incubation period that we won't really know
just yet, is that right? But I do think that,
you know, with all these people really self sacrificing and
quarantine and whatnot for some of this long incubation period.
Quite frankly, they are a little bit of unsung heroes.
At this point, I think.

Speaker 3 (34:00):
We're going to be fine.

Speaker 4 (34:00):
I think we're all just kind of like a little
not I wouldn't say traumatized. I think that's too strong
of a word. Maybe, but you know, maybe just borderline
traumatized from twenty twenty.

Speaker 3 (34:13):
I don't think it's so.

Speaker 4 (34:16):
Either, you don't, okay, I don't want to like overstate it,
but I think we're all just a little like on edge,
everybody in the world, not just us, you know, three
I don't.

Speaker 6 (34:24):
Know right and the world, you know, I keep again,
everybody choose a source that gives you comfort that you
personally trust. For me, it's the World Health Organization, and
they continue to assess the risk as low.

Speaker 3 (34:40):
So I'll go ahead.

Speaker 6 (34:42):
And trust the World Health Organization over my imagination, which
can run a little rampant when tied to twenty twenty memories.

Speaker 4 (34:51):
And you know, you know, there's a lot of hard
facts and data to fall back on, and I take
a lot of comfort in that. To Courtney, that's I
just do. I find a lot of comfort in like
provable data and.

Speaker 3 (35:03):
The who does a good job at that. So I
feel I feel fine about it, and.

Speaker 2 (35:08):
I'm really glad for that talk back, because look, I
think we're also traumatized and triggered, or at least maybe
anecdotically speaking king for myself from the twenty to twenty pandemic,
just that there was so much misinformation and then there's
so much new information about the information, and then who's
giving the wrong misinformation? Like I can't keep up with

(35:29):
what the heck happened and who was involved?

Speaker 3 (35:31):
Who are the good guys, who are the bad guys.
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (35:34):
I was compliant because I was told to be, and
you know, I see the world a little differently now,
and that is what's kind of troubling. I think when
we see things on the news and we see virus
and it's you know, breaking, and we're like, oh, really
is that the truth? You know, and like having that
response is also part of the problem. So I'm grateful

(35:55):
that we get to talk it out and sort of
share different perspectives and make sure that we're we're cross
checking each other as a community. I say that just
to make sure that we're not getting lost in the
sauce of just like the scary media on all sides.

Speaker 3 (36:10):
I don't know.

Speaker 4 (36:11):
I was very compliant as well. At the time, my
mom was going through chemo and you know, you're in
your immune system is just not great, you know, when
you're going through chemo, right, you're just not And I
was her caregiver and so like I was doing everything
you know.

Speaker 3 (36:28):
To because I didn't want to get my mind. I
don't want to kill my mom, you know what I mean. Yeah,
it was scary.

Speaker 4 (36:34):
I mean, she ended up passing during COVID, but not
not related to COVID. I mean, it was just her time, right,
But yeah, I mean, and there I think there were
a lot of people like me, you know, that were
caring for somebody or somebody that was sick themselves.

Speaker 2 (36:49):
I was going through a very low, low key chemo
myself at the beginning of COVID, so I couldn't really
ever leave the house. And you know, you have a
son and a family, and you know, I had to
have friends come. And when I was getting chemo, I
would leave again a one on a Richter scale, you know,

(37:11):
people are living it real time. I don't want to
over dramatize, but the reality was, yeah, I was immune
compromised and couldn't leave the house, and I would have
friends come and sit outside the glass window while he
was on his zooms because they couldn't come inside, and
I couldn't have anybody have contact with the outside world

(37:31):
because I was so compromised, and it was a really
challenging time and you're so confused, or like at the
time they were putting people on boats to get healthcare.
It's like, which one of my friends is going to
get my kid that's going to kill them? Is what
this sort of messaging was at that time. And I
can only imagine how scary that must have been with
you and your mom and.

Speaker 3 (37:52):
You know, oh my gosh, I didn't know.

Speaker 2 (37:54):
We all just sort of, you know, luckily I had
a circle and you know, it all worked out okay,
and thankful for that.

Speaker 3 (38:01):
But we had to be compliant.

Speaker 2 (38:02):
So there are so many people that were in the
hospital full time, you know, imagine, or people that were
giving birth. I think about that. I have so many
friends that were pregnant in giving birth during that time.

Speaker 3 (38:12):
How scary.

Speaker 2 (38:14):
So of course we're all traumatized because we want to
live and we want to make sure that the information
that we're getting is real and independent. And I think
that's the trigger, at least for me, of like what's
the truth here? Is this guy really falling and it
seems as though in reality this guy is not falling, And.

Speaker 3 (38:35):
I think we have to say that loud and clear.
I do too. Good job, Stephanie. I'm so glad that
you are here. Ah, I'm so glad.

Speaker 2 (38:43):
I'm here too, for any of those who are suffering
with chemo or any of that stuff, or caring for
somebody with it.

Speaker 3 (38:50):
Hard road, but you know, sometimes you can die with
stuff and die of stuff. That's right, and we're all
glad you're here. Let's go to another talk about he.

Speaker 8 (39:00):
Teck Cram tonight. My name is Lydia. I'm calling from
the UK. I love the show. I'm American and I
just felt really compelled to call in after listening to
your last episode discussing the school shooting drills. I don't
know if you guys have heard of this thing called
the Dunblane massacre. It happened in Dunblane, Scotland in nineteen
ninety six. Sixteen children and a teacher were shot in
a school shooting, and following this event, the UK passed

(39:24):
really intense gun control legislations and they have not had
a school shooting here since no one wants to talk
about it makes Americans really uncomfy. The NRA has a
choke hold on the government and it's the only solution,
and I just feel like no one wants to get
it out there. Thanks, Love the show, buys.

Speaker 12 (39:41):
Right, Jessie from I was just listening to your conversation
about SAP shooters and there's a great podcast called Stop
the Killing Bay Katamin Troit. She was the head of
the Active Shooter Department or the SCI but I think
she would be a great person to have on your podcast.
Love you all, Thank you.

Speaker 13 (39:58):
Hi.

Speaker 14 (39:58):
This is Karen some Texas. Love the show. Listen every
night that I can. And this is not to take
anything away from the horrific school shootings that we're seeing
in godless college foldering in school now, But when I
was very young, we were doing school drills for bombs
and tornadoes horribly scary.

Speaker 2 (40:18):
Yeah, those are all good bombs, great talkbacks. We created
a swell of a conversation. Heva, We're so glad you're
here to see it go down because this was her
big topic.

Speaker 6 (40:29):
Yeah, that's right. Wow, So go ahead, Courtney. Oh, I
was just gonna say. Lydia from the UK popular opinion
or not. I am so with you, and that just
the amount of shootings in the United States of America
when you stack it against I mean, I don't have

(40:49):
the facts in front of me, but you can stack
many dozens of other countries. And I don't think Americans
are more angry. I think we have have way more
access to just having something in our hands when we
are angry, said depressed, or anything else. So I support

(41:12):
and share your opinion.

Speaker 4 (41:14):
I did too, But there's also we just have more
guns here, and passing a law saying that, you know,
whatever mandate would get past, doesn't mean those guns are
not still going to be here, right, And criminals, people
who are going to murder people don't care if there's
a law. Right, the guns are still here. That's the issue.

(41:35):
That's the issue. But we have to No, it's banning
them though. Let's give it a go. Let's give it.

Speaker 3 (41:40):
Are ry to take the semi automatics do? How about that?
Let's ban bullets atty easier? Dave Chappelle said that I
think it was a very clever idea.

Speaker 2 (41:53):
The bullet let's take away the bullets, right, it's easier.

Speaker 4 (41:57):
I don't know, I don't know. You got to start
somewhere though. But the argument I do against it, I
do believe is valid, is that you know, you know,
while it's great and it's working in the UK, and
I wish that we could get to that point, I
don't know that we can because the guns are already.

Speaker 2 (42:11):
Here and you guys are both right by the way,
is it possible too that just with given all the
AI greatness, given all the surveillance that we find ourselves
in givers, given all the ability to use chat GPT,
should we need to Why are we just not getting
proper background checks?

Speaker 7 (42:28):
Like?

Speaker 3 (42:28):
How is it possible that those.

Speaker 2 (42:30):
Guns are getting in the hands very easily with people
who have not only records but obvious mental illness? We
see this? How many times have we seen this? Even
on the show? Like that to me seems like the
middle zone.

Speaker 4 (42:43):
So many of them don't have diagnosed mental illness. We
spoke about this with j Just Kaplin and I think
we're going to have another conversation about that because the
audio is kind of bad. But she had mentioned something about,
you know, there's difference between mental health issues and mental illnesses. Yes,
and mental health issues necessarily won't show up on those
background chain checks.

Speaker 3 (43:03):
Right, that's fair. So how does one of the issues.

Speaker 6 (43:07):
How does the greatness of chat of AI and chat
ship et factor?

Speaker 3 (43:11):
And when you said since we have them, I mean.

Speaker 6 (43:14):
Like I use chat shept to try a book a
hotel and that hotel didn't even exist.

Speaker 3 (43:19):
Listen, I'm all.

Speaker 6 (43:20):
For using chat GPT, but I'm curious how that relates
into your.

Speaker 2 (43:23):
Artist meant it shouldn't be so difficult. You know, this
bums me out in general. We talked even about it
last night. How we have so much access to technology.
I find it difficult to believe that we can't be
tracking things quicker through that said technology. Meaning if chat
GPT can answer all these great questions, how do we
not just be able to put a name into a
basic device at Walmart or when you're purchasing a gun

(43:47):
and do a quick background check.

Speaker 3 (43:49):
I mean, the technology clearly exists.

Speaker 2 (43:51):
We talked about it last night about jurisdictions in different
police departments working well, maybe not.

Speaker 3 (43:56):
Specifically chat GPT.

Speaker 2 (43:58):
I don't I'm not applauding chatchip't use it anymore. I
literally do not even use it because I felt like
at work it was actually more problematic than it was
worse to check.

Speaker 3 (44:08):
That fifteen times.

Speaker 2 (44:10):
So I say that simply that we have so much
technology it's able to spit out information very quickly. It's
not like we have to hand to write a background
thing and then send it in the mail and then
somebody has to take it and stamp it.

Speaker 3 (44:23):
This happens instantly. Why is it happens? It happens instantly.

Speaker 4 (44:28):
Now I can in Nevada, I can go to a
gun store and buy a gun under thirty minutes with
a background check.

Speaker 3 (44:34):
It's very quick. Wow.

Speaker 4 (44:38):
It depends on the state you live in, right, I
know there's waiting, there's waiting periods in other states and whatnot.
But here in Nevada, I mean because I own weapons.
I have many, and it doesn't take long at all.

Speaker 3 (44:49):
It's an assault weapons.

Speaker 2 (44:51):
You think it's fine, everybody should just have the assault weapons.

Speaker 3 (44:55):
I don't.

Speaker 4 (44:55):
I don't necessarily think that I don't have any assault weapons.
I have pistols, But I mean, I don't see the
reason for assault weapons personally, Like why don't those even exist?
I don't know, I really don't.

Speaker 2 (45:07):
But not and also initially war war assuming yeah, okay,
got it.

Speaker 6 (45:16):
Yeah, not some some guy on the street, you know,
who had a bad breakup. And a lot of states
don't even require background checks.

Speaker 3 (45:24):
That just st so I know that.

Speaker 2 (45:26):
It's like, well, they won't get through all of them.
And mental illness versus mental health is so true, no question,
But why not just try Maybe one percent gets through
that gets flagged, or two percent have a background check,
I don't know.

Speaker 4 (45:41):
Yeah, And there was another interesting topic in there. She
was talking about shooter drills versus you know, doing the
drills for bombs and tornadoes, and you know, I definitely
understand that, But I also I was doing drills for
like nuclear you know, I grew up in the eighties
and when that we'd have to get under the desk and.

Speaker 3 (46:00):
Like cover the day after the day.

Speaker 4 (46:03):
Yeah, but there was always this thing in the back
of our heads like, oh, this is never going to happen.
I think it's a little bit different now because like
these shooting drills, these are real possibilities of happening to
these kids, rather than like a bomb that's just not
like a real possibility. Tornado for sure, that's my nature, right,
what can you do? But I but like a bomb,

(46:23):
I don't know right. I think the shooter drills are
just scarier because it's a person killing another person, and.

Speaker 6 (46:29):
It's very, very real, like once a week happen exactly
even more than once a week. More than once a week.
There were forty nine incidents this calendar year. We are
not halfway through. That's almost two a week. We're not
getting bombed twice a week by Russia every week or

(46:49):
anywhere else.

Speaker 3 (46:49):
Yeah, yes, fair point. We'll keep it here.

Speaker 6 (46:54):
Coming up at the top of the hour, we've got
Jordan Sillers joining us to talk Blood Trip.

Speaker 3 (47:00):
It's the true crime podcast.

Speaker 6 (47:01):
It investigates murders, disappearances, and mysteries that are deep in
the wilderness.

Speaker 3 (47:07):
And listen. Don't forget.

Speaker 6 (47:08):
Give us a call eighty eight three to one crime
or leave a talk back.

Speaker 3 (47:12):
We obviously play them.

Speaker 10 (47:13):
True Crime Tonight.

Speaker 4 (47:25):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight on iHeartRadio, where we
talk true crime all the time. I'm body Movin and
I'm here with Stephanie Leidecker and Courtney Armstrong. Don't forget.
If you miss any part of tonight's show, you can
always catch the podcast and listen. We really want to
hear from you. Give us a call eight eight eight
three one Crime or get us on our socials. You
can slide into our dms at True Crime Tonight's Show

(47:47):
on TikTok and Instagram, and you can just do a
little search on Facebook for True Crime Tonight and dam
us there. Right now, we're joined by investigative journalist Jordan Sillers.
He's the host of podcast Blood t It's a true
crime series exploring murders, disappearances, and suspicious tests tied to
the wilderness and hunting culture.

Speaker 3 (48:09):
Jordan, welcome. We're so happy to have you.

Speaker 7 (48:12):
Thank you. Yeah, it's great to be here.

Speaker 6 (48:15):
Oh yay, We've been so excited that you were coming.
And as body just mentioned, Jordan Sillers, he is the
host of Blood Trails and it's a podcast from Meat Eater,
and it really investigates so much that goes on in
the outdoors. It covers sort of crimes that happen in
remote hunting camps, disappearances deep in the wilderness, and the

(48:38):
show itself really combines investigative journalism with real world survival
tracking and backcountry knowledge and dives into cases which I
find so interesting. A lot of the cases, the terrain itself,
the isolation and nature become part of the mystery. So
it's it's really layered and a great listen. Jordan tell us,

(49:01):
how did the idea for Blood Trails first come together.

Speaker 13 (49:05):
Yeah, So blood Trails, like you said, as a podcast
kind of under the Meat Eater umbrella.

Speaker 7 (49:11):
So meat Eater is a hunting.

Speaker 13 (49:12):
And fishing media company, So we have five or six
other podcasts, so we're pretty familiar with the podcast space.

Speaker 7 (49:17):
And of course true crime.

Speaker 13 (49:19):
I mean it's one of the biggest genres out there,
and so it's an idea. You know, we were kicking
around for a long time and I think we were
just trying to figure out what's the format of this.
And my background is in writing and journalism, and so
it really just started with a tip. So someone wrote
in and said, hey, my buddy in the early two

(49:39):
thousands was killed. He was shot in the back while
he was turkey hunting and they never figured out who
did it, and he had theories about the neighbors things
like that. So I called him and I mean it
was a it was a wild story, a tragic story
in a lot of ways, but that's really where it started.

Speaker 7 (49:57):
And so I worked on this kind of on.

Speaker 13 (49:59):
The side for about a year. I talked with the
victims family and friends. I talked with law enforcement as
far as they were, you know, as far as they were.

Speaker 7 (50:06):
Willing to speak with me.

Speaker 13 (50:08):
I put together the script, sent it in, and you know,
we said, this, this seems like something we should at
least try because true crime kind of famously true crime
podcasts kind of a female dominated space, right that the
audiences tend to be primarily female, and our audience is
the opposite, right Like, we're a male dominated space, And

(50:30):
so we weren't quite sure how our audience would react
to it, and they reacted really well. They liked that
pilot episode, and so we decided let's go ahead and
do a full season. So we did eight episodes last fall,
and right now we're in the middle of a second
eight episode season.

Speaker 4 (50:48):
Exactly lazy to have to market, right, you really untapped
the male true crime market. You know, there's this convention
every year called Crime Con and a bunch of people
go to it, thousands of people, and I when you
look at the audience, it's like, I would say, ninety
five percent women. So this is a really on deep market.
So good for you on that. What is it about
crimes in like remote outdoor settings that make them feel

(51:12):
so different from like a typical homicide case.

Speaker 13 (51:16):
Yeah, I mean, I think and this is kind of
anecdotal to just me and my reporting, but a lot
of the stories we've covered, it tends to be a
stranger crime. So homicides, like you talk about detectives, homicides
are usually someone that the victim knows, family, friends, associate,
you know, coworker. When you're out in the wilderness, a

(51:36):
lot of times you run into trouble just by interactions
with strangers, with.

Speaker 7 (51:41):
People just you meet them on the wrong day.

Speaker 13 (51:44):
Maybe they're you know, have some kind of mental illness
and are just out there by themselves, and so that
makes them kind of unique in that regard, but also very.

Speaker 7 (51:54):
Difficult to investigate.

Speaker 13 (51:56):
And investigators going out there into some remote location and
now they're having to find a stranger and so it's
really difficult a lot of times to solve these cases.
And I'm always impressed with the detectives or who are
able to do it, because it's a real challenge.

Speaker 7 (52:12):
A lot of times.

Speaker 2 (52:13):
We've had a few of the US marshals on our show,
and same they're so built to be able to be
in these incredibly difficult, challenging scenarios where listen, four seasons, snow, rain,
things change, and the climate can really affect an investigation,
let alone one that happened you know, days or months

(52:35):
or years prior.

Speaker 13 (52:37):
Right, And something that I never really thought of but
is a real challenge is a lot of times these
cases start as missing persons cases.

Speaker 7 (52:45):
They start as search and rescue operations.

Speaker 13 (52:47):
So the law enforcement they're not really thinking about like suspects,
they're not really thinking about evidence. They're thinking about, we
need to find this person because they're out here, they're lost,
they need help. And so you know, I've covered a
few cases where potential suspects have been allowed to leave
the area simply because law enforcement didn't know that they're

(53:08):
looking for suspects, they're looking for this missing person, and
so it's challenging for that reason. Another reason is just
they don't know how big the crime scene is.

Speaker 7 (53:18):
Right.

Speaker 13 (53:18):
I talked with the former detective who I was talking
with them about that first case that we covered where
the victim was shot, and it's like, how far do
we search for evidence? Is it ten yards around the body?
Is it one hundred yards is it a mile? Like
where do we stop looking? And so these cases are
really challenging for a lot of different reasons.

Speaker 6 (53:40):
And Jordan speaking of you know, marshals and just where
things are, I feel like jurisdiction is maybe something that
comes up. Does that come up, whether it's National Park Service,
whether it's the FBI, whether it's the marshal, the sheriff,
the police.

Speaker 13 (53:59):
Yeah, some times, like you know, on a on a
big piece of federal public land where a lot of
hunters like to hunt, you know, you might have the
sheriff's department, but then you also have Fish and Wildlife Service,
who has their own law enforcement division. I've never run
into that being a real problem in a case, except
for there was one case. So the first episode of

(54:19):
season one, this hunter he disappeared and his car was
found in one county, but then one county over, and
it wasn't even it was like a mile away one
county over. A woman's house was broken into, and so
but they didn't really connect these dots as like the
person who broke into the house might be responsible for

(54:40):
this disappearance of a hunter because that county line separated
it and they just.

Speaker 7 (54:45):
Didn't talk to each other.

Speaker 13 (54:46):
This was back in the seventies, and so you know,
it does it does come up that that jurisdictional sort
of confusion does come up.

Speaker 4 (54:54):
Sometimes your reporting involves a lot of travel and a
lot of field work. How often are you actually visiting
the places where these crimes have happened?

Speaker 7 (55:06):
I do occasionally.

Speaker 13 (55:07):
A lot of my reporting is done is done remotely.
But if there's a local case, like we're covering a
case later this season about a fisherman down near where
I live in East Texas, about two hours away from me,
and so I did go down there. I interviewed two
of his grandchildren, a Texas ranger who was involved in

(55:29):
the case.

Speaker 7 (55:30):
We got a lot of footage of the area.

Speaker 13 (55:32):
And I do like doing that because it gives me
a sense just as someone trying to tell the story
of the place, like what is this place like? And
I did get a chance earlier this year to go
up to Montana. Heter is based in Montana around Bozman,
so I was kind of up there anyway, but I
went to this camp site where a camper was killed

(55:54):
just a couple of years ago, and going up there
made me realize just how remote this place really is is.
I mean, it's miles back there in the wilderness, and
so I hope that helps me convey that to the audience.

Speaker 2 (56:07):
Do you feel like, by making this podcast, you've learned
your own tips and tricks about survival and if God forbid,
you found yourself in a precarious situation in the thick
of the woods that just based on your your new
knowledge of this journey, how would you do I would
be the first to die in this movie.

Speaker 3 (56:27):
Put it that way. Maybe not. I think, actually I'm.

Speaker 2 (56:30):
Getting better, but I'd be like, wait, you guys, stay here.
I'm going to go get us some help by myself.
Take my phone, and keep the water in case you
get fu step no.

Speaker 7 (56:40):
Point, yeah, I would say.

Speaker 9 (56:43):
So.

Speaker 13 (56:43):
People ask me like, does doing this podcast make you
afraid to go out and go hunting or fishing?

Speaker 7 (56:51):
And I don't know.

Speaker 13 (56:51):
I don't know that it does so much, just because
these these cases are very rare, Like you're way more
likely to run into rubble out there because you don't
have water right because a storm comes in. I will say,
one thing I've thought a lot about is if I'm
out there by myself, especially if I'm by myself, I

(57:12):
am not getting into any kind of conflict. Like someone
could come up and and like steal my stuff, and
I would say, you know what, just take it. Like
because it's such a remote location, help is so far away,
you just don't want to run into the wrong person
and you never really know who that person's going to be.
We've covered a couple of different cases, like I said,

(57:34):
stranger crime, where like people just run into the wrong
person out there, wow, and they you know, they.

Speaker 7 (57:40):
Are killed or they disappear.

Speaker 13 (57:42):
So that is definitely something that that I thought a
lot about.

Speaker 3 (57:47):
Yeah, very important stuff.

Speaker 6 (57:49):
If anyone's just joining us, this is true crime tonight,
and we're so thrilled to be joined by Jordan Sillers.
He's a host of Blood Trails, which is a podcast.

Speaker 3 (57:58):
You should really be catching.

Speaker 6 (58:00):
It investigates crimes connected to the outdoors and wilderness and
it's it's really compelling. So have you ever, Jordan, have
you ever gone into a story thinking well, this is
probably an accident, but then changed your mind.

Speaker 3 (58:16):
Oh good question.

Speaker 13 (58:20):
So I'm trying to think not so much an accident
because we do stick in the because there are many
accidents right that happened to hunters out there, like, people
run into trouble all the time, and so we stick
with stories that are like, there's there's some kind of
suspicious circumstance and it's not like necessarily that they were

(58:41):
killed or kidnapped, but there is some evidence of foul play.
I did cover a case last season, probably the most
tragic case I covered, of a hunter who was found.
It was in Georgia. He was found and he'd been
stabbed seventeen times, and.

Speaker 7 (59:03):
He was with a buddy. His buddy was like he
couldn't find him.

Speaker 13 (59:07):
He he'd actually called his friend to say, Hey, I'm
out in the woods. I'm lost. I can't find my
way out. And then he was found stabbed later later
that night.

Speaker 7 (59:18):
And what was.

Speaker 13 (59:19):
So sad about it is that once the medical examiner
really got a chance to look at this hunter, they
concluded that he'd actually died by suicide. He had stabbed
himself exactly exactly, which is very uncommon. It's very uncommon to.

Speaker 7 (59:40):
Do it that way. He had he had a rifle
with him right he was hunting.

Speaker 13 (59:44):
He had he had a gun with him, and there's
and there were no other suspects.

Speaker 7 (59:49):
They really grilled. I got the interview tape of his friend.

Speaker 13 (59:54):
And I mean they they grilled him, like they really,
they really grilled him, and they never found any evidence
that he'd done it. He was the man who died,
was off by himself, like, so there really weren't any
other suspects.

Speaker 7 (01:00:05):
It's pretty clear what happened. But it's like why, wow,
you know.

Speaker 13 (01:00:09):
The I talked with the investigator in charge of the case.
They never found anyone who said who said this hunter
was depressed or sad or like there were.

Speaker 7 (01:00:18):
Things going on in his life. So we really don't.

Speaker 13 (01:00:20):
Know why he did that, but it's pretty clear that
he did. And so that's that's a case that I
think about a lot. And it was just so tragic.
I mean, his family. I reached out to his family,
His family didn't, you know, didn't want to talk about
it for obvious reasons. So there are definitely cases where
you think it's one thing and then it turns out

(01:00:40):
to be something else.

Speaker 2 (01:00:42):
There have also been quite a few cases even that
we've covered of just you know, Travis Decker, for example,
the father who murdered his two children, three children, i
should say, and then ran off into the marsh and
into the woods. And you know that went on for
a very long time.

Speaker 3 (01:00:59):
Even the high school teacher we just talked about last night.

Speaker 2 (01:01:02):
We had a caller who was perhaps accused of inappropriate
sexual YadA YadA.

Speaker 3 (01:01:11):
And then he dipped into the woods.

Speaker 2 (01:01:13):
And that could be again very very dangerous even for
those who were investigators who are looking for them.

Speaker 7 (01:01:20):
Yeah.

Speaker 13 (01:01:21):
Yeah, So it actually just came out last week. We
covered a case from the seventies of a game warden
Wisconsin who was killed by a poacher. And this poacher's
name was Brian Hussan, and they caught him.

Speaker 7 (01:01:37):
He went to jail.

Speaker 13 (01:01:39):
Ten years later, the poacher, the murderer, breaks out of prison.
It's honestly kind of like a movie. He breaks out
of prison with the help of his girlfriend. And he
was a survivalist.

Speaker 7 (01:01:51):
He was a hunter.

Speaker 13 (01:01:53):
He apparently had spent time in jail reading books on
survival and he just I mean, it's like that he
you know, they drove in the car up into northern
Wisconsin and he just kind of disappeared into the woods
and it took them, i think three or four months
to find him, to figure out where he was hiding out.
He built basically a shack out in the wilderness, and

(01:02:17):
you know, eventually I found him, but it took them
a long time because he could kind of, you know,
get by on his own out out in the woods,
and so that makes it very difficult.

Speaker 3 (01:02:26):
He was prepared, You're like really good at it.

Speaker 2 (01:02:29):
By the way, if you saw Jordan right now, his
background is like this hunter green contact seeming very outdoors vibes,
but like, man, I know what I'm doing and to
get out of my way. I'm investigating in the woods.
It's exciting. Yeah, it's very exciting.

Speaker 3 (01:02:46):
It really is.

Speaker 6 (01:02:47):
Well, we're happy because after the break, Jordan Sellers will
be with us and he of course is the host
of the podcast Blood Trails and next act going to
go into one of the most haunting disappearances that Jordan
has handled. Keep it here, True Crime Tonight, We're talking

(01:03:07):
true crime all the time.

Speaker 2 (01:03:21):
Welcome back to true crime tonight on iHeartRadio. We're talking
true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Leidecker here as
always with Courtney Armstrong and Body Move in and we
have a special guest with us tonight.

Speaker 3 (01:03:33):
He makes the podcast.

Speaker 2 (01:03:35):
You can catch it on iHeart just downloaded on your
iHeartRadio app.

Speaker 3 (01:03:39):
Blood Trails.

Speaker 2 (01:03:40):
You can also catch that on any of the many
places you can catch your podcasts, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, you
name it. Jordan Siller's telling us some of the tales
that he's been covering in the Thick of the Woods,
and I'm sure there have been some haunting ones, Jordan,
Is there one that sticks out that is particularly.

Speaker 7 (01:04:02):
Yeah, I mean, I think they're all scary.

Speaker 13 (01:04:05):
I'll be honest, they're all scary. But one that I
think about a lot, just because it leaves some unanswered
questions is a disappearance that happened in twenty fourteen. An
elk hunter went up into the mountains of Montana and
he never came back.

Speaker 7 (01:04:24):
He disappeared.

Speaker 13 (01:04:25):
And the strange thing about this case is that he
wasn't alone. He went up with two other hunters. So
there were three elk hunters who went up and two
of them came back five days later, but Aaron Hedges didn't.
And so it's a long case. There's a lot of details.

(01:04:45):
We covered it in season one of Blood Trails, but
that's one that really sticks out as like, I don't
really know what happened here exactly. We got some answers, certainly,
but not as many, I think as we would have liked.

Speaker 3 (01:04:59):
What did the f and say when they came back
without their friend?

Speaker 7 (01:05:03):
Yeah, good question.

Speaker 13 (01:05:05):
So so Aaron Hedges went up into this kind of isolated
mountain range in Montana. It's called the Crazy Mountains and
it's great hunting. There's plenty of elk up there, and
so he went up. They were going to bowhunt. This
was in September of twenty fifteen, So they went up
September fifth.

Speaker 7 (01:05:24):
And what his his buddies. Well, so it took some doing,
I think, to get the buddies to talk.

Speaker 13 (01:05:31):
Because when they came back off that mountain and a
storm was coming in, they didn't.

Speaker 7 (01:05:37):
Call the sheriff's office first.

Speaker 13 (01:05:39):
They called Aaron's wife first and called the sheriff to
report that Aaron was missing. Then the sheriff actually had
to call these guys and say, hey, you got to
come back to the to the office and give a
statement because like, we don't know where erin is exactly
like you guys know where you were when you're up there,

(01:06:00):
And so they did. They turned around, they came back
and in those first few weeks they were looked at
very closely. Obviously as suspects in Aaron's disappearance because they
they were, according to the people that I spoke with, pretty.

Speaker 7 (01:06:18):
Untruthful in their account of.

Speaker 13 (01:06:21):
Where they were, of the timeline of what happened when
they were up there. And so, you know, the obviously
the search and rescue team goes out, but it's dumping snow,
like I was told, the temperatures dropped, like, you know,
thirty forty degrees. This huge storm rolled in, and so
search efforts were really impeded those first few days.

Speaker 7 (01:06:42):
They eventually did get up into the mountains and they
found some interesting things, and.

Speaker 13 (01:06:49):
We can get into that, but I don't know, I
don't want to keep going too long here.

Speaker 3 (01:06:53):
No, I'm not fascin I want to a little bits
are Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:06:57):
I had a question actually about is it knowable why
the friends were being evasive?

Speaker 3 (01:07:03):
That's a bad that's a bad look drug.

Speaker 13 (01:07:09):
So it is a bad look. It turned out, and
and this it took a while for this to come out,
but it turned out those guys did kill an elk
while they were up there, but that elk was killed
on private land, so place, a place they weren't supposed
to be hunting. And if if you know that landscape,
it's really kind of a patchwork of public land where

(01:07:30):
you're allowed to hunt and then private land where you're not.
And so they killed that elk on private and so
they were not really interested in talking with law enforcement
when they got back, and obviously too, they were like
they left their buddy up there, and so I don't
think they were real interested in talking much for that.

Speaker 7 (01:07:51):
Reason as well.

Speaker 13 (01:07:52):
But when when search and rescue went up there, they
they started to find a few pieces of evidence iew
things to suggest kind of where Aaron went. And one
of those things was Aaron's hunting boots. They found a
place where it looked like he had made a camp,
and they found his boots kind of nearby, and I

(01:08:14):
think they were probably pretty excited at that point, right
because like who takes off their boots and then like
goes of long distance. But they looked and looked and looked,
and he wasn't there. They found a few other of
his possessions, but they didn't find him, even though his
boots were right there. And so it's like what happened?
And so this was twenty fourteen. They did a search.

(01:08:38):
I think they did like a twenty day search, so
like they really tried. They kept expanding the search area.
They brought in you know, everything, horses, dogs, helicopters, like
everything they had in twenty fourteen, and they still couldn't
find him.

Speaker 7 (01:08:53):
And so eventually they had they had to call off the.

Speaker 2 (01:08:55):
Search, and then the guys were never in trouble. What
kind of friends or these could you imagine? You just
jump your friends at the top of the hill because
you don't want to get in trouble for killing an elk?
Like really, you think that your friendship and the missing
buddy would over override any bad behavior, Like that's absurd.

Speaker 3 (01:09:14):
That makes me so angry. They did, Yeah, they did.

Speaker 7 (01:09:18):
They did. Yep, yep, they had an elk tag.

Speaker 13 (01:09:21):
One of the friends actually posted a picture of the
elk on Facebook a week and a half later while
his buddy was still missing.

Speaker 2 (01:09:30):
Hold of presses, stop the presses. So they cut these
two guys. These two buddies come back without their friend,
and then they have the nerve to take the elk
that they illegally shot on private land. They post a
photo or the tag and then are still not harrowed
looking for their friend.

Speaker 7 (01:09:48):
I think that's a special Yeah, and you're.

Speaker 3 (01:09:52):
Back up and Elk is a big deal. No, of
course it is.

Speaker 7 (01:09:55):
And so you're you're really cutting to the heart of it.

Speaker 13 (01:09:58):
Here, because the the story they told once they finally
kind of fest up to the Elk and told the
whole story.

Speaker 7 (01:10:07):
Basically, they went up with Aaron. Aaron was, according to.

Speaker 13 (01:10:11):
Them, just being really difficult, like almost like he didn't
want to be there. He'd had he'd had a problem
with alcohol that he was trying to kick, and so
he'd been on a medication to kind of tamp down
some of those cravings.

Speaker 7 (01:10:28):
But at the same time, they said, he.

Speaker 13 (01:10:30):
Was also kind of drinking as well while while he
was up there, and so he also lost some of
his gear. He lost his sleeping bag at one point
because they had a mule to like pack stuff in
and out. The mule bucked the gear off and it
kind of went down the mountain, so we lost some
of that stuff. So he's just in this foul mood
according to his buddies. And so at one point Aaron says,

(01:10:52):
you know what, I'm going to go off to this
different campsite where the year.

Speaker 7 (01:10:56):
Before they'd they'd stashed some some gear up there.

Speaker 13 (01:10:59):
It was about a seven mile height up the mountain,
but it had like an extra sleeping bag, it had
an extra tent, and he said, I'm just gonna go
up there and just kind of camp out by myself.
And according to them, they were like fine, like please,
you know, like like you're being yeah, you're you're not
interested in this hunt. You're just kind of, you know,

(01:11:20):
being a real jerk. And so he left and went
off by himself.

Speaker 4 (01:11:24):
For our listeners that don't know, elk tags, they're rare, right,
Some people only get one their whole lifetime, isn't that right.

Speaker 13 (01:11:33):
So if you're a resident of a state with elk,
it's a lot easier to get a president tag. If
you were trying to travel to a different state, it's difficult.

Speaker 7 (01:11:43):
So these guys were experienced elk hunters.

Speaker 13 (01:11:45):
They'd been up there in that same place, you know,
multiple years. They'd killed elk. Aaron had killed elk. So like,
these are guys who are familiar with this area. They're
familiar with the wilderness, which is part of the reason
Aaron's disappearance was strange. The boots things very strange. It's
like this guy knows what he's doing, but he's still
he still disappears.

Speaker 4 (01:12:04):
So this wasn't like a once in a lifetime opportunity,
is what I was trying to know.

Speaker 7 (01:12:08):
But no, this was okay. Now.

Speaker 13 (01:12:10):
They they did take this very seriously. The Greg, one
of the friends hold law enforcement. He's like, I take
this trip every year very seriously. He trains, he practices
with his bow. Right, He's like, he's really into it.
He said Aaron was out of shape, right, maybe a
little bit drunk. Apparently he hadn't cited in his bow.

(01:12:32):
So you know, all of these things, all these factors
like created this tension, which Greg and Joe admitted to.
They admitted there was this tension, and so Aaron goes
off by himself. They go up and they actually kill
that ELK on private and Greg greg in his interview
with law enforcement, like this is kind of a real

(01:12:53):
pivotal moment because they call Aaron on the radio.

Speaker 7 (01:12:56):
They have these like really kind of simple radios.

Speaker 13 (01:12:59):
They call Aarin like, hey man, we got an ELK.
Can you come back and help us break it down,
help us pack it out? And he's like, according to them,
he says kind of some strange things. He's like, I
don't know really I don't really know where I am.
I think I went too far because there was this turnoff.
He was on one trail he's supposed to turn off
and go up a different trail. It's like, I think

(01:13:20):
I missed the turnoff, which was weird because it was
daytime and it's like a very clear trail to follow.
But he's like, I'm not coming back. I think I
went too far. And Greg says to law enforcement, like
I maybe should have left my elk and gone and
like figured out what happened, Like what's going on with Aaron,
because like he's clearly not in a great place. But

(01:13:43):
he's like, the elk's on the ground. If I leave
it right, a bear could come.

Speaker 7 (01:13:48):
It could be ruined.

Speaker 13 (01:13:50):
And so he decides to stay with the elk rather
than go after Aaron. And you know, this is a
really pivotal moment in the story that he said he's
like I have a lot of regrets about this and
not kind of going after my friend. So that's how
that's how they became separated initially, and why Greg and
Joe were really kind of preoccupied, not really looking for Aaron,

(01:14:13):
not really concerned too much. That's probably not fair I
think they were concerned.

Speaker 7 (01:14:17):
They said they.

Speaker 13 (01:14:18):
Tried to radio him several times but he didn't respond,
but they didn't actually go and look for him, which
I think they felt a lot of regret about later.

Speaker 2 (01:14:29):
Okay, that makes me feel a little bit better that
they were in fact preoccupied and did have guilt. Sounded
like they came back and you know, we're off to
the races.

Speaker 6 (01:14:40):
If you're just joining us, you're listening to True Crime tonight,
and we are so happy to be joined by Jordan Sellers.

Speaker 3 (01:14:48):
We're talking about the Aaron Hedges case.

Speaker 6 (01:14:51):
Which is a fascinating one that comes straight out of
Jordan's podcast Blood Trails. So there was one thing that
you said that stuck out to me, and keep in
mind on my Real City Mouse. You said, Oh, Aaron,
the victim in this case, the deceased, I should say,
he had lost his gear and said, hey, I'm going

(01:15:13):
to go seven miles away where we left some gear
last year. Like that wouldn't if any of my friends
said I'm just going to go ahead and walk seven
miles and see if something was there.

Speaker 3 (01:15:24):
It just it was.

Speaker 6 (01:15:24):
It just seems really indicative of how the cases you
cover are really have such a specific set of circumstances,
surroundings and complications.

Speaker 7 (01:15:38):
Yeah, the.

Speaker 13 (01:15:39):
Landscape is often very important, and so we do we
try to publish maps of like where people were and when,
because seven miles, like you know, if you're walking on
a on a road, it's it's a hike, like it's
a long ways, but it's not like you know, it's doable.
But this is up in the mountains. It's a higher elevation.
You're going up and down, up and down. It's pretty

(01:16:02):
challenging for someone who's like in good physical condition. If
you're not, it's especially challenging. And so that I mean,
one of the mysteries of the case really is like
why Aarin was never able to make it to that
cash of gear Because they went up there and they
found the cash of gear and it hadn't been touched.
So for some reason, Aaron wasn't able to make it,

(01:16:24):
even though again he's an experienced guy in the outdoors.
You know, he knows this area, he's been there before,
and he still wasn't able to make it.

Speaker 7 (01:16:32):
And we don't really know why.

Speaker 3 (01:16:35):
I don't know that we've if we've touched I can't
remember if we've touched on this or not. But was
he ever located.

Speaker 13 (01:16:41):
Yes, So we haven't gotten to that part of the
story yet. So in twenty fifteen, a year later, they
found I.

Speaker 7 (01:16:47):
Believe his backpack.

Speaker 13 (01:16:49):
A rancher in the area found his backpack, but it's
the same thing with the boots, Like they looked and
looked and looked.

Speaker 7 (01:16:55):
He still couldn't find him. A year after that.

Speaker 13 (01:16:58):
I don't know if it was the same rancher or
for rancher found a skull underneath a tree, and so
obviously he calls it in, sheriff comes out. They find
the bones were kind of scattered to a certain extent,
and they collect them and they do I think a
dental records comparison, and it is Aaron the kind of

(01:17:22):
I mean, the tragic, crazy thing about where he was found.
He was actually within a quarter mile of a road,
and he'd been up on this hill. They found evidence
he'd left like a thermost or a cup up on
a hill not far away, and if you look down
from that hill you can see buildings like I don't
think it was a house, but I think it was
some kind of like ranch building. And so it's really

(01:17:46):
unclear like if he saw that. Why he didn't go
get help. Could he maybe not see it. Maybe it
was dark, maybe it was snowing at the time and.

Speaker 7 (01:17:56):
He couldn't see it.

Speaker 13 (01:17:57):
But he was really close to finding help in the end,
but it was way farther away. I talked with the sheriff,
one of the sheriffs who led the search effort, and
he said it was outside their search area, so like
they really expanded the search area and he'd gone even
farther than that. I think it was like fourteen miles
from this face camp that they'd set up, and they

(01:18:19):
just didn't think he'd make it that far, and he did,
and so, you know, it took them a long time
to find his remains. But those years where he was,
where he had disappeared, are really where a lot of
the rumors surrounding this case come in, especially about his
buddies Joe and Greg. Once they find his remains, there

(01:18:40):
were still rumors, but it's like, how did Aaron get
all the way out there? If Joe and Greg, you know,
somehow somehow killed him.

Speaker 4 (01:18:48):
Well, listen, you're going to have to tune in to
Jordan's podcast. Jordan, thank you so much for joining us.

Speaker 3 (01:18:53):
Tonight.

Speaker 4 (01:18:54):
You can listen to Blood Trails wherever you get your podcasts.
It's a lot of fascinating stories, and you can find
more of Jordan's reporting through Meat Eater. Keep it right here.
We're gonna wrap up the night with your talkbats True
crime tonight. This is your crime Tonight. We're on iHeartRadio.

(01:19:20):
We're talking true crime all the time. I'm Boddy Moving
and I'm here with Courtney Armstrong and Stephanieleidecker. Don't forget
if you miss any part of tonight's show, you can
always catch a podcast. And we want to hear from you.
Give us a call eight eight eight three one crime.
All right, you guys ready for some talkbacks. This is
my favorite part of the night show because it's a
little more lighthearted.

Speaker 3 (01:19:39):
Let's get right. That's some talkbacks. Let's go.

Speaker 5 (01:19:42):
Hi everyone, it's Lynette from LA. You're talking about Travis Turner.
Here's another theory. Could he have already planted a go
bag somewhere out in the woods that yes, he didn't
need have that extra time, he already had it ready
and possibly that's what happened.

Speaker 4 (01:20:04):
Just another theory, so smart, that was probably exactly what happened, right.

Speaker 2 (01:20:11):
Because I have a feeling, like my Spidey sense does
strike me as him being gone, Like he just sort
of I don't know why gone. He's obviously not home,
but that would be a very interesting theory.

Speaker 4 (01:20:25):
No, it is like like because I from what I remember,
I haven't looked into this case in a really long time,
but from what I remember, like this was like kind
of a mounting thing, like he knew there was an
investigation being opened and whatnot. So it is Yeah, so
it is possible, like maybe the night before he put
like a little go bag in the woods, didn't just

(01:20:46):
in case they showed up at his house, right, But
then he would still need a place to go to, right,
You still need to like have somewhere to go.

Speaker 3 (01:20:56):
I don't know. I think maybe it's possible, or.

Speaker 6 (01:20:58):
Like we just heard, if he was really well trained,
maybe he built for myself a fort or god, I
really don't.

Speaker 3 (01:21:07):
Belong in the woods for shelter. I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:21:14):
Houses where the New Yorker comes out queens, right, the
Queen's upbringing.

Speaker 3 (01:21:20):
Itself. Yeah, go have some coffee in the in the fort.

Speaker 2 (01:21:26):
But by the way, I don't know that would be
an interesting turn of events. I mean, look, the guy,
if what he was being accused of was accurate, you know,
allegedly allegedly, allegedly, he was up to no good with miners.
So yeah, he probably knew that the worlds the walls
were closing in on him and at some point that
something was going to give and he needed a go

(01:21:48):
bag and a backup plan.

Speaker 3 (01:21:51):
Yeah, I think that's really I think it's possible. Thank
you for that talkback. Really good. Yeah, great talkback.

Speaker 4 (01:21:58):
I never even thought about that, So thank you for
that talk back. Let's go to another one.

Speaker 9 (01:22:02):
Hey, guys, this is just a working theory I have,
but I was wondering if there was any evidence that
Maura Murray was the only one in the vehicle at
the time of the crash, because in the short amount
of time, it doesn't make sense that there wouldn't be
a car stash somewhere waiting for her. So I'm thinking
that there may have been someone else in the vehicle
that made her crash, or they were driving and they
crashed on purpose, so whoever was waiting with the other
vehicle could swoop in really fast and pick her up

(01:22:24):
and take them somewhere else and just vanish off the
base of the earth.

Speaker 3 (01:22:27):
But I don't know.

Speaker 9 (01:22:27):
That's just a theory I have and that's what I'm thinking.

Speaker 2 (01:22:31):
Wait, let me just make sure I understand this, So
the idea being and if Maura Murray is not a
case anyone is familiar with. We covered it the other
night and she went missing after having been in a
car accident and allegedly there was.

Speaker 3 (01:22:43):
Alcohol potentially involved.

Speaker 2 (01:22:44):
So maybe she wanted to dip because cops were gonna come,
or maybe she was stolen by the person across the street, abducted,
I should.

Speaker 4 (01:22:54):
Say, Well, and many people saw her run that night
because remember that guy, he was like, I thought maybe
she'd I was scary, so you know, she didn't want
to meet a help her, and he didn't report anything
with her, right, and nobody can really did definitely rule
out another person but her sister. Okay, So her sister
Julie has really kind of been a champion of her case.

(01:23:16):
And I followed her sister for a while, and I
remember her sister was really into the idea. Maura Murray
had like a twelve pack of beer in her car, right,
and apparently she did not drink beer. She did not
drink beer. She didn't like beer, and so her sister
has always thought that either somebody was with her or

(01:23:38):
I think that's what she thought, or that she was
meeting somebody that she was intending to meet that night
and something happened and he met her.

Speaker 2 (01:23:46):
Right, that's interesting, And maybe she had gotten the beer
for this said person that tracks like you guys know
Celiac disease. I don't drink a beer, yeah right now
that I don't like a beer. It looks delicious, but
I just don't. So if somebody accused me of being
at the bar with a bunch of beers in my hand,
you guys would know that doesn't track. So it was

(01:24:06):
always like a tippet. Yeah, that's impossible, so you know,
the sister would know.

Speaker 6 (01:24:12):
But on top of that, I'm fairly if I'm remembering
the podcast correctly, I'm fairly certain that one of the witnesses,
not the bus driver, but one of the witnesses claimed
they saw the second person in the car.

Speaker 3 (01:24:26):
They thought they did, Yes, they thought they did. I
didn't know my understanding as well.

Speaker 2 (01:24:30):
If anyone knows us and knows this to be wrong,
let us know, please, eight at age three, one crime.
But that was my understanding too, because that's what made
this case so extra haunting, is that the accident happened.
People saw her after the accident, and it seems as
though in a nana second man was just gone in
the night and never to be seen again, never to

(01:24:53):
be seen again.

Speaker 4 (01:24:55):
And it's been what twenty five years? I think, no
or sister, that must be no terrible for her. It's
been a really long time. Let's go another talk about Hi.

Speaker 3 (01:25:06):
This is Marissa from Maryland.

Speaker 15 (01:25:08):
Sorry, I'm really sick, but I do have to make
a comment about buying a house with someone who died.
There's a very big difference between someone who died of
natural causes and a murder. My father passed away when
I was young, and he died at home, and honestly,
I didn't ever think about it until I was looking
for a home myself to think, oh, did anyone die here? Well,

(01:25:28):
there's a big difference between dying naturally and murder.

Speaker 2 (01:25:31):
Totally agree. In fact, First of all, hope we feel better.
I hope we hope you're feeling better. That's you know,
it's going around. Yeah, but you sound like you sound
like you're on the mend. But people die in houses, right,
your father is likely you know, it's good energy in
the walls.

Speaker 3 (01:25:49):
Right, That's a beautiful thing.

Speaker 2 (01:25:51):
That is different than somebody being you know, grizzly murdered,
you know, or multiple people, or in the case of
the Long lanyereial killer, many people and many women being
tortured in the basement and just you know, the evil
of that, I think is probably what we're all bumping on.
Whereas somebody dying naturally in their home and that home

(01:26:14):
goes to the dog. I mean to me, that is
just you know, you have angel history. Yeah, exactly different,
totally agree.

Speaker 4 (01:26:24):
Like what do you do? Do you try to sell it?
I mean, are you gonna get you know, is it
gonna even get appraised the way it should because of what?
I don't even know?

Speaker 3 (01:26:34):
You should have a real estate person on from Long Island.

Speaker 2 (01:26:36):
I'm sure, I for sure know a real estate agent
in the area I grew up not too far from there.

Speaker 4 (01:26:42):
Does that ruin your home, like the appraisal, like the history,
like does the Amityville whoorhouse?

Speaker 3 (01:26:48):
Yes, horrorhouse? Like does it have a good value? Does
shake up the value?

Speaker 2 (01:26:53):
I think it reduces the value significantly is what you
would think. You get it on a short sale, at
least that's how it happens in the movies. But in
other cases sometimes it becomes, you know, a house of legend,
and maybe people overpay for that. This is a particular house, though,
Let's you know, be real.

Speaker 3 (01:27:11):
It's in a.

Speaker 2 (01:27:11):
Beautiful area, a lovely neighborhood. You know that whole location
is very special, as we've said. But the house looks
like the monsters live there, right, It's like not a
good looking house on a hops from a sore thum.
It's the house you skip on Halloween, no doubt. I
think everybody knows that house, right, We've all kind of

(01:27:32):
rushed past that house, you know, when you're delivering your
newspapers and stuff back in the day.

Speaker 3 (01:27:37):
I think this was that house.

Speaker 2 (01:27:39):
So it was like it looked a little dilapidated. Honestly,
it looks like it has bad vibes the end, you know.
So I don't even know that you need to know
the history to know that something funky has potentially happened
in that house. I think that's a unique case. I'm curious.
I'm going to find out the answer to it. I
think Jill Heeger from Stageam High School. I'm going to

(01:28:00):
look her up. Maybe she's even listening. Jill Huger is
a she's an Oyster Bay real estate agent and she's
going to get to the bottom of it for us.
We will circle back on this. Give me, give me
seven days texting her.

Speaker 3 (01:28:12):
Now, all right, let's grab another talk back, guys.

Speaker 7 (01:28:18):
The US ambassador has got to be Snoop.

Speaker 4 (01:28:21):
He is everywhere and everybody loves him and the Aliens
would love him too.

Speaker 3 (01:28:27):
What a good idea. I'm into all this every every
person you guys have mentioned.

Speaker 4 (01:28:32):
I'm like, yeah, I'm in or flavor Flava with Olympics right,
like either one of them or Jordan LaForge, LeVar Burton.
I'm in wait, did I miss this convo? Is this
the Ambassador to the Aliens? When we have disclosure in
the coming weeks? Copy copy?

Speaker 2 (01:28:51):
Yes, the Earth Ambassador, I mean even Snoop and Martha
Stewart would be a great combo.

Speaker 3 (01:28:57):
Yet again, back at it.

Speaker 2 (01:28:58):
They can cook, they can play bang two sides to
an interesting coin.

Speaker 6 (01:29:04):
I don't know that everyone. I gave mine, which was
Lamar Burton. But did we did we go around? Did
we get everybody, Sam.

Speaker 2 (01:29:11):
You know who Lamar Burton is the Rainbow? Of course, Oh, Courtney,
you're so good.

Speaker 3 (01:29:18):
He was on Route Star Trek. Of course, I stand corrected.

Speaker 2 (01:29:22):
So wait, so we're choosing the most ideal person to
represent mankind in the face of disclosure?

Speaker 16 (01:29:31):
Apparently someone I talked back yesterday and someone said Shane
Gillis and that I guess that just has me thinking, Uh,
it'd be funny if THEO Vaughn was the ambassador. I
just imagine him sitting in his chair and there's a
little green alien sitting across from them.

Speaker 2 (01:29:48):
Yeah, THEO Vaughan has become like, you know, America's sweetheart.
I suppose in many ways, who else?

Speaker 3 (01:29:54):
Gabe?

Speaker 2 (01:29:54):
You know, Gabe has switched out with Ava because Ava
was on the late shift we've had.

Speaker 3 (01:29:58):
Certainly this has been a rotating a rotating seat.

Speaker 5 (01:30:01):
Gabe.

Speaker 2 (01:30:01):
Do you have a recommendation of the best person to
represent our humanity?

Speaker 7 (01:30:08):
Oh?

Speaker 2 (01:30:10):
You know, I've heard a lot of Ruby Goldberg, Roberts,
Dolly Parton.

Speaker 3 (01:30:18):
Dolly Parton.

Speaker 2 (01:30:19):
Yeah, Dolly Parton, Dolly Parton, America's sweetheart. If you don't
like Dolly Parton, we shouldn't be friends.

Speaker 3 (01:30:27):
Something's just wrong. You just haven't.

Speaker 2 (01:30:28):
If you don't love Dolly Apartment Dolly Parton, you just
haven't been exposed to her.

Speaker 3 (01:30:33):
You know, you haven't.

Speaker 2 (01:30:34):
You haven't had the benefit of just understanding Dolly Parton.
She's the best, and she's so warm, and she's so unique,
and she's herself. She was very devoted to her now
deceased husband, Talented beyond measure, happens to also be Miley
Cyrus's godmother. So we get Miley as a plus two.
Is she really singing Dance on the way?

Speaker 3 (01:30:55):
Oh, yeah, I know that.

Speaker 2 (01:30:56):
Yeah, she's Miley Cyrus's godmother and they're very respectful to
other I love that Miley Cyrus's voice, You too know wrong.

Speaker 4 (01:31:05):
I didn't like the Hannah Montana, but as an adult man,
I really like her today even right now.

Speaker 3 (01:31:12):
Love her.

Speaker 4 (01:31:13):
Yes, I love Miley Cyrus one hundred percent. Yeah, but
I didn't know Dolly Parton was her grandmother? Where her godmother?

Speaker 2 (01:31:20):
And yeah, because I worked in a show, Nashville Star,
which was like a singing competition show in Nashville, like
a thousand years ago, and Billy Ray Cyrus was the
host and Jewel, the singer, was the judge with John
Rich and Jeffrey Steele, the songwriter from Rascal Flats, And
then Miley was in the mix and Dolly Parton was

(01:31:43):
in the mix.

Speaker 3 (01:31:44):
It's a real family affair. How fun, how cute? Right, well,
my vote is Dolly. I vote for Dolly Parton too.

Speaker 2 (01:31:51):
I'm trying to think if there's a male counterpart to
our beloved. Oh you know what can you can't go
wrong with Keanu Reeves, right, everybody loves the matrix.

Speaker 3 (01:32:02):
Willie Nelson, Sam and Adam say, will Will that's a
good call. Yes, what about guy? What about Alwitz? We
could put him in the middle. He's a great representation
of humanity. Yeah that he'll just want to make.

Speaker 2 (01:32:17):
Sure that the aliens are aware that fourteen year old
girls are consenting with me.

Speaker 3 (01:32:24):
Thanks, thanks, thanks so much.

Speaker 4 (01:32:26):
Way to ruin it, Adam, some moments.

Speaker 3 (01:32:30):
You know, we got another.

Speaker 16 (01:32:32):
We have one more suggestion if you guys will yeah, wow.

Speaker 17 (01:32:36):
Hey, team, just on who we should get to represent
us if the aliens did come down. One ward with
Dame Judy Dench. But also I think we can't go
past to David Attenborough. I think he would be the perfect.

Speaker 2 (01:32:47):
Great, great call great call can Ted Lasso? Can we
get Ted Lash?

Speaker 3 (01:32:55):
Who is? Who is that man? You know?

Speaker 2 (01:32:57):
The actor he is for? You know him? What couldn't pull?
Someone needs to pull the photo?

Speaker 3 (01:33:03):
David. You'll know in two seconds. He's a podcaster, the
planet ure historian. Yeah, yeah, narrator Loveably.

Speaker 6 (01:33:13):
Yeah, you know him. Of all people, you know him.
He is one hundred years old. That's right, he's the
Britain is really yeah, according according to Wikipedia, and yeah,
nature historian, conservationist.

Speaker 3 (01:33:26):
Okay, I'm down.

Speaker 2 (01:33:28):
And then really Ben Affleck and Matt Damon, after this
lunch goes away, we could have the double duo of
Boston's greatest Did.

Speaker 3 (01:33:36):
You say, Taha? We should just send Taha? Why don't
we just make Taha house? He can party all the time.

Speaker 2 (01:33:43):
That's what Listen Right now, he's snuck out the room
because he has secret ambassador work.

Speaker 3 (01:33:47):
Probably he's on it.

Speaker 2 (01:33:49):
He knew that the he knew the assignment, and he
was not going to be late.

Speaker 5 (01:33:53):
You know what.

Speaker 4 (01:33:54):
In all seriousness, note Taha is one of the most
friendliest people I've ever met.

Speaker 3 (01:34:01):
It's so sincere.

Speaker 2 (01:34:02):
It's not like wicked behind doors, like he's always that way.

Speaker 3 (01:34:06):
And so I would actually not say no to Ta.
I'm not even He'd be like, oh shoot, I know.

Speaker 2 (01:34:12):
You probably must be feeling a little out of sorts,
but welcome. We're thrilled you're here. And you know what
can I get you? We have, we have showed up.

Speaker 4 (01:34:22):
You know.

Speaker 3 (01:34:23):
We don't love the high, but have about some cranberry juice.
It's very good. Welcome to America, into the world. We
love you, Taha. We'll see you tomorrow, We'll see you
on Sunday. Can't die? Don't you forget? Can I