November 29, 2023 • 31 mins
The final thoughts on Jared’s case are pieced together as John and Deanna find out about another case parallel to Jared’s murder and compare their investigation to those results.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
I've heard that there's a house that has some bodies
in the basement.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Somebody told you that Shakaia was a victim of human trafficking.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
I'm come to find out. This is like it exploded
into this huge thing.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
I knew, I just knew something was wrong.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Police say thirty three year old Jared Bride Again was
shot dead.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
I kept calling his phone during the drive.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
Gunned down in front of his two year old daughter.
It's a murder of the stun Jack Speach neighbors.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
His murder has attracted national attention, with the investigators saying
he was targeted.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
Eventually a police officer answered and told me to come
to the police station.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Justice is something that takes different shapes or forms.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
If you know something, heard something, please it's never too
late to do the right thing.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
So I'm Dana Thompson aka Body Movin, and.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
I'm John Green.
Speaker 4 (00:49):
For about a decade, Deanna and I spent a lot
of time on the Internet, especially in the underbelly of
the Internet, trying to identify and get animal abusers arrested.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
We spent countless hours scouring the dark web helping catch predators.
We spent over a year and a half trying to
get law enforcement to take us seriously about a man
that was killing cats online and he was threatening to
move on to kill humans. And that was Luca mcnatdah.
Speaker 4 (01:15):
Yeah, you might have heard about the Netflix special called
Don't Fuck with Cats.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
That's us. Well, now we're turning our online investigator skills
to some of the most unexplained, unsolved, and just ignored cases.
Speaker 4 (01:29):
This is True Crimes, the production of iHeartRadio and Kat's Studios.
Speaker 3 (01:36):
The last time we had an opportunity to speak with
forensic analysts Joseph Scott Morgan. He walked us both through
the ins and out of the likely evidence collected at
Jared's murder scene. It's a bit overwhelming. But now it's
time to check in with our Florida based investigator, Chris Salgado.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Chris has been looking at a Jared's x y Shana
and her husband Mario. Let's see what he's found.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Chris. Last time we spoke with you, we kind of
went over the Jared Bradigan case and went over the
details of the case and kind of some theories and
some information that Dan and I had come across, and
we needed your help as a private investigator get some
information that she and I couldn't find, and some of
that might be because it's too soon. So one of
(02:21):
the things we were looking for is if somebody moves,
how soon will the new records be reflected that we
can see somebody and find them where they're at now.
So since we saw you last hour, I spoke to
you last time. We asked you to run a report
for us. Were you able to do that?
Speaker 1 (02:36):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (02:36):
I was.
Speaker 5 (02:36):
I was able to run up some couple of reports
and fire off that information to you both.
Speaker 2 (02:41):
Great for the listeners. Dan and I were doing a
little research on a.
Speaker 6 (02:46):
House in Jacksonville Beach that looks like it was put
up for sale in mid October. We were trying to
see if somebody was still living in the state of Florida.
This was our first chance to look at the report. Okay,
now we have kind.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
Of heard something through the great Brian. I guess you
could say.
Speaker 1 (03:07):
I got a message from someone saying that the kids
were moving to a specific state. They were telling their
friends they're moving to a specific state. So I got
a message from someone asking me can we find them
in that state. I did record searches on like voter
records and things like that, and everything still pointed to Florida.
But because they only moved in October to wherever they
(03:31):
moved to, then you know, I figured, well, maybe it's
just too soon to have those records reflected, you know, correct.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
So I think what we're looking at here kind of
agrees with what we've been told.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
All right, let's go through this. So we got a
report now on Shana and Mario, but we're not gonna
we're not going to give too any details because we're
not going to dock this person on the air. Right. Yeah,
So what I want to know is did they move
to this specific state? And the first first note on
this report is they have an address in this state.
(04:04):
And then I have the address and the address is
linked to a specific company. The deed was transferred in September.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Hold on, I'm doing my thing and going on Google Map.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
Yeah, you do your thing. I'm going to do mine
real quick.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
I'm just looking at the area. I understand, and then
I'm going to do my next thing is verify when
that house it's sold. Robot.
Speaker 7 (04:25):
Okay, it wasn't difficult to get the information. The more
difficult part is going to be analyzing the information, because
you've got to remember a lot of times when we investigate,
it's not a lack of information, but it's an analysis
of all the large amounts of information data points that
(04:46):
we get to really understand what is relevant, what's misinformation
or frankly just wrong, and what's really relevant for the
focus at hand.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
So the address that I'm looking at shows that property
with sold late September.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
The address that we just got, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
One of the address that I'm looking at.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
Yeah, September twenty sixth is when the property was transferred.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
Yeah, and then a couple of weeks later in October,
they put the house in Florida up for.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
So they put the house up October twenty seventh is
when it was listed on solo.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
So this is within a month, within a month of
this house being purchased in another state, the house in
Florida is put up for sale. Right, So one of
the things that we know that they had done at
one point in time that started like a property management company.
Speaker 1 (05:35):
Yeah, we use it all right, Ena.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
Yep, I don't think this is related to that. Interesting, Yeah,
so this all this all fits together. I would say
all these pieces Fick together, you buy a house, you
put your old house up for sale. Yeah, yeah, wow,
I want to see prices.
Speaker 5 (05:54):
So that's listed as a current address to the individual
for and I think it's something pretty interesting. So it
looks like it's listed as a current address as of
mid December. But the transfer of what you're talking about,
(06:16):
like you folks said, happened in late September to a company, right,
and that company falls into the background of the context
of the situation. Let me pull that up here.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
But it looks like the property, just the land itself,
was purchased at the beginning of this year, and then
house is built on it and then purchased. Well, it
looks like the hunt was right or yeah, what she
heard was right? Right?
Speaker 1 (06:49):
Where's the city at Is it closer to COMADL.
Speaker 2 (06:52):
No, it's about two hundred and twenty miles inland from Tacoma.
I mean it's very very rule area. So I think
the takeaway from this fianna is is that the hunch
that somebody had or heard it sounds like actually happened, right.
Speaker 1 (07:12):
Yeah, But where's where's her husband?
Speaker 2 (07:15):
I guess it's the million dollar question that we're able
to get much information on him christ new husband.
Speaker 5 (07:24):
Yeah, yeah, I was. I'll go ahead and send that
off to you guys with was able to pull some
new information on them. It's behind the company and there's
a lot of there's a lot of different companies affiliated
with the certainly property management companies, there's a whole lot
of them. You guys have kind of tip of the
(07:48):
results here, and in the same email that I sent
you folks, it has the new address for the other
individual there.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
Yeah, but the thing is that she's on one end
of the country and he's on the other end of
the country. That that's the takeaway from this, Deanna, and
the question is his wife? So Deanna and I had
a really good conversation.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
With Joseph Joseph Scott Morgan.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
As a forensics guy, and we were talking about what
type of witness, what kind of testimony is made in court,
and I witness testimony. Unfortunately in this case, it's only
the two year old daughter, which she'll probably never be
called to stand. All she remembers is bang bang bang
and seeing daddy Lane on the ground. I don't think
(08:36):
she saw the shooter, so that then relies on evidence
left at the scene. So I was thinking about it. Dianna,
after that conversation yesterday, said, well, there's one other way,
and that's a confession. Somebody would confess to it. And
so the fact that she's on one side of the
country and he may be staying at the other end
(08:56):
of the country is kind of telling. I mean, you know,
the going theory people on the internet believe that, you know,
the ex wife is responsible for his death, and a
lot of people believe that her current husband may have
something to do with it or he knows information about it.
Right m h. So you would think you would, you know,
(09:18):
unless the marriage were really bad, you would stay together.
And you know, if possibly you were somehow connected to
what happened to Jared, you would stay together. So I
just it just seems odd that he's on one end
of the country and she's on the other coast.
Speaker 3 (09:36):
Let's stop here for a break. We'll be back in
a moment.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
Do you want me to give you a theory? Go okay,
I don't think she has anything to do with it.
I don't think she knows about it. I don't think
this is just okay? Can j sure? I don't think
she knows about it. I don't think she had anything
to do with it, but I think her circle does.
Right now, who that person is I don't know yet,
(10:11):
But let's pretend for a moment that it's her husband,
that he hired some guy like his first time kind
of hit job, right, hypothetically for five grand Let's just
say this is all hypothetical. Well, I mean, how stupid
would you have to be to kill your ex husband
two miles from your home? Do you know what I mean?
Speaker 2 (10:32):
Like?
Speaker 1 (10:32):
How stupid would you have to be to do that?
You're in this contentious custody battle. This makes you suspect
number one, and you know this, You're not stupid, right, yeah,
but if you don't have any if you have like
plausible deniability, then I mean, then your innocent an alibi,
You have an alibi you've been you're at home with
the kids. Then okay. Now she might suspect him, right,
(10:56):
she might suspect that he had something to do with this,
And they've been fighting about it, and it's been causing resentment,
and it's been causing this undercurrent of disdain amongst them.
She tells, Mom, I can't I can't be with this
guy anymore, Like we're just so different and I've outgrown
him and blah blah blah blah. Mom, I'll take care
(11:17):
of it. We'll get this handled. A month before they
start moving, remember, a month before they start moving, Mom
and dad, through this company, purchased this house in Washington. Yeah,
she goes to her husband, I'm leaving you, and you're
not coming with me. I'm moving. I'm moving as far
away from this as I It's too painful for me
to be here anymore. I mean, this is just me
(11:42):
guessing at this point.
Speaker 2 (11:43):
I mean that is a huge difference.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
Yeah, but why would he stay? If let's pretend he's
guilty of something, why would he stay? Is he allowed
to leave Florida? Now? The company that he owns with her,
he's the primary worker there. And she did an interview
and she said, my husband runs this company, right, Yeah,
it is registered in the state of Florida. But that
(12:07):
doesn't mean he has to live there, right. But if
his rentals are in Florida, then you know he would
stay there.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
All right, I'm giving a little digging while.
Speaker 1 (12:17):
We're No, no, I'm just talking. I'm just talking.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
No, I hear you.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
But I mean, seriously, think about it. How stupid would
you have to be to kill your husband, who everybody
knows you basically hate, right, That's that's a strong word,
but you basically hate him.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
You have animosity, right, And at one point in time
you told somebody at a tattoo poll or you wish
somebody some way to shut him up. Yep, again, this
is all hypothetical.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
Allegedly, and in any situation that this has been brought up,
I have defended this woman and you have to and
we're the only ones doing that. Are we nuts? I mean?
Are we missing something?
Speaker 2 (12:59):
Well? I think the thing is is is who has
motive in this right?
Speaker 1 (13:03):
Who has clearly?
Speaker 2 (13:06):
Bono?
Speaker 1 (13:06):
Who let's talk about that. You're right because her moving
seven months after his murder is kind of like because
one of the things that people have been saying is
that maybe she wanted to move out of state, and
Jared said, no, you're not taking my kids out of state.
Florida is their home. You're not leaving Florida.
Speaker 2 (13:28):
You're not going to take my kids. You're not taking
my kids as the country, right.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
Right, And sure that's the reason. That's a that that
could be a motive for.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
Sure, But I think I think that's why a lot
of people that at first don't get reaction, is she
had something to do with it because she would have
benefited by getting that's wife would have gotten the full
custody of the kids. So I mean, for sure, now
that may be true, but that doesn't mean she she
actually committed the act.
Speaker 1 (13:55):
So I think anything's possible. Anything is possible.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
One thing actually popped into my head recently was the date.
So February happened to Jarrett right, correct, and what happened
two days before February?
Speaker 1 (14:11):
Yeah, It's just what does that have to do with anything?
Speaker 2 (14:15):
You know, after glove, you do something out of love.
If you love me, you'll do this for me. Oh,
I mean that's that's you know that doesn't. It just
popped into my head recently when I was just kind
of doing the timeline of things, like well, wait a minute,
Valentine's Day was two days before, and so it just
kind of struck me odd that maybe it was like,
you know, if you love me, you'll do this for me.
Speaker 1 (14:37):
I don't know, I'm just that's a really good, really
good point.
Speaker 2 (14:41):
Does it sound like the ex wife is somebody who
would say something like that. I mean, based on what
we don't know about I wish She goes to a
tattoo poller and says, I wish somebody would there was
a way to make them to shut up.
Speaker 5 (14:54):
You know what you gave me a couple of links.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
One was to map, one was to.
Speaker 5 (15:00):
Repository of information. Maybe I can highlight in there, you
know what's corroborated from my end, specific points. Now everything
but specific points, and then you guys can pick it
up from there and I can email you saying, hey,
take a look at the spreadsheet and you know that's.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
More information for you.
Speaker 5 (15:17):
Depending on how intricate this this is on this this
idea of this hypothesis, right, depending on how intricate it
is or was, you know, somebody could be using talk.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
With walkie talking Again. Part of me thinks, man, it
was a very professional and there's other aspects of this crime.
You think it was kind of amateur the way they
did it. A professional wouldn't have done that, right, So yeah, okay,
So getting back to the report, is there anything else
we need? I think that answers our big question about
you know, did she leave the state of Florida, And
(15:49):
now we know for sure, And it kind of goes
with what we were told, So I think I verifies it.
Now the question is that why did you go all
the way across the country.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Yeah, that's that we need to figure out.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Right, Well, Chris, thank you very very much. That was
exactly what we were looking for.
Speaker 1 (16:06):
I think John and I just kind of want to
know if they've got I'm sure they do, but what
kind of evidence they have that they're not releasing and
not that not that anything that we find is going
to like break the case wide open, sure, but just
for just for theory wise, you know, like do they
have a piece of evidence that they haven't released to
the public that they're holding on to that's like key
(16:28):
in this case, and a footprint would be one of
those things.
Speaker 5 (16:32):
Definitely, And that's that's a lot of times that's the
frustration piece inside an ongoing investigation. But we all know,
you know, law enforcement does a very good job at
running down all the leaves that they possibly can, and
you know, trying to keep things close to their chest
because they don't want to unfurl information where it's low
premature and it sits off the perspective of tender or
(16:54):
the targeted person by law enforcement. Right, So you know,
we're kind of the public in general is kind of
left in the dark with what's going on. What evidence
do they have, what tactics have they done, did they
do a tower dump, did they do did they find
a shoeprint like you're saying there, you know, and all
that's kind of TVD until they, you know, they find
(17:15):
they find themselves comfortable enough to either release the information
or act.
Speaker 1 (17:19):
On it, right, right, And I and I appreciate that,
and I do respect that. I know it's important. So
I like, I'm certainly not going to you know, hope
that they release this information just conjecture, you know, just talking. Yeah,
But so it's you know, and it's weird like in Jacksonville,
they do the top the weather collection four minutes before
(17:44):
the hour, and so everything is at like two fifty six,
three fifty six, four fifty six, five fifty six, you know,
et cetera. And I'm looking at seven fifty six pm,
and I know that is when he called his wife,
right and they were on the phone for like a minute,
and then he died like two minutes later. And I'm
(18:04):
looking at that time in my heart just starts beating,
like I don't know, you're you're looking at the weather
in the location where the sky was shot at that
specific time, and it's just it's it's kind of fucked
up anyway.
Speaker 5 (18:16):
Yeah, it touches on all of us. You know, we're
all compassionate, and you know, it's just you can only
imagine what Kirsten's going.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
Oh no, I can't imagine. I cannot imagine. Let's stop
here for another quick break. I've been dying to talk
(18:43):
to you about this, all right. Do you remember how
we were talking about Jared's parents, Yeah, and if if
they were around and if you know, they had access
to the twins. Yeah, okay, So I started looking into
that Markle Act that we were talking about a while ago.
And the Markle Act, just going to repeat it real quick,
(19:04):
it gives grandparents' rights to their grandchildren when there's tragic circumstances,
all right. And that was like the really general like explanation.
All right. So I was like, well, let me go
find out, you know, if this would help Jared's parents. Right.
So I'm reading about it and it says, you know,
(19:25):
this act was you know, enacted because of the tragic
circumstances surrounding Dan Markle's murderer, right, So I was like, well,
what kind of circumstances would the grandparents be given access
to their grandchildren? You know, like what happened here? So
I wanted to go look at this Dan Markle case, right,
(19:47):
because it happened in Florida too, by the way, in Tallahassee.
This is a Florida like statute. So I was like,
all right, let me dig into this case just very briefly,
just to get an understanding of what's going on here.
Speaker 2 (20:00):
Where'd you find out?
Speaker 1 (20:01):
Dude? Okay, let me uh let me pull it up again. Okay,
all right, so listen. Dan is on a business trip
in September of twenty twelve. All right, September twenty twelve,
Dan's on a business trip. When he gets home, he
finds out that his wife, Wendy, her maiden name is Adelson.
You have to remember that. Okay. When he gets home,
(20:23):
he finds that his kids are gone and Wendy has filed,
like for divorce. So what happened was she filed for
divorce and just moved to Miami. I think it was Miami.
I'm not one hundred percent sure. Anyway, she moves far
away let's just say that she moves far away, and
Dan is like, okay, you can divorce me. That's fine,
but you were not taking my kids. Right. So a
(20:46):
year later, well not quite a year, but in twenty thirteen,
in June of twenty thirteen, the judge comes out and says,
you can't relocate without permission from the father. So they
the divorce is finally settled, they cannot leave. The tally
has the area, I'm assuming, and Dan can now see
(21:08):
his kids. Great, right, Well, something happens between July of
twenty thirteen in May of twenty fourteen, because the next
thing in the timeline is that the court documents, I'm sorry,
there's a hearing scheduled for emotion to prohibit Wendy's mother
from seeing her grandchildren unsupervised. All right, Now, this hearing
(21:32):
never happens because two months later, Dan is murdered. Really yeah,
so they're okay, So listen, there's this divorce, there's this
contentious custody battle. It goes on for a long time,
and now all of a sudden, Dad's dead and he's murdered.
And now listen to this. This is the thing, all right,
this is the thing he is shot after dropping his
(21:54):
children off at school. So he has this kids, he
drops them off at school. I think it was like
nine in the morning. He dropped him off at preschool.
I think he went to go work out. He comes
back home, it's like eleven o'clock two hours later, and
he is shot in his driveway, in his driveway. So
he's okay, listen, So the parallels here are very similar.
(22:17):
Jared had the kids, he dropped him off in his car. Shot,
do you know what I mean? Like, okay, heading home
right in his way home, right, shot. Yeah, it gets
crazier though, it gets even more kind of like parallel. Right.
So this is in July twenty fourteen that this happens. Okay,
July eighteen, twenty fourteen, he's shot. Okay. So after that,
(22:40):
a couple of days go by, and the police release
an image of a green Prius scene in the area
around the time that the crime occurred. So this is
our Ford f one fifty, right in Jared's case. Right,
in Jared's case, this is our Ford f one fifty.
So in Dan's case, it's a green Prius, all right, ja.
So they release this image of the screen Prius and
(23:02):
then there's some like you know, the memorial services held,
there's you know, general stuff. Okay. The next big thing though,
that happens is that in February of twenty sixteen, so
like a year and a half go by, the Tallahassee
Police Department starts to like slowly release like documents about
the circumstances running the death, like things like the keys
(23:27):
were in the ignition and the house was locked, it
wasn't robbed, and you know, things like you know that
they would normally keep.
Speaker 3 (23:34):
To themselves only the person who committed Yeah.
Speaker 1 (23:38):
Right, they start releasing their puma, right, or some of
the puma, right, yep. Okay, so this is this is
where it gets kind of nitty gritty. Oh and the
other thing that they released is that they don't think
that the prius belonged to the driver. And I don't
know how they know this, but that's what they release.
(23:58):
All right. But here's where it gets like, wow, all right,
in April of twenty sixteen, Now, remember he was murdered
in twenty fourteen. Yep, all right. In April of twenty sixteen,
the FBI, all right, and the FBI is involved. They
record a conversation between a guy named Charlie Adelson and
(24:21):
Catherine Magbuana at a restaurant. Right now, Remember I told
you his ex wife's name is Wendy Addelson, correct, So
are they related? That's her brother? Oh okay, so this
is her brother, all right. And when I first was
reading this, I'm like, okay, well, who's this dude? Right?
And why is this important?
Speaker 2 (24:41):
Well?
Speaker 1 (24:42):
Just keep that in mind. And they record this conversation
at a restaurant that's in April. In May, a month later,
they arrest somebody, and they arrest this guy named Sigfredo Garcia,
and he denies everything. He's like, I don't know you're
talking about you know the full press, right yep? Okay,
So somebody's arrested. Now, in June, like a month after
(25:04):
he was arrested, documents in the murder case become unsealed.
In those documents, there's another suspect named His name is
Louis Rivera or Louis Rivera, and that establishes a connection
between Adelson and Garcia, all right, So it provides more
details than a timeline of the murder, according to the
Tallahausee Police Department. So a jury indicts both Garcia and
(25:29):
Rivera for this murder. So there's now a trial is
going to be set, right, So Sigfredo pleads not guilty. Right,
Louis Rivera, I think he made a deal. He pled guilty,
he made a deal, and so Sigfredo his trial was
set for November fourteenth, twenty sixteen. Then Rivera pleads guilty
(25:53):
to second degree murder and is sentenced to nineteen years
in prison. So he doesn't have a he doesn't have
a trial, all right, But just then Catherine is arrested.
So I'm guessing at this I haven't read the detail,
but I'm guessing that Louis Rivera like he got he
copped a deal because right right at that time, Catherine's arrested,
(26:16):
so he was cooperating, right right, And says, listen, this
Catherine lady hired us, okay, hired me and sik Credo wow. Right,
and this Catherine woman is connected to Wendy's brother, Charles. Okay,
So this is all kinds of crazy, right, And there's
a lot of other things that happened. The the FBI
(26:37):
need to analyze the the recording, and there's a lot
of different kinds of COVID happens, you know, in all this,
so things have been delayed, right, But it boils down
to Charlie hired these two people through Catherine. She was
like the go between, all right, and Charlie's trial doesn't
(26:59):
start until a role this year, twenty twenty three, so
we don't know what's going to happen there. But Catherine
turned state's witness and eventually I think she got a mistrial.
This case is out. This case is crazy, but it's
so similar to the suspicions that people have about our case. Right.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
What happened to Jared?
Speaker 4 (27:19):
Same right, same divorce, contractious family, Right, He's taking his
kids home, gets out of his car, gets shot.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
Nobody knows who's done it.
Speaker 4 (27:32):
It looks like it was a well we don't think
the police have said that Jared was targeted by somebody.
The way it was done, it appeared like it was
like a professional.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
Yeah. And it's important to note too that the Tallahassee
Police Department, very very very quickly after the murder also
said that that Dan Markle was targeted, that he was
the intended victim.
Speaker 2 (27:55):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
So it's a very similar like we know this is
targeted and I'm sure people were like, why, how did
they think this was targeted? Well, you know, they just did.
Speaker 4 (28:04):
While it's still there are nothing of any value was taken,
right except for his Dan Markle's life. So because of
all this, they passed the law in Florida so that
Dan's parents could get access.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
Yeah, I'm not sure exactly, like why Wendy denied. Okay,
So here's the thing. So Charlie is in jail right now.
He has a trial scheduled for April of twenty twenty three.
But his sister, who is Dan Markle's ex wife, like
who started all this, I guess, is not facing criminal
charges at this moment, all right, right.
Speaker 4 (28:42):
And she still has custody of the kids.
Speaker 1 (28:44):
She does, she does, and apparently she's been denying access
to her children to Dance parents.
Speaker 4 (28:53):
So to what's happening with Kirsten.
Speaker 1 (28:55):
And her and so the law though, here's the sad thing. Okay,
the law, the market law, it's not going to help them,
and they still pushed for it, like they still saw
the value of this. The law, the Dan Markle law
or I'm sorry, the Markel Act, would only benefit the Markles.
If Wendy was convicted. So this tragic circumstances. Part of
(29:19):
this law means that the grandparents of the murder victim
would have access to their children if their spouse was
convicted of the murder. So it's not gonna it's not
gonna help.
Speaker 2 (29:32):
Jaredy Jared's case. It wouldn't.
Speaker 4 (29:36):
It would not do to use because nobody has yet
to be arrested, prosecuted, and found guilty of committeing the act.
Right so that happens, the ex wife can keep the
kids to herself, and as we know right now, she's
relocated to another state.
Speaker 1 (29:54):
Correct. So it was kind of a waste of time
for me to look into this because it's just not
going to help jared parents. But on the bright side,
I found this case, you know, that is eerily similar
to Jared's case, the same kind of situation, kind of
the same mo it's early similar and and the only
(30:15):
reason that I kind of want to talk to miss
Bradygan about it is just like I don't want to
and I don't think she is giving up hope. I
don't think she I don't think she's ever going to
give up hope, you know what I mean. But I
know she's I know she's desperate, right, Like she wants
justice for her husband. And if we tell her the story,
if she doesn't know about it, if we tell her
the story and say, look, these are like really similar
(30:35):
circumstances and this family. You know it took a year
just to get somebody arrested. Don't lose hope. It's only
it's I know it's saying it's only been eight months
is shitty. That's not what I That's not how I
want to say it. But like we need to give
it a little bit more time. More on that next time.
Speaker 3 (30:52):
True Crimes is executive produced by Stephanie Leidecker, Deanna Thompson,
Courtney Armstrong, Jeff Shane, Andrew Arnaut, and me John Green.
Additional producing by Connor Powell and Gabe Castile, Editing by
Jeff Ti Music by vanikor Music.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
True Crimes is a production of iHeartRadio and Katie Studios.
For more podcasts from iHeart Radio, please visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
I've heard that there's a house that has some bodies
in the basement.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Somebody told you that Shakaia was a victim of human trafficking.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
I'm come to find out. This is like it exploded
into this huge thing.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
I knew, I just knew something was wrong.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Police say thirty three year old Jared Bride Again was
shot dead.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
I kept calling his phone during the drive.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
Gunned down in front of his two year old daughter.
It's a murder of the stun Jack Speach neighbors.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
His murder has attracted national attention, with the investigators saying
he was targeted.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
Eventually a police officer answered and told me to come
to the police station.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Justice is something that takes different shapes or forms.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
If you know something, heard something, please it's never too
late to do the right thing.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
So I'm Dana Thompson aka Body Movin, and.
Speaker 3 (00:48):
I'm John Green.
Speaker 4 (00:49):
For about a decade, Deanna and I spent a lot
of time on the Internet, especially in the underbelly of
the Internet, trying to identify and get animal abusers arrested.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
We spent countless hours scouring the dark web helping catch predators.
We spent over a year and a half trying to
get law enforcement to take us seriously about a man
that was killing cats online and he was threatening to
move on to kill humans. And that was Luca mcnatdah.
Speaker 4 (01:15):
Yeah, you might have heard about the Netflix special called
Don't Fuck with Cats.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
That's us. Well, now we're turning our online investigator skills
to some of the most unexplained, unsolved, and just ignored cases.
Speaker 4 (01:29):
This is True Crimes, the production of iHeartRadio and Kat's Studios.
Speaker 3 (01:36):
The last time we had an opportunity to speak with
forensic analysts Joseph Scott Morgan. He walked us both through
the ins and out of the likely evidence collected at
Jared's murder scene. It's a bit overwhelming. But now it's
time to check in with our Florida based investigator, Chris Salgado.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Chris has been looking at a Jared's x y Shana
and her husband Mario. Let's see what he's found.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Chris. Last time we spoke with you, we kind of
went over the Jared Bradigan case and went over the
details of the case and kind of some theories and
some information that Dan and I had come across, and
we needed your help as a private investigator get some
information that she and I couldn't find, and some of
that might be because it's too soon. So one of
(02:21):
the things we were looking for is if somebody moves,
how soon will the new records be reflected that we
can see somebody and find them where they're at now.
So since we saw you last hour, I spoke to
you last time. We asked you to run a report
for us. Were you able to do that?
Speaker 1 (02:36):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (02:36):
I was.
Speaker 5 (02:36):
I was able to run up some couple of reports
and fire off that information to you both.
Speaker 2 (02:41):
Great for the listeners. Dan and I were doing a
little research on a.
Speaker 6 (02:46):
House in Jacksonville Beach that looks like it was put
up for sale in mid October. We were trying to
see if somebody was still living in the state of Florida.
This was our first chance to look at the report. Okay,
now we have kind.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
Of heard something through the great Brian. I guess you
could say.
Speaker 1 (03:07):
I got a message from someone saying that the kids
were moving to a specific state. They were telling their
friends they're moving to a specific state. So I got
a message from someone asking me can we find them
in that state. I did record searches on like voter
records and things like that, and everything still pointed to Florida.
But because they only moved in October to wherever they
(03:31):
moved to, then you know, I figured, well, maybe it's
just too soon to have those records reflected, you know, correct.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
So I think what we're looking at here kind of
agrees with what we've been told.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
All right, let's go through this. So we got a
report now on Shana and Mario, but we're not gonna
we're not going to give too any details because we're
not going to dock this person on the air. Right. Yeah,
So what I want to know is did they move
to this specific state? And the first first note on
this report is they have an address in this state.
(04:04):
And then I have the address and the address is
linked to a specific company. The deed was transferred in September.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Hold on, I'm doing my thing and going on Google Map.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
Yeah, you do your thing. I'm going to do mine
real quick.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
I'm just looking at the area. I understand, and then
I'm going to do my next thing is verify when
that house it's sold. Robot.
Speaker 7 (04:25):
Okay, it wasn't difficult to get the information. The more
difficult part is going to be analyzing the information, because
you've got to remember a lot of times when we investigate,
it's not a lack of information, but it's an analysis
of all the large amounts of information data points that
(04:46):
we get to really understand what is relevant, what's misinformation
or frankly just wrong, and what's really relevant for the
focus at hand.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
So the address that I'm looking at shows that property
with sold late September.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
The address that we just got, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
One of the address that I'm looking at.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
Yeah, September twenty sixth is when the property was transferred.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
Yeah, and then a couple of weeks later in October,
they put the house in Florida up for.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
So they put the house up October twenty seventh is
when it was listed on solo.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
So this is within a month, within a month of
this house being purchased in another state, the house in
Florida is put up for sale. Right, So one of
the things that we know that they had done at
one point in time that started like a property management company.
Speaker 1 (05:35):
Yeah, we use it all right, Ena.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
Yep, I don't think this is related to that. Interesting, Yeah,
so this all this all fits together. I would say
all these pieces Fick together, you buy a house, you
put your old house up for sale. Yeah, yeah, wow,
I want to see prices.
Speaker 5 (05:54):
So that's listed as a current address to the individual
for and I think it's something pretty interesting. So it
looks like it's listed as a current address as of
mid December. But the transfer of what you're talking about,
(06:16):
like you folks said, happened in late September to a company, right,
and that company falls into the background of the context
of the situation. Let me pull that up here.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
But it looks like the property, just the land itself,
was purchased at the beginning of this year, and then
house is built on it and then purchased. Well, it
looks like the hunt was right or yeah, what she
heard was right? Right?
Speaker 1 (06:49):
Where's the city at Is it closer to COMADL.
Speaker 2 (06:52):
No, it's about two hundred and twenty miles inland from Tacoma.
I mean it's very very rule area. So I think
the takeaway from this fianna is is that the hunch
that somebody had or heard it sounds like actually happened, right.
Speaker 1 (07:12):
Yeah, But where's where's her husband?
Speaker 2 (07:15):
I guess it's the million dollar question that we're able
to get much information on him christ new husband.
Speaker 5 (07:24):
Yeah, yeah, I was. I'll go ahead and send that
off to you guys with was able to pull some
new information on them. It's behind the company and there's
a lot of there's a lot of different companies affiliated
with the certainly property management companies, there's a whole lot
of them. You guys have kind of tip of the
(07:48):
results here, and in the same email that I sent
you folks, it has the new address for the other
individual there.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
Yeah, but the thing is that she's on one end
of the country and he's on the other end of
the country. That that's the takeaway from this, Deanna, and
the question is his wife? So Deanna and I had
a really good conversation.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
With Joseph Joseph Scott Morgan.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
As a forensics guy, and we were talking about what
type of witness, what kind of testimony is made in court,
and I witness testimony. Unfortunately in this case, it's only
the two year old daughter, which she'll probably never be
called to stand. All she remembers is bang bang bang
and seeing daddy Lane on the ground. I don't think
(08:36):
she saw the shooter, so that then relies on evidence
left at the scene. So I was thinking about it. Dianna,
after that conversation yesterday, said, well, there's one other way,
and that's a confession. Somebody would confess to it. And
so the fact that she's on one side of the
country and he may be staying at the other end
(08:56):
of the country is kind of telling. I mean, you know,
the going theory people on the internet believe that, you know,
the ex wife is responsible for his death, and a
lot of people believe that her current husband may have
something to do with it or he knows information about it.
Right m h. So you would think you would, you know,
(09:18):
unless the marriage were really bad, you would stay together.
And you know, if possibly you were somehow connected to
what happened to Jared, you would stay together. So I
just it just seems odd that he's on one end
of the country and she's on the other coast.
Speaker 3 (09:36):
Let's stop here for a break. We'll be back in
a moment.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
Do you want me to give you a theory? Go okay,
I don't think she has anything to do with it.
I don't think she knows about it. I don't think
this is just okay? Can j sure? I don't think
she knows about it. I don't think she had anything
to do with it, but I think her circle does.
Right now, who that person is I don't know yet,
(10:11):
But let's pretend for a moment that it's her husband,
that he hired some guy like his first time kind
of hit job, right, hypothetically for five grand Let's just
say this is all hypothetical. Well, I mean, how stupid
would you have to be to kill your ex husband
two miles from your home? Do you know what I mean?
Speaker 2 (10:32):
Like?
Speaker 1 (10:32):
How stupid would you have to be to do that?
You're in this contentious custody battle. This makes you suspect
number one, and you know this, You're not stupid, right, yeah,
but if you don't have any if you have like
plausible deniability, then I mean, then your innocent an alibi,
You have an alibi you've been you're at home with
the kids. Then okay. Now she might suspect him, right,
(10:56):
she might suspect that he had something to do with this,
And they've been fighting about it, and it's been causing resentment,
and it's been causing this undercurrent of disdain amongst them.
She tells, Mom, I can't I can't be with this
guy anymore, Like we're just so different and I've outgrown
him and blah blah blah blah. Mom, I'll take care
(11:17):
of it. We'll get this handled. A month before they
start moving, remember, a month before they start moving, Mom
and dad, through this company, purchased this house in Washington. Yeah,
she goes to her husband, I'm leaving you, and you're
not coming with me. I'm moving. I'm moving as far
away from this as I It's too painful for me
to be here anymore. I mean, this is just me
(11:42):
guessing at this point.
Speaker 2 (11:43):
I mean that is a huge difference.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
Yeah, but why would he stay? If let's pretend he's
guilty of something, why would he stay? Is he allowed
to leave Florida? Now? The company that he owns with her,
he's the primary worker there. And she did an interview
and she said, my husband runs this company, right, Yeah,
it is registered in the state of Florida. But that
(12:07):
doesn't mean he has to live there, right. But if
his rentals are in Florida, then you know he would
stay there.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
All right, I'm giving a little digging while.
Speaker 1 (12:17):
We're No, no, I'm just talking. I'm just talking.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
No, I hear you.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
But I mean, seriously, think about it. How stupid would
you have to be to kill your husband, who everybody
knows you basically hate, right, That's that's a strong word,
but you basically hate him.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
You have animosity, right, And at one point in time
you told somebody at a tattoo poll or you wish
somebody some way to shut him up. Yep, again, this
is all hypothetical.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
Allegedly, and in any situation that this has been brought up,
I have defended this woman and you have to and
we're the only ones doing that. Are we nuts? I mean?
Are we missing something?
Speaker 2 (12:59):
Well? I think the thing is is is who has
motive in this right?
Speaker 1 (13:03):
Who has clearly?
Speaker 2 (13:06):
Bono?
Speaker 1 (13:06):
Who let's talk about that. You're right because her moving
seven months after his murder is kind of like because
one of the things that people have been saying is
that maybe she wanted to move out of state, and
Jared said, no, you're not taking my kids out of state.
Florida is their home. You're not leaving Florida.
Speaker 2 (13:28):
You're not going to take my kids. You're not taking
my kids as the country, right.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
Right, And sure that's the reason. That's a that that
could be a motive for.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
Sure, But I think I think that's why a lot
of people that at first don't get reaction, is she
had something to do with it because she would have
benefited by getting that's wife would have gotten the full
custody of the kids. So I mean, for sure, now
that may be true, but that doesn't mean she she
actually committed the act.
Speaker 1 (13:55):
So I think anything's possible. Anything is possible.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
One thing actually popped into my head recently was the date.
So February happened to Jarrett right, correct, and what happened
two days before February?
Speaker 1 (14:11):
Yeah, It's just what does that have to do with anything?
Speaker 2 (14:15):
You know, after glove, you do something out of love.
If you love me, you'll do this for me. Oh,
I mean that's that's you know that doesn't. It just
popped into my head recently when I was just kind
of doing the timeline of things, like well, wait a minute,
Valentine's Day was two days before, and so it just
kind of struck me odd that maybe it was like,
you know, if you love me, you'll do this for me.
Speaker 1 (14:37):
I don't know, I'm just that's a really good, really
good point.
Speaker 2 (14:41):
Does it sound like the ex wife is somebody who
would say something like that. I mean, based on what
we don't know about I wish She goes to a
tattoo poller and says, I wish somebody would there was
a way to make them to shut up.
Speaker 5 (14:54):
You know what you gave me a couple of links.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
One was to map, one was to.
Speaker 5 (15:00):
Repository of information. Maybe I can highlight in there, you
know what's corroborated from my end, specific points. Now everything
but specific points, and then you guys can pick it
up from there and I can email you saying, hey,
take a look at the spreadsheet and you know that's.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
More information for you.
Speaker 5 (15:17):
Depending on how intricate this this is on this this
idea of this hypothesis, right, depending on how intricate it
is or was, you know, somebody could be using talk.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
With walkie talking Again. Part of me thinks, man, it
was a very professional and there's other aspects of this crime.
You think it was kind of amateur the way they
did it. A professional wouldn't have done that, right, So yeah, okay,
So getting back to the report, is there anything else
we need? I think that answers our big question about
you know, did she leave the state of Florida, And
(15:49):
now we know for sure, And it kind of goes
with what we were told, So I think I verifies it.
Now the question is that why did you go all
the way across the country.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Yeah, that's that we need to figure out.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Right, Well, Chris, thank you very very much. That was
exactly what we were looking for.
Speaker 1 (16:06):
I think John and I just kind of want to
know if they've got I'm sure they do, but what
kind of evidence they have that they're not releasing and
not that not that anything that we find is going
to like break the case wide open, sure, but just
for just for theory wise, you know, like do they
have a piece of evidence that they haven't released to
the public that they're holding on to that's like key
(16:28):
in this case, and a footprint would be one of
those things.
Speaker 5 (16:32):
Definitely, And that's that's a lot of times that's the
frustration piece inside an ongoing investigation. But we all know,
you know, law enforcement does a very good job at
running down all the leaves that they possibly can, and
you know, trying to keep things close to their chest
because they don't want to unfurl information where it's low
premature and it sits off the perspective of tender or
(16:54):
the targeted person by law enforcement. Right, So you know,
we're kind of the public in general is kind of
left in the dark with what's going on. What evidence
do they have, what tactics have they done, did they
do a tower dump, did they do did they find
a shoeprint like you're saying there, you know, and all
that's kind of TVD until they, you know, they find
(17:15):
they find themselves comfortable enough to either release the information
or act.
Speaker 1 (17:19):
On it, right, right, And I and I appreciate that,
and I do respect that. I know it's important. So
I like, I'm certainly not going to you know, hope
that they release this information just conjecture, you know, just talking. Yeah,
But so it's you know, and it's weird like in Jacksonville,
they do the top the weather collection four minutes before
(17:44):
the hour, and so everything is at like two fifty six,
three fifty six, four fifty six, five fifty six, you know,
et cetera. And I'm looking at seven fifty six pm,
and I know that is when he called his wife,
right and they were on the phone for like a minute,
and then he died like two minutes later. And I'm
(18:04):
looking at that time in my heart just starts beating,
like I don't know, you're you're looking at the weather
in the location where the sky was shot at that
specific time, and it's just it's it's kind of fucked
up anyway.
Speaker 5 (18:16):
Yeah, it touches on all of us. You know, we're
all compassionate, and you know, it's just you can only
imagine what Kirsten's going.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
Oh no, I can't imagine. I cannot imagine. Let's stop
here for another quick break. I've been dying to talk
(18:43):
to you about this, all right. Do you remember how
we were talking about Jared's parents, Yeah, and if if
they were around and if you know, they had access
to the twins. Yeah, okay, So I started looking into
that Markle Act that we were talking about a while ago.
And the Markle Act, just going to repeat it real quick,
(19:04):
it gives grandparents' rights to their grandchildren when there's tragic circumstances,
all right. And that was like the really general like explanation.
All right. So I was like, well, let me go
find out, you know, if this would help Jared's parents. Right.
So I'm reading about it and it says, you know,
(19:25):
this act was you know, enacted because of the tragic
circumstances surrounding Dan Markle's murderer, right, So I was like, well,
what kind of circumstances would the grandparents be given access
to their grandchildren? You know, like what happened here? So
I wanted to go look at this Dan Markle case, right,
(19:47):
because it happened in Florida too, by the way, in Tallahassee.
This is a Florida like statute. So I was like,
all right, let me dig into this case just very briefly,
just to get an understanding of what's going on here.
Speaker 2 (20:00):
Where'd you find out?
Speaker 1 (20:01):
Dude? Okay, let me uh let me pull it up again. Okay,
all right, so listen. Dan is on a business trip
in September of twenty twelve. All right, September twenty twelve,
Dan's on a business trip. When he gets home, he
finds out that his wife, Wendy, her maiden name is Adelson.
You have to remember that. Okay. When he gets home,
(20:23):
he finds that his kids are gone and Wendy has filed,
like for divorce. So what happened was she filed for
divorce and just moved to Miami. I think it was Miami.
I'm not one hundred percent sure. Anyway, she moves far
away let's just say that she moves far away, and
Dan is like, okay, you can divorce me. That's fine,
but you were not taking my kids. Right. So a
(20:46):
year later, well not quite a year, but in twenty thirteen,
in June of twenty thirteen, the judge comes out and says,
you can't relocate without permission from the father. So they
the divorce is finally settled, they cannot leave. The tally
has the area, I'm assuming, and Dan can now see
(21:08):
his kids. Great, right, Well, something happens between July of
twenty thirteen in May of twenty fourteen, because the next
thing in the timeline is that the court documents, I'm sorry,
there's a hearing scheduled for emotion to prohibit Wendy's mother
from seeing her grandchildren unsupervised. All right, Now, this hearing
(21:32):
never happens because two months later, Dan is murdered. Really yeah,
so they're okay, So listen, there's this divorce, there's this
contentious custody battle. It goes on for a long time,
and now all of a sudden, Dad's dead and he's murdered.
And now listen to this. This is the thing, all right,
this is the thing he is shot after dropping his
(21:54):
children off at school. So he has this kids, he
drops them off at school. I think it was like
nine in the morning. He dropped him off at preschool.
I think he went to go work out. He comes
back home, it's like eleven o'clock two hours later, and
he is shot in his driveway, in his driveway. So
he's okay, listen, So the parallels here are very similar.
(22:17):
Jared had the kids, he dropped him off in his car. Shot,
do you know what I mean? Like, okay, heading home
right in his way home, right, shot. Yeah, it gets
crazier though, it gets even more kind of like parallel. Right.
So this is in July twenty fourteen that this happens. Okay,
July eighteen, twenty fourteen, he's shot. Okay. So after that,
(22:40):
a couple of days go by, and the police release
an image of a green Prius scene in the area
around the time that the crime occurred. So this is
our Ford f one fifty, right in Jared's case. Right,
in Jared's case, this is our Ford f one fifty.
So in Dan's case, it's a green Prius, all right, ja.
So they release this image of the screen Prius and
(23:02):
then there's some like you know, the memorial services held,
there's you know, general stuff. Okay. The next big thing though,
that happens is that in February of twenty sixteen, so
like a year and a half go by, the Tallahassee
Police Department starts to like slowly release like documents about
the circumstances running the death, like things like the keys
(23:27):
were in the ignition and the house was locked, it
wasn't robbed, and you know, things like you know that
they would normally keep.
Speaker 3 (23:34):
To themselves only the person who committed Yeah.
Speaker 1 (23:38):
Right, they start releasing their puma, right, or some of
the puma, right, yep. Okay, so this is this is
where it gets kind of nitty gritty. Oh and the
other thing that they released is that they don't think
that the prius belonged to the driver. And I don't
know how they know this, but that's what they release.
(23:58):
All right. But here's where it gets like, wow, all right,
in April of twenty sixteen, Now, remember he was murdered
in twenty fourteen. Yep, all right. In April of twenty sixteen,
the FBI, all right, and the FBI is involved. They
record a conversation between a guy named Charlie Adelson and
(24:21):
Catherine Magbuana at a restaurant. Right now, Remember I told
you his ex wife's name is Wendy Addelson, correct, So
are they related? That's her brother? Oh okay, so this
is her brother, all right. And when I first was
reading this, I'm like, okay, well, who's this dude? Right?
And why is this important?
Speaker 2 (24:41):
Well?
Speaker 1 (24:42):
Just keep that in mind. And they record this conversation
at a restaurant that's in April. In May, a month later,
they arrest somebody, and they arrest this guy named Sigfredo Garcia,
and he denies everything. He's like, I don't know you're
talking about you know the full press, right yep? Okay,
So somebody's arrested. Now, in June, like a month after
(25:04):
he was arrested, documents in the murder case become unsealed.
In those documents, there's another suspect named His name is
Louis Rivera or Louis Rivera, and that establishes a connection
between Adelson and Garcia, all right, So it provides more
details than a timeline of the murder, according to the
Tallahausee Police Department. So a jury indicts both Garcia and
(25:29):
Rivera for this murder. So there's now a trial is
going to be set, right, So Sigfredo pleads not guilty. Right,
Louis Rivera, I think he made a deal. He pled guilty,
he made a deal, and so Sigfredo his trial was
set for November fourteenth, twenty sixteen. Then Rivera pleads guilty
(25:53):
to second degree murder and is sentenced to nineteen years
in prison. So he doesn't have a he doesn't have
a trial, all right, But just then Catherine is arrested.
So I'm guessing at this I haven't read the detail,
but I'm guessing that Louis Rivera like he got he
copped a deal because right right at that time, Catherine's arrested,
(26:16):
so he was cooperating, right right, And says, listen, this
Catherine lady hired us, okay, hired me and sik Credo wow. Right,
and this Catherine woman is connected to Wendy's brother, Charles. Okay,
So this is all kinds of crazy, right, And there's
a lot of other things that happened. The the FBI
(26:37):
need to analyze the the recording, and there's a lot
of different kinds of COVID happens, you know, in all this,
so things have been delayed, right, But it boils down
to Charlie hired these two people through Catherine. She was
like the go between, all right, and Charlie's trial doesn't
(26:59):
start until a role this year, twenty twenty three, so
we don't know what's going to happen there. But Catherine
turned state's witness and eventually I think she got a mistrial.
This case is out. This case is crazy, but it's
so similar to the suspicions that people have about our case. Right.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
What happened to Jared?
Speaker 4 (27:19):
Same right, same divorce, contractious family, Right, He's taking his
kids home, gets out of his car, gets shot.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
Nobody knows who's done it.
Speaker 4 (27:32):
It looks like it was a well we don't think
the police have said that Jared was targeted by somebody.
The way it was done, it appeared like it was
like a professional.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
Yeah. And it's important to note too that the Tallahassee
Police Department, very very very quickly after the murder also
said that that Dan Markle was targeted, that he was
the intended victim.
Speaker 2 (27:55):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
So it's a very similar like we know this is
targeted and I'm sure people were like, why, how did
they think this was targeted? Well, you know, they just did.
Speaker 4 (28:04):
While it's still there are nothing of any value was taken,
right except for his Dan Markle's life. So because of
all this, they passed the law in Florida so that
Dan's parents could get access.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
Yeah, I'm not sure exactly, like why Wendy denied. Okay,
So here's the thing. So Charlie is in jail right now.
He has a trial scheduled for April of twenty twenty three.
But his sister, who is Dan Markle's ex wife, like
who started all this, I guess, is not facing criminal
charges at this moment, all right, right.
Speaker 4 (28:42):
And she still has custody of the kids.
Speaker 1 (28:44):
She does, she does, and apparently she's been denying access
to her children to Dance parents.
Speaker 4 (28:53):
So to what's happening with Kirsten.
Speaker 1 (28:55):
And her and so the law though, here's the sad thing. Okay,
the law, the market law, it's not going to help them,
and they still pushed for it, like they still saw
the value of this. The law, the Dan Markle law
or I'm sorry, the Markel Act, would only benefit the Markles.
If Wendy was convicted. So this tragic circumstances. Part of
(29:19):
this law means that the grandparents of the murder victim
would have access to their children if their spouse was
convicted of the murder. So it's not gonna it's not
gonna help.
Speaker 2 (29:32):
Jaredy Jared's case. It wouldn't.
Speaker 4 (29:36):
It would not do to use because nobody has yet
to be arrested, prosecuted, and found guilty of committeing the act.
Right so that happens, the ex wife can keep the
kids to herself, and as we know right now, she's
relocated to another state.
Speaker 1 (29:54):
Correct. So it was kind of a waste of time
for me to look into this because it's just not
going to help jared parents. But on the bright side,
I found this case, you know, that is eerily similar
to Jared's case, the same kind of situation, kind of
the same mo it's early similar and and the only
(30:15):
reason that I kind of want to talk to miss
Bradygan about it is just like I don't want to
and I don't think she is giving up hope. I
don't think she I don't think she's ever going to
give up hope, you know what I mean. But I
know she's I know she's desperate, right, Like she wants
justice for her husband. And if we tell her the story,
if she doesn't know about it, if we tell her
the story and say, look, these are like really similar
(30:35):
circumstances and this family. You know it took a year
just to get somebody arrested. Don't lose hope. It's only
it's I know it's saying it's only been eight months
is shitty. That's not what I That's not how I
want to say it. But like we need to give
it a little bit more time. More on that next time.
Speaker 3 (30:52):
True Crimes is executive produced by Stephanie Leidecker, Deanna Thompson,
Courtney Armstrong, Jeff Shane, Andrew Arnaut, and me John Green.
Additional producing by Connor Powell and Gabe Castile, Editing by
Jeff Ti Music by vanikor Music.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
True Crimes is a production of iHeartRadio and Katie Studios.
For more podcasts from iHeart Radio, please visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.