May 2, 2024 • 42 mins
A fire erupted in the basement of an apartment building in Pittsburgh, PA, on January 17, 1993, killing three people. Arson officials believed the fire was set purposefully, but the case went cold for 13 years. Dan Carnevale was arrested for the fire in 2006 based on the questionable testimony of a man claiming to be an eyewitness. All of the physical evidence in this case had been destroyed so the case against Dan relied solely on this witness, the testimony of a jailhouse informant, and junk science hypotheses. Dan was ultimately sentenced to life in prison without parole for arson and the three deaths.
To learn more and get involved, visit:
https://lavaforgood.com/podcast/392-wrongful-conviction-junk-science-arson-evidence/https://lavaforgood.com/podcast/151-jason-flom-with-kristine-bunch/https://lavaforgood.com/podcast/429-jason-flom-with-greg-brown/https://oakmontbakery.com/
We started the Wrongful Conviction podcast to provide a voice to innocent people in prison.
We want to hear your voices, too.
So call us at 833-207-4666 and leave us a message.
Tell us how these powerful, often tragic and sometimes triumphant, stories make you feel.
Shocked?
Inspired?
Motivated?
We want to know!
We may even include your story in a future episode.
And hey, the more of you that join in, the more power our collective voices will have.
So tell a friend to listen and to call us too at 833-207-4666
Wrongful Conviction is a production of Lava for Good™ Podcasts in association with Signal Co. No1.
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 (00:03):
On January seventeenth, nineteen ninety three, a fire ripped through
two adjacent apartment buildings in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Many onlookers, including
a man named Dan Carnivali, witnessed the mayhem that took
three lives. Soon information was released to the media that
two blank checks and a set of keys had been
(00:25):
taken from the apartment building. Dan Carnivali's roommates once found
a number of old checks from that apartment complex under
his bet, so they reported him to the police. After
Dan convinced police that he had come upon the blaze
after the fact, he was released and he moved to California.
The case went cold for nearly fourteen years until an
(00:47):
eyewitness came forward with a different account of Dan's whereabouts
that night. Dan was dragged back to Pennsylvania, where he
allegedly confessed to a fellow inmate while awaiting trial, saying
that he was in fact the culprit all those many
years ago. But this is wrongful conviction. Wrongful conviction has
(01:16):
always given voice to innocent people in prison. Now we're
expanding that voice to you. Call us at eight three
three two O seven four six sixty six and leave
us a message, tell us how these powerful, often tragic
stories make you feel outraged, inspired, motivated. We want to know.
We may even include your story in a future episode.
(01:38):
Call us A three three two O seven four six
sixty six. Welcome back to Wrongful Conviction, where we've got
an alleged arson case out of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, again involving
ATF agents William Patritis and Jason Wick, as well as
(02:02):
ATF chemist William Kinnard. And you may remember one or
all of them from the cases of Greg Brown and
Christine Bunch, and of course we'll have both of those
stories linked in the episode description. But now we're going
to hear from another one of their victims, Dan Carnivale. Dan,
I'm so sorry for the reason you're here and for
what you went through, but we're so happy and honored
(02:25):
to have you here today. Thank you and joining him.
You may recognize her from our coverage of Greg Brown's case.
She's the managing attorney of the Pennsylvania Innocence Project, Liz Deloso.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
Yeah, thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
Glad to have you, and last but not least, Dan
civil attorney Alec Right, Alec, Welcome, to wrongful conviction.
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (02:47):
Now, Alec. My understanding is that you're also from Pittsburgh.
But this fire happened way back in ninety three when
you were still just a kid, while Dan at the
time was already twenty nine. But crazily he didn't get
prosecuted until weeen years after that. But before we unpack
all of that, Dan, I want to hear more about
what it was like growing up in Pittsburgh and being
a teenager in the Steel City at that time. You
(03:10):
were raised in Polish Hill, right.
Speaker 4 (03:12):
Yes, I grew up on Polish Show in Pittsburgh. I
mean I did everything every other teenager did, drank Bear
in the Woods.
Speaker 1 (03:19):
Well, if I grew up there, I pretty much can
guarantee I would have been right next to you.
Speaker 4 (03:25):
That makes all of us separality.
Speaker 5 (03:27):
My house, Dan, just so you know, had the woods
behind it where we stashed the beer Steel City reserved. Dan,
Was that a beer that you guys had at Polish Hill?
Speaker 4 (03:36):
Yeah, but I derailed the night train a few times too.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
During his twenties, Dan moved across Pittsburgh to the tightly
knit Italian neighborhood of Bloomfield, where he was familiar with
the buildings in which the nineteen ninety three fire occurred.
Speaker 4 (03:50):
I made some mistakes growing up, and I had some
hard times in my twenties. I was a male thief.
That was what linked me to the building, because I
was still in their mail from their mailboxes. I would
get the checks from the building and take them to
poll the show and have somebody cash them for me.
I mean, I drank out every night practically. I just
(04:13):
I like to buy drinks and make myself look like
I had money, And that night was no exception. I
just went to the Luna that of karaoke to have
a DJ whatever, and I'd hang out there until they closed,
and then I'd walk back to Bloomfield, where I lived.
Most of that night I don't remember, but I do
remember being at the sandwich shop and I was with
(04:33):
other people watching the fire. There was just a load
of people there and people hanging out the windows, people
screaming and yelling. Just that's I remember that.
Speaker 1 (04:45):
During the early morning hours of January seventeenth, nineteen eighty three,
while Dan was closing down the Lunar Bar and headed
to a local sandwich shop, a fire began at the
nearby Columbia Apartment Building and spread next door to an
apartment building called the Regal.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Emergency calls started to come in around four am. By
five thirty, it's a six alarm fire. The fire has
moved from where it began in the basement all the
way to the roof, and the northwest corner of the
Columbia Apartment building collapses. Three apartment residents are killed. One
(05:22):
visitor is very severely injured.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
That was twenty year old Linda McCutcheon who was staying
with her friend. Twenty two year old Christopher Stallman who
leaped to his death to escape the flames. Sixty three
year old Lawrence Lychkoe and thirty one year old Anita
Emery died from smoke in elation. Thankfully, twenty nine other
residents managed to survive, and they all reported the same thing.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
In the weeks prior to the fire. Witnesses would later
tell investigators that they had like buzzing and clicking and
banging within their radiators, that some apartments were really hot
and some apartments were not receiving heat at all, and
then justin the hours prior to like these nine to
one one calls coming in we have a hissing, a buzzing,
(06:09):
and banging within the radiators. You know, later in litigation,
as we are investigating Dan's case, or expert Douglas Carpenter,
one of the things that really stood out to Doug
was the fact that a manual boiler, so a boiler
that really required someone to keep up with it and
to manually feed the water into that boiler to make
(06:31):
sure that it wasn't overheating. That boiler would have had
all of these signs or symptoms if it was malfunctioning
in the days and weeks prior to the fire. Unfortunately,
these apartment residents were not interviewed until days and weeks
after the arson determination.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
Before speaking with these folks, the Pittsburgh Arson Squad had
called in the ATF to assist with the investigation.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
These are two ATF agents that investigated the Greg Brown case,
William Patritis and Jason Wick, and they're doing the same
thing right. They're making this arson determination very quickly after
the fire has been suppressed on visual inspection alone, without
the use of any other experts, without ruling out any
additional accidental causes, without all of the chemical analysis having
(07:21):
been even sent to the ACF laboratory without witness interviews
being completed, and they're not using the NFPA nine twenty one,
which at that point in nineteen ninety three was in
its first publication.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
The NFPA nine twenty one is the National Fire Protection
Association's investigation guide that signaled a paradigm shift towards the
scientific method and away from the myths and folklore nonsense
that have been handed down by arson investigation predecessors visual
cues that were believed to indicate that a fire had
been intentionally set with accelerants. Modern science has proved that
(08:01):
none of that stuff is true, but it was relied on,
and sadly in some places it still relied on for
generations and generations and generations. We'll have our coverage of
arson investigation on wrongful conviction junk science linked in the
episode description as well. But anyway, these ATF agents totally
ignored this paradigm shift from myth to science and instead
(08:26):
search for support for that determination that they had already made,
and they interviewed some of the people who worked at
these buildings.
Speaker 2 (08:32):
So the Regal Apartment building and the Columbia Apartment Building
are connected in the basement via several locked doors. In
the Regal apartment building, there was a can of laquer
thinner near kind of like the back end of the basement.
One of the maintenance men tells investigators, I can't find
that can. It may have been moved. Later, they find
(08:55):
a can of lacquer thinner in the maintenance room of
the Columbia Apartment building, and that starts to turn the
wheels for investigators that that must have been the can
of lacker thinner that was originally stored in the Regal
Apartment building. Although there are lots and lots of chemicals
in this maintenance room, there is a insecticide, there's gasoline,
(09:20):
there's a charcoal grill, there's lacquer thinner, there's no reason
to believe that like this can of lacker thinner was
intentionally moved by a perpetrator. It simply could have been
moved by one of the maintenance men, of which there
were several, or just a different can of laquer thinner.
But that piques the investigator's interests.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Then Patritis and Wick sent fifteen samples from the building
to their boy in the ATF Lab William Canard.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
William Canard has a conversation with William Patritis prior to
finalizing his report, and he says that in samples three, nine, ten,
and six, there are elements that lead into believe that
there was a presence of Lacquer Center, which was used
as an accelerant to start this fire.
Speaker 1 (10:12):
And now what they needed was the right suspect. At
this point, they had heard from a guy named Chris
palm Mary who found two sets of keys and blank
checks from the Columbia in front of one of the
building owners's homes, and this information was leaked to the
local media, which piqued the interest of Dan's roommates Keith
Playtech and Tammy Mancini.
Speaker 5 (10:33):
The only thing that attached him to the Columbia apartment
buildings at the time was Tammy Mancini and Keith Playtech saying,
you know that they found these checks.
Speaker 4 (10:43):
Yeah, they found checks under the mattress of the bed
I slept in, but they were old. They just happened
to have that address on them.
Speaker 5 (10:50):
So when Dan was interviewed about that, you know, he
readily admitted, yes, this was my cash cow. I stole
checks from this place. So the police say, he needs
your jacket for testing. He says, take my jacket for testing.
They says, sit down for a polygraph test.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
He sits down for a polygraph test.
Speaker 4 (11:07):
Oh, add they lost the coat and they losched a
polygraph test.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
Both items cleared Dan, but if they hadn't, surely they
would have been saved. Additionally, Dan had his alibi and
no way of having been able to get into these buildings.
Speaker 5 (11:20):
Every exterior door to this building was locked. The maintenance
room where they say the fire started was locked. The
office where two blank checks and keys that are later
found on the owner of the building's doorstep after this
fire was locked. The room in the regal building where
Liz was describing, you name your accelerant, that's in this.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Room, okay. Locked.
Speaker 5 (11:41):
The access to the regal building is an l two
by four over the door. Can't get into it. Everywhere
down of this basement locked, and everybody tells them this.
August Paluso, the owner of the building, Orlando Syrium Belly,
who is the person who actually goes in and locks
the doors that night, and Ronald t who is one
of the maintenance people at the time, all say everything's locked.
(12:04):
Dan has only ever taken checks from an outdoor courtyard.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
So if this had been arson, the assailant either had
to have had keys or have broken in somehow. So
the when this interviews continued and one building resident, Paul Parter,
said that he had heard a party going on that night,
which corroborated a statement from a guy named Sean Maxwell.
Speaker 5 (12:28):
On January eighteenth of nineteen ninety three, the day after
this fire, Sean Maxwell comes forward and says, the guy
named Larry Steele shows up to my house a few
hours after this fire. He's covered in soot, talking about
how he broke into this Columbia apartment building with some friends.
They were drinking, and he says, we burned down the
building by accident. If you tell anybody about it, I
(12:49):
will kill you and I will kill your grandmother. Sean
Maxwell tells police investigators, I know who did it, and
I know the name of the guy that he was with.
His name was Rob Zacharias. While this is going on,
a couple other witnesses in the neighborhood, and you have
to understand Pittsburgh to really grasp this. Bloomfield is an
old Italian town in Pittsburgh, and everybody knows everybody in
(13:12):
the neighborhood, and one of the things that these individual
residents are talking about is that there is an individual
with long sandy blondehair's shoulder length in an army field
jacket that we don't know who's watching this fire. They
actually create a composite sketch, and this individual matches one
of two people, First Rob Zacharias, who was the same
individual that Larry Steele said earlier he was with that night. Second,
(13:36):
a former maintenance man by the name of Glenn Spoon,
who is fired from the property a year ago, but
Paul Potter says, is spotted a day or two before
this fire, and one of the only individuals other than
the owner of the building who have keys to those
locked rooms. He matches the description of the composite sketch.
Speaker 1 (13:56):
Two more individuals were identified who also matched this description. However,
who even knows if this stranger had anything to do
with the fire or if Larry Steele had ever even
made this confession about him or about Rob Zacharias. Considering
that this fire in all likelihood was a tragic accident,
the presence of this alleged suspect with sandy blonde hair
(14:18):
and an army field jacket had both dubious value and
was also definitely not Dan. The description set five to
ten and Dan is six ' four, so that's not
even close. And it appears that yet another witness named
Shane Evans, confirmed that.
Speaker 5 (14:35):
Shane Evans grew up with Dan CARNIVALI would know him
from one hundred yards away, would know him from one
hundred inches away. Shane Evans is watching the fire happen
on January seventeenth, nineteen ninety three, four am, four fifteen,
around five am, he leaves the fire. He finds a
fire personnel and he says to them, I was walking
by the Columbia about five minutes before the fire broke out.
(14:58):
I heard a door close of the Columbia apartment building.
I turned around in a very well lit area, could
not see his face. The person was unknown to me,
but had sandy long blonde hair shoulder length.
Speaker 3 (15:10):
And an army field jacket.
Speaker 5 (15:12):
And fire personnel say go tell police investigators.
Speaker 1 (15:16):
So Shane Evans did exactly that. He told three investigators
what he had seen.
Speaker 4 (15:21):
Wait do you hear what he said? Thirteen years later?
Speaker 1 (15:37):
You're listening to wrongful Conviction. You can listen to this
and all the Lava for Good podcasts one week early
and ad free by subscribing to Lava for Good Plus
on Apple Podcasts. After Dan cooperated to the fullest with
law enforcement, his jacket tested negative for accelerant. He passed
(16:00):
a polygraph, which has limited value, but still he was
released and he grew a bit cold on Pittsburgh.
Speaker 4 (16:09):
Pittsburgh was bad for me. All my friends were dying
of overdoses. Everybody was dying of China White and Iroin
and in this and that. I just I had to
get away. I couldn't take it any where. The police
were at my parents' house every other day about something stupid.
Most of it I knew nothing about. About a month
or or so after that, I moved to California. I
(16:29):
have a friend who lives out there in Humble County.
I called the police from California and told him I
was there. That you know, if you need me for
any further questioning, this is where I'm at. It wasn't
like I was living in the mountain siding from anybody.
I just wanted to start over, so I left.
Speaker 1 (16:46):
The case went cold for nearly fourteen years, and during
that time Dan had built himself a happy, comfortable life.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
I had a family. I had a wife, I had
step kids, I had a house. I had a good job.
I was working in a lumber mill eighty eighty five
thousand a year. I finally was doing good in my life, finally,
and then everything went down hill.
Speaker 1 (17:10):
In early two thousand and six, Pittsburgh Police cold case
detective Scott Evans and Jr. Smith inexplicably reopened. In nineteen
ninety three Columbia fire investigation.
Speaker 5 (17:21):
They do a huge press release where Scott Evans and Jr.
Smith release all of the information that we've talked about
so far out to the news. Then they put a
ten thousand dollars reward in the paper for anybody for information,
and thirteen years later on a ten thousand dollars reward.
In this press release, they talked to Shane Evans, who says, now,
in this well lit area, I saw six foot four
(17:44):
Dan CARNIVALI face to face leaving that Columbia apartment building.
They asked Shane Evans in nineteen ninety three, did you
know who Dan CARNIVALI was? And Shane Evans, of course says,
I grew up with him my whole life. One hundred
percent it was him, and I was watching the fire
later and he came up to me unsolicited, unprovoked and
(18:05):
screamed out loud. I was at the sandwich shop. And
when he testifies at trial, he says those same things,
except he also says, and by the way, Dan Carnivali
was covered with soot. Now, let's remember some of the
things that we've talked about so far. Dan Carnivali had
told everybody his alibi that he was at the sandwich
shop after being at the lunar bar. We also know
(18:26):
from the criminal investigation file that Larry Steele, in his
confession was covered in soot. Shane Evans is receiving information
somewhere from someone to add those two pieces of information
into this situation. When he told everybody in nineteen ninety three,
when the fire was still going, that he did not
recognize the person.
Speaker 4 (18:46):
All of a sudden, in two thousand and six, it
was me. He saw me.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
Ten grand can be pretty persuasive. And meanwhile, the state
disposed of those original statements from nineteen ninety three in
which Evans had said he could and identify the suspect,
only sharing this two thousand and six David which goner
the arrest wererant.
Speaker 4 (19:06):
I was coming home from Warp one day, riding up
to my house, and I knew there was a helicopter
following me, and it was driving all the way up
through fifty until I got close to my house, and
then the car pulled out beside me and the lights
went on, and then I seen the Pennsylvania badges, and
then I was like, oh, what the hell. So then
(19:27):
they started questioning me about the fire. I told them
a million times I did not do this, You're making
a mistake. But all they kept doing was yelling at me, well,
think about the people that are dead, Well, think about
what you're doing. You're a resting or wrong person, so
you know what I mean. That's all they kept telling me.
I didn't know what to tell them. Finally I said,
let me have an attorney. I don't want to talk
to you'all anymore. Next thing you know, I'm sitting in
(19:47):
the county jail.
Speaker 5 (19:49):
And now emerge as a jail house informant by the
name of Sean Burns. Here's what Sean Burns tells everybody
in all of this time, Dan CARNIVALI explains to Sean burns.
This individual in protective custody the Alleghany County Jails that
I didn't mean to burn down the building, but what
happened was I was at the bar and somebody told
(20:09):
me that it's possible that in the future they might
put video surveillance on the Columbia Apartment building, and so
in order to get ahead of them setting up video surveillance,
I'm gonna break into the Columbia and I'm gonna go
into the office, but I don't find any video surveillance.
Speaker 3 (20:28):
It's not there.
Speaker 5 (20:29):
But just out of an abundance of caution, I'm gonna
take this can of lacquer thinner and I'm gonna douse
the office, not the maintenance, from the office with this
whole can, and then i'm gonna light a match. I'm
gonna throw it behind me, and I'm gonna walk out
with the can of lacquer thinner, get rid of it,
and hopefully that fire will contain itself in that office
and burn the video surveillance equipment that I couldn't find
(20:51):
in that I don't know exists. And in the process,
I'm gonna take two blank checks in instead of on
the owner, and then go set them down on the
doorstep of the owner building.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
The allegend motive was as far fetched as it was
inconsistent with the ATFS theory, which if their theory is
to be believed, then why was Burn's alleging that Dan
burned the office, not the maintenance room and then left
with the lacquer thinner when the can was in fact
found in the building. Either way, Sean Burns did not
(21:24):
make this statement for free.
Speaker 4 (21:25):
Sean Burns had gun charges. He also had some kid charges,
some child rape things, and if he would have went
to state prison he wouldn't have made it through. So
he was doing anything he could do to come up
with getting himself out of jail, and he got out
of jail four days after my trial.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
What we later find out, Sean Burns has not only
testified in Daniel Carnivali's case during two thousand and seven,
He's testified on behalf of the commonwealth as an informant
in two other cases just.
Speaker 5 (21:58):
That year for the same prosecutor, for the very.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
Same prosecutor, they got the deal of a century for
cerial cooperation.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
So it seems like this prosecutor, Jennifer di Giovanni was
willing to overlook the inconsistencies in Burns's statement to try
to close the Columbia fire case, and with Shane Evans
and Sean Burns in her back pocket, she offered Dan
three and a half to seven years. Pretty incredible deal
if you think about it. If she really thought he
(22:29):
was guilty of a triple murderer, I.
Speaker 4 (22:31):
Wasn't taking a plea. I wouldn't care what they were
giving me. I didn't do it, and I'm not taking
a plea. I really thought that there was no way
they could find someone guilty that wasn't guilty. I just
I found out the hard way. I was roam.
Speaker 1 (22:45):
Dan went to trial in August two thousand and seven
with his attorney Frank Walker, and in addition to Evans
and Burns, ATF agent William Patritis testified from memory. Right
fourteen years removed from the investigation and testified from memory
the physical evidence had all been destroyed, making it impossible
to do a full reinvestigation. Meanwhile, Patritis was sure that
(23:05):
an alleged assailant started the blaze with lacquer dinner in
the maintenance room, backing his claims up with ancient arson gobbledegook.
Speaker 2 (23:14):
He says that the thing that really stood out to
him was the low burn patterns that were present on
like the doorway of the mechanical room, which today we
know low burn patterns are not indicative of an unnaturally
or an accelerant set fire. We know that if the
(23:35):
structure reaches full room involvement, meaning flashover, that low burn
patterns are absolutely naturally occurring. But Patritis's testimony, you know,
led the jury to believe that these low burn patterns
were unnaturally occurring, were indicative of only a fire that
could have been set through the use of an accelerant.
Speaker 1 (23:57):
And this non scientific observation was then backed up by
allegedly scientific analysis from ATF chemist William Cannard, whose credibility
was falling apart in the lead up to Dan's trial.
In two thousand and six, three fire scientists were hired
to examine his analysis of an alleged arson in Indiana,
(24:17):
the notorious Christine Blench case, in which he said there
was presence of an accelerant in her son's bedroom when
in fact there was none.
Speaker 2 (24:26):
And William Canard is really exposed as having falsified report.
We know that in August two thousand and seven, the
ATF is asked to reevaluate William Cannard's original chemical analysis
in Dan's nineteen ninety three case. Chief Julia Dolan real
evaluates all of the gascarmatographs and she says that the
(24:50):
levels of lackarthinner are so low as to be meaningless.
She disagrees with every single finding. Canard has reported that
report that Julia Dolan does is not shared with defense counsel.
Speaker 5 (25:06):
But the Julia Dolan memo is dated August of two
thousand and seven, and Dan was tried August twenty sixth.
In August twenty seventh of two thousand and seven, so
somebody knew. Somebody had the information. But Jennifer Digivanni gets
Frank Walker croml defense attorney to just stipulate, Hey, you
(25:27):
don't want.
Speaker 3 (25:28):
To go get an expert.
Speaker 5 (25:29):
Let's just accept the ATF just stipulate, don't get an expert.
Speaker 3 (25:33):
This is legit.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
And then Petritis just reads in William Connard's original chemical
analysis telling the jury that lacquer thinner has been found
in all of these samples.
Speaker 5 (25:47):
And so that evidence was always just assumed to be
one hundred percent true.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
And then with all of the information that was withheld
from defense counsel, any of the alternative perpetrators, the steel
alleged confession, and Julia Dolan ATF report saying that the
lack of Thurner conclusion was meaningless.
Speaker 1 (26:06):
Dan was convicted of arson, burglary, aggravated assault, and three
counts of second degree murder. So instead of three and
a half years, he got three consecutive life sentences.
Speaker 4 (26:18):
My trial lasted one day, by the way, I mean,
I had a triple homicide. I picked the jury one day,
which found guilty the next I was just shocked. I
was in shocked for probably the first year. My personality
(26:50):
got me through prison. I could be a comedian because
I had to make it to where I wasn't going
to get in trouble in jail, or have enemies or
or whatever. I just did the best I could. I
was in a supermax prison. You know, I had three
life sentences. It's bugging me right now. I can't get
it out of my fucking hay, just hearing all the
(27:12):
stuff that they did to me over and over. It's
you know why, they had enough stuff to prove me innocent,
but they lost it. All a little strange, ain't it?
Speaker 2 (27:25):
Like, Let's just recap. They alleged to have lost the
jacket that Dan turned over for testing as to whether
he had any kind of like trace of accelerants on
his jacket. They do not have the polygraph that Dan took,
which you know, indicated that he was not being deceptive.
At trial, they testified that they lost any indication that
(27:49):
Shane Evans had come forward on the night of the
fire and made original police statements.
Speaker 1 (27:56):
Yet the original statements turned up years later, and with
Shane Evans, who knew Dan CARNIVALI could not identify the
man he saw. Rather, Evans had described someone who did
not match Dan's profile. But before those statements were discovered,
Dan's earlier appeals focused on the information Dan had received
about Sean Burns.
Speaker 4 (28:17):
This guy sent me a message to my self saying
that he wanted to talk to me out in the
yard about something really important. I'm starting to stress out
what the hell is wrong now? So I go out
in the yard and he tells me, hey, did you
ever hear of David Dixon? I said no. Then he goes, well,
do you know Jennifer di Giovanni. I said yes, why
And then he started explaining that she put him in jail,
(28:37):
and they had Sean Burns as also as the jail
how's informant, blah blah blah, and he ended up getting
twenty years and he just wanted to let me know
that it happened.
Speaker 1 (28:48):
To him to David Dixon, who had spent time with
Sean Burns, swore an affidavit that Burns had admitted fabricating
Dan's alleged confession, which became part of a post conviction
relief motion. Along with the sweetheart deal. Burns had received
fourteen months and immediate parole eligibility. He was released four
days after Dan's trout. However, both Dan's post conviction motion
(29:10):
and his habeas were denied by twenty sixteen, by which
point the Pennsylvania Innocence Project had reviewed Dan's case and
Liz paid him a visit.
Speaker 4 (29:19):
Once Liz came to see me for the first time,
everything changed. I knew that something was going to happen
because I was innocent. I don't even know what the
Saydal is anymore, because she's just like the best thing
that ever happened to me.
Speaker 2 (29:31):
I'm sorry, I love you too, and our first step
was to retain our expert, Douglas Carpenter, and he did
that review pro bono, even though we were missing quite
a bit of documentation. He really laid out for the
court the evolution of the NFPA nine twenty one of
(29:53):
how fire sigence and fire investigation what would have been
done in twenty seventeen that just was not done in
Night eighteen ninety three, was not even conceptualized in nineteen
ninety three, and alleged that this fire should not have
been determined an arson or intentionally set, that at the
very least, it should have been undetermined. And his theory
(30:17):
was that it was an accidental fire and that the
boiler overheated, causing superheating within the joists, and he, you know,
talked very much about like the steam pipes and how
they ran throughout the building, how they ran straight up
into that northwest corner that collapsed, the ways in which
witness statements afterwards really supported the fact that this could
(30:37):
have been an accidental boiler overheating.
Speaker 1 (30:40):
But the state argued that this was just a battle
of experts and their petition was denied. However, Liz's work
on Greg Brown's case another Canard victim, by the way,
appears to have been the catalyst that brought the Julia
Dolan report in Dan's case to light in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
I can't say exactly what happened here, but if I
had to assume, that assistant US attorney in Greg Brown's
case requested all of the ATF files arson files that
were conducted in Alleghany County through a specific time period,
so nineteen ninety to nineteen ninety five. Right one of
(31:20):
those case files was Dan Carnivali's and within that ATF
case file was that Julia Dolan report saying that the
Lacquer thinner results that were originally reported in Canards nineteen
ninety three report were meaningless. That was then turned over
to the PCRA attorney that was working on Dan Carnivali's case.
(31:44):
And thank goodness for the ethics of that PCRA prosecutor,
because they turned it over to US as they have
a constitutional duty to do. And because of that report,
the Alleghany County District Attorney's office agreed that Dan deserved
a new trial.
Speaker 1 (32:03):
While the DA was deciding whether to even bother with
a new trial, Liz reached out to Julia Dolan.
Speaker 2 (32:09):
I was able to interview Julia Dolan and ask why,
in two thousand and seven, very coincidentally, in the same
month as Dan's trial, did you reevaluate Cannard's report? And
the only response I was able to achieve was I
cannot recall. And I was like, was it a specific
(32:31):
request from Alleghany County to reevaluate this analysis or were
you doing a more systemic review of like analysis from
this time from this particular chemist because he had been
discredited in the Bunch case, and she says, I have
never done a systemic review of one of my colleagues.
Speaker 1 (32:53):
In addition to this Brady violation that should have prevented
Dan's two thousand and seven trial from ever happening at all,
Liz was now able to locate even more evidence.
Speaker 2 (33:04):
In the District Attorney's response to our PCRA petition. One
of the attachments was a document from the insurance agency
that represented the owner of the Columbia building, and it
gave me the actual name, which was Northwestern National Insurance.
(33:24):
Many times, especially in these Arson cases, the insurance company
will do a much more in depth investigation in order
to determine whether they should pay the claim than sometimes
the Arson squad will. When I tried to locate how
many Northwestern National insurance companies there were, there was like
over two hundred. So I just made a list and
(33:47):
started down this list. I think I got to probably
seventy five, maybe one hundred calls when finally I spoke
with this woman and I gave her the insurance claim number,
and she said, yes, that reflects a claim number. That
would have been a claim number that we used at
the time. But they were in the process of destroying
all of these old documents, and I was like, stop
(34:10):
where you are. If you have these old documents, I
need them, And so immediately sent her a subpoena and
she located six thousand pages of insurance documents and within
that box were those original police reports from Shane Evans
that the cold case detectives said were lost, and there
(34:32):
were three police reports. He did in fact speak with
three police officers on that night, but despite his trial
testimony saying it was light, I immediately recognized it as
Daniel CARNIVALI his police report said unknown white male did
not see face all three. And so when I presented
(34:56):
this a district attorney's office finally said we're going to
nol prost. We're going to pititition the court to withdraw
all charges, and Dan was finally released and exonerated.
Speaker 4 (35:08):
I got released March eighteenth, the first day of COVID
that nobody was.
Speaker 2 (35:12):
Allowed out of the house the very first day of
like everybody was being kind of like sent home from
your work.
Speaker 4 (35:19):
I went out anyway I used to. I was walking
all over Pittsburgh. I was taking money and giving fight
older bills the homeless people down town Pittsburgh. So I
haven't been in Pittsburgh for twenty six, twenty seven years.
So I'm back in Pittsburgh. I'm living with my brother,
and he's taking good care of me. Like he bought
me a motorcycle. He let me use his car, He
(35:39):
helped me get my driver's license. KK Radio station, helped
me get the job. I mean, there was a lot involved.
I just oh, and I had a house something in
Pittsburgh that my parents had and they had squatters and
stuff living in it. So I just went there and
cleaned it and we sold that. And it was pretty
crazy when I got out, But life got so good.
Then I met my wife, Donna, who's sitting next to
(36:02):
me right everything changed. We're on our second home since
I got out. You know, just I work ten hours
a day, six days a week sometimes and just I'm
loving life.
Speaker 2 (36:14):
I will say that when I first met Dan, just
the sweetest, most sincere man. And you know, Dan's case,
Greg's case, every case that I work on is the
best thing that I could possibly do with my jurse doctorate.
But like knowing that I never have to have a
conversation with Dan in those orange uniforms in that mind
(36:36):
green room.
Speaker 3 (36:38):
That's enough.
Speaker 2 (36:38):
That's enough that I have done with my career.
Speaker 3 (36:40):
I could stop today.
Speaker 5 (36:42):
Dan is the most incredible person that I've ever met.
He I have a four year old boy, my oldest boy.
Dan is a very successful baker. He loves the bacon
he bakes for one of the probably the most famous
bakery in all of the Pittsburgh.
Speaker 4 (36:56):
Areia, third best in the country, third best.
Speaker 3 (36:58):
In the country.
Speaker 5 (36:59):
On his own dime, Dan surprised my four year old's
junior pre kindergarten class with Halloween cookies that he made
for them. And then on Thanksgiving and we you know talk,
if not every day every other day, said Alec, you
gotta try my homemade pumpkin pie.
Speaker 4 (37:17):
I do it.
Speaker 5 (37:18):
I'm gonna get there, Dan, I'm gonna get there. And
I said, I love pumpkin pie and he said it's cheesecake,
but I do a special sauce on top. And so
my family, my two boys, my wife, we all met
Dan and he gave us this homemade pumpkin pie. And
then we called Dan and I said, Dan, let's go
to Eaton Park, sort of this well Owneditzburg dive. And
(37:39):
we get there and Dan's talking about the super Burgers
rave it about a super Burger.
Speaker 2 (37:43):
You're so obsessed with Bidnax and Superburger.
Speaker 3 (37:46):
Obsessed with it.
Speaker 5 (37:47):
And I'm like, Dan, fuck the super Burger. I'm getting
turkey dinner. And Dan looks at the waitress and he
goes give me the exact same thing. And then this
woman walked over unsolicited. Dan had a Steelers tattoo on
the side of his head and said, sir, I love
your tattoo. And Dan made a joke to her.
Speaker 3 (38:07):
She lit up. He he is a guy that just
makes everything better. You make everything better.
Speaker 1 (38:13):
Okay, So just in case I find myself in Pittsburgh
anytime soon, what's the name of this bakery.
Speaker 4 (38:17):
Oakmont Bakery number one in Pittsburgh for sure.
Speaker 1 (38:21):
Well shout out to Oakmont Bakery. We're gonna have them
linked in the episode description as well. But meanwhile, we
wish you all the best in the civil suit as
we go now to closing arguments, where first of all,
I thank you guys so much for sharing this story.
And then I'm just gonna take these next few minutes
to sit back in my chair and listen to anything
(38:41):
else you feel is left to be said. So let's
start with Alec, then Liz, and of course finally Dan.
Speaker 5 (38:51):
There's nothing really for me to add except to reiterate.
Speaker 3 (38:54):
You know, Dan, you know we all love you. This
is about you.
Speaker 5 (38:58):
Others are hurt, but you know we're in your fight
and you really do make life better. You made my
life better, You made my family's life better.
Speaker 4 (39:05):
Thank you. I'll bring you some work cook.
Speaker 5 (39:07):
Well, those compliments will only continue as long as you feed.
Speaker 4 (39:10):
Me, right, Okay, Liz, what do you guys to say?
Speaker 2 (39:13):
By takeaway? And I expressed this to Alec quite a bit,
is I just don't understand why Dan was targeted, and
not even in nineteen ninety three, right, it was years
later in two thousand and six, it feels like more
of an effort to target Dan as opposed to actually
(39:35):
following the tangible leads that they had. And I feel like,
you know, when you lie, when you cover up, you
not only have to remember the lies and the cover
up that you did, but the lies and the cover
up that you asked others to do, which seems much
much more difficult than just conducting a really straightforward and
logical investigation. And so I just will I will never
(39:58):
understand this case. I will never understand why Dan was targeted,
especially because he was out of state. You know, he
wasn't in our state, he wasn't in our community, he
wasn't causing a problem, he wasn't making enemies. And so
I hope someday, Dan, you have an answer to that.
I would like to have some answers, and to have
(40:19):
those particular people who cost you thirteen fourteen years of
your life and all of the trauma that you experienced
while you were in prison answer for that.
Speaker 4 (40:32):
Yeah. I don't even know what to say. I just
thank god things had happened the way they did. At
the end, you know, I'm just happy to be living
my life not inside that hole anymore. I can't understand it.
I will never understand it. So that's about all I
got to say. Thank you for having me on this show, Liz,
(40:55):
thank you for being here analog. You know, I don't
know what else is. I thought i'd ever eat a
big bac again. I think that's why I like big
macs much.
Speaker 3 (41:03):
You know, I'll lead a big back with you.
Speaker 4 (41:05):
Dan. All right, well, yeah, we could just do super burgers.
Speaker 5 (41:08):
No, let's we'll get distracted by a turkey dinner.
Speaker 3 (41:10):
Let's go get a big Mac.
Speaker 4 (41:12):
They got double ones.
Speaker 5 (41:13):
Oh, Chris.
Speaker 1 (41:22):
Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. You can listen
to this and all the Lava for Good podcasts one
week early by subscribing to Lava for Good Plus on
Apple Podcasts. I want to thank our production team, Connor
Hall and Kathleen Fink, as well as my fellow executive
producers Jeff Kempler, Kevin Wartis, and Jeff Cliburn. The music
in this production was supplied by three time OSCAR nominated
(41:43):
composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow us across all
social media platforms at Lava for Good and at Wrongful Conviction.
You can also follow me on Instagram at it's Jason Flamm.
Wrongful Conviction is a production of Lava for Good Podcasts
and association with Signal Company.
Speaker 2 (41:58):
Number one
Speaker 4 (42:00):
Was the wind that work and many dream
On January seventeenth, nineteen ninety three, a fire ripped through
two adjacent apartment buildings in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Many onlookers, including
a man named Dan Carnivali, witnessed the mayhem that took
three lives. Soon information was released to the media that
two blank checks and a set of keys had been
(00:25):
taken from the apartment building. Dan Carnivali's roommates once found
a number of old checks from that apartment complex under
his bet, so they reported him to the police. After
Dan convinced police that he had come upon the blaze
after the fact, he was released and he moved to California.
The case went cold for nearly fourteen years until an
(00:47):
eyewitness came forward with a different account of Dan's whereabouts
that night. Dan was dragged back to Pennsylvania, where he
allegedly confessed to a fellow inmate while awaiting trial, saying
that he was in fact the culprit all those many
years ago. But this is wrongful conviction. Wrongful conviction has
(01:16):
always given voice to innocent people in prison. Now we're
expanding that voice to you. Call us at eight three
three two O seven four six sixty six and leave
us a message, tell us how these powerful, often tragic
stories make you feel outraged, inspired, motivated. We want to know.
We may even include your story in a future episode.
(01:38):
Call us A three three two O seven four six
sixty six. Welcome back to Wrongful Conviction, where we've got
an alleged arson case out of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, again involving
ATF agents William Patritis and Jason Wick, as well as
(02:02):
ATF chemist William Kinnard. And you may remember one or
all of them from the cases of Greg Brown and
Christine Bunch, and of course we'll have both of those
stories linked in the episode description. But now we're going
to hear from another one of their victims, Dan Carnivale. Dan,
I'm so sorry for the reason you're here and for
what you went through, but we're so happy and honored
(02:25):
to have you here today. Thank you and joining him.
You may recognize her from our coverage of Greg Brown's case.
She's the managing attorney of the Pennsylvania Innocence Project, Liz Deloso.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
Yeah, thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
Glad to have you, and last but not least, Dan
civil attorney Alec Right, Alec, Welcome, to wrongful conviction.
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (02:47):
Now, Alec. My understanding is that you're also from Pittsburgh.
But this fire happened way back in ninety three when
you were still just a kid, while Dan at the
time was already twenty nine. But crazily he didn't get
prosecuted until weeen years after that. But before we unpack
all of that, Dan, I want to hear more about
what it was like growing up in Pittsburgh and being
a teenager in the Steel City at that time. You
(03:10):
were raised in Polish Hill, right.
Speaker 4 (03:12):
Yes, I grew up on Polish Show in Pittsburgh. I
mean I did everything every other teenager did, drank Bear
in the Woods.
Speaker 1 (03:19):
Well, if I grew up there, I pretty much can
guarantee I would have been right next to you.
Speaker 4 (03:25):
That makes all of us separality.
Speaker 5 (03:27):
My house, Dan, just so you know, had the woods
behind it where we stashed the beer Steel City reserved. Dan,
Was that a beer that you guys had at Polish Hill?
Speaker 4 (03:36):
Yeah, but I derailed the night train a few times too.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
During his twenties, Dan moved across Pittsburgh to the tightly
knit Italian neighborhood of Bloomfield, where he was familiar with
the buildings in which the nineteen ninety three fire occurred.
Speaker 4 (03:50):
I made some mistakes growing up, and I had some
hard times in my twenties. I was a male thief.
That was what linked me to the building, because I
was still in their mail from their mailboxes. I would
get the checks from the building and take them to
poll the show and have somebody cash them for me.
I mean, I drank out every night practically. I just
(04:13):
I like to buy drinks and make myself look like
I had money, And that night was no exception. I
just went to the Luna that of karaoke to have
a DJ whatever, and I'd hang out there until they closed,
and then I'd walk back to Bloomfield, where I lived.
Most of that night I don't remember, but I do
remember being at the sandwich shop and I was with
(04:33):
other people watching the fire. There was just a load
of people there and people hanging out the windows, people
screaming and yelling. Just that's I remember that.
Speaker 1 (04:45):
During the early morning hours of January seventeenth, nineteen eighty three,
while Dan was closing down the Lunar Bar and headed
to a local sandwich shop, a fire began at the
nearby Columbia Apartment Building and spread next door to an
apartment building called the Regal.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Emergency calls started to come in around four am. By
five thirty, it's a six alarm fire. The fire has
moved from where it began in the basement all the
way to the roof, and the northwest corner of the
Columbia Apartment building collapses. Three apartment residents are killed. One
(05:22):
visitor is very severely injured.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
That was twenty year old Linda McCutcheon who was staying
with her friend. Twenty two year old Christopher Stallman who
leaped to his death to escape the flames. Sixty three
year old Lawrence Lychkoe and thirty one year old Anita
Emery died from smoke in elation. Thankfully, twenty nine other
residents managed to survive, and they all reported the same thing.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
In the weeks prior to the fire. Witnesses would later
tell investigators that they had like buzzing and clicking and
banging within their radiators, that some apartments were really hot
and some apartments were not receiving heat at all, and
then justin the hours prior to like these nine to
one one calls coming in we have a hissing, a buzzing,
(06:09):
and banging within the radiators. You know, later in litigation,
as we are investigating Dan's case, or expert Douglas Carpenter,
one of the things that really stood out to Doug
was the fact that a manual boiler, so a boiler
that really required someone to keep up with it and
to manually feed the water into that boiler to make
(06:31):
sure that it wasn't overheating. That boiler would have had
all of these signs or symptoms if it was malfunctioning
in the days and weeks prior to the fire. Unfortunately,
these apartment residents were not interviewed until days and weeks
after the arson determination.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
Before speaking with these folks, the Pittsburgh Arson Squad had
called in the ATF to assist with the investigation.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
These are two ATF agents that investigated the Greg Brown case,
William Patritis and Jason Wick, and they're doing the same
thing right. They're making this arson determination very quickly after
the fire has been suppressed on visual inspection alone, without
the use of any other experts, without ruling out any
additional accidental causes, without all of the chemical analysis having
(07:21):
been even sent to the ACF laboratory without witness interviews
being completed, and they're not using the NFPA nine twenty one,
which at that point in nineteen ninety three was in
its first publication.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
The NFPA nine twenty one is the National Fire Protection
Association's investigation guide that signaled a paradigm shift towards the
scientific method and away from the myths and folklore nonsense
that have been handed down by arson investigation predecessors visual
cues that were believed to indicate that a fire had
been intentionally set with accelerants. Modern science has proved that
(08:01):
none of that stuff is true, but it was relied on,
and sadly in some places it still relied on for
generations and generations and generations. We'll have our coverage of
arson investigation on wrongful conviction junk science linked in the
episode description as well. But anyway, these ATF agents totally
ignored this paradigm shift from myth to science and instead
(08:26):
search for support for that determination that they had already made,
and they interviewed some of the people who worked at
these buildings.
Speaker 2 (08:32):
So the Regal Apartment building and the Columbia Apartment Building
are connected in the basement via several locked doors. In
the Regal apartment building, there was a can of laquer
thinner near kind of like the back end of the basement.
One of the maintenance men tells investigators, I can't find
that can. It may have been moved. Later, they find
(08:55):
a can of lacquer thinner in the maintenance room of
the Columbia Apartment building, and that starts to turn the
wheels for investigators that that must have been the can
of lacker thinner that was originally stored in the Regal
Apartment building. Although there are lots and lots of chemicals
in this maintenance room, there is a insecticide, there's gasoline,
(09:20):
there's a charcoal grill, there's lacquer thinner, there's no reason
to believe that like this can of lacker thinner was
intentionally moved by a perpetrator. It simply could have been
moved by one of the maintenance men, of which there
were several, or just a different can of laquer thinner.
But that piques the investigator's interests.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Then Patritis and Wick sent fifteen samples from the building
to their boy in the ATF Lab William Canard.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
William Canard has a conversation with William Patritis prior to
finalizing his report, and he says that in samples three, nine, ten,
and six, there are elements that lead into believe that
there was a presence of Lacquer Center, which was used
as an accelerant to start this fire.
Speaker 1 (10:12):
And now what they needed was the right suspect. At
this point, they had heard from a guy named Chris
palm Mary who found two sets of keys and blank
checks from the Columbia in front of one of the
building owners's homes, and this information was leaked to the
local media, which piqued the interest of Dan's roommates Keith
Playtech and Tammy Mancini.
Speaker 5 (10:33):
The only thing that attached him to the Columbia apartment
buildings at the time was Tammy Mancini and Keith Playtech saying,
you know that they found these checks.
Speaker 4 (10:43):
Yeah, they found checks under the mattress of the bed
I slept in, but they were old. They just happened
to have that address on them.
Speaker 5 (10:50):
So when Dan was interviewed about that, you know, he
readily admitted, yes, this was my cash cow. I stole
checks from this place. So the police say, he needs
your jacket for testing. He says, take my jacket for testing.
They says, sit down for a polygraph test.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
He sits down for a polygraph test.
Speaker 4 (11:07):
Oh, add they lost the coat and they losched a
polygraph test.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
Both items cleared Dan, but if they hadn't, surely they
would have been saved. Additionally, Dan had his alibi and
no way of having been able to get into these buildings.
Speaker 5 (11:20):
Every exterior door to this building was locked. The maintenance
room where they say the fire started was locked. The
office where two blank checks and keys that are later
found on the owner of the building's doorstep after this
fire was locked. The room in the regal building where
Liz was describing, you name your accelerant, that's in this.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Room, okay. Locked.
Speaker 5 (11:41):
The access to the regal building is an l two
by four over the door. Can't get into it. Everywhere
down of this basement locked, and everybody tells them this.
August Paluso, the owner of the building, Orlando Syrium Belly,
who is the person who actually goes in and locks
the doors that night, and Ronald t who is one
of the maintenance people at the time, all say everything's locked.
(12:04):
Dan has only ever taken checks from an outdoor courtyard.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
So if this had been arson, the assailant either had
to have had keys or have broken in somehow. So
the when this interviews continued and one building resident, Paul Parter,
said that he had heard a party going on that night,
which corroborated a statement from a guy named Sean Maxwell.
Speaker 5 (12:28):
On January eighteenth of nineteen ninety three, the day after
this fire, Sean Maxwell comes forward and says, the guy
named Larry Steele shows up to my house a few
hours after this fire. He's covered in soot, talking about
how he broke into this Columbia apartment building with some friends.
They were drinking, and he says, we burned down the
building by accident. If you tell anybody about it, I
(12:49):
will kill you and I will kill your grandmother. Sean
Maxwell tells police investigators, I know who did it, and
I know the name of the guy that he was with.
His name was Rob Zacharias. While this is going on,
a couple other witnesses in the neighborhood, and you have
to understand Pittsburgh to really grasp this. Bloomfield is an
old Italian town in Pittsburgh, and everybody knows everybody in
(13:12):
the neighborhood, and one of the things that these individual
residents are talking about is that there is an individual
with long sandy blondehair's shoulder length in an army field
jacket that we don't know who's watching this fire. They
actually create a composite sketch, and this individual matches one
of two people, First Rob Zacharias, who was the same
individual that Larry Steele said earlier he was with that night. Second,
(13:36):
a former maintenance man by the name of Glenn Spoon,
who is fired from the property a year ago, but
Paul Potter says, is spotted a day or two before
this fire, and one of the only individuals other than
the owner of the building who have keys to those
locked rooms. He matches the description of the composite sketch.
Speaker 1 (13:56):
Two more individuals were identified who also matched this description. However,
who even knows if this stranger had anything to do
with the fire or if Larry Steele had ever even
made this confession about him or about Rob Zacharias. Considering
that this fire in all likelihood was a tragic accident,
the presence of this alleged suspect with sandy blonde hair
(14:18):
and an army field jacket had both dubious value and
was also definitely not Dan. The description set five to
ten and Dan is six ' four, so that's not
even close. And it appears that yet another witness named
Shane Evans, confirmed that.
Speaker 5 (14:35):
Shane Evans grew up with Dan CARNIVALI would know him
from one hundred yards away, would know him from one
hundred inches away. Shane Evans is watching the fire happen
on January seventeenth, nineteen ninety three, four am, four fifteen,
around five am, he leaves the fire. He finds a
fire personnel and he says to them, I was walking
by the Columbia about five minutes before the fire broke out.
(14:58):
I heard a door close of the Columbia apartment building.
I turned around in a very well lit area, could
not see his face. The person was unknown to me,
but had sandy long blonde hair shoulder length.
Speaker 3 (15:10):
And an army field jacket.
Speaker 5 (15:12):
And fire personnel say go tell police investigators.
Speaker 1 (15:16):
So Shane Evans did exactly that. He told three investigators
what he had seen.
Speaker 4 (15:21):
Wait do you hear what he said? Thirteen years later?
Speaker 1 (15:37):
You're listening to wrongful Conviction. You can listen to this
and all the Lava for Good podcasts one week early
and ad free by subscribing to Lava for Good Plus
on Apple Podcasts. After Dan cooperated to the fullest with
law enforcement, his jacket tested negative for accelerant. He passed
(16:00):
a polygraph, which has limited value, but still he was
released and he grew a bit cold on Pittsburgh.
Speaker 4 (16:09):
Pittsburgh was bad for me. All my friends were dying
of overdoses. Everybody was dying of China White and Iroin
and in this and that. I just I had to
get away. I couldn't take it any where. The police
were at my parents' house every other day about something stupid.
Most of it I knew nothing about. About a month
or or so after that, I moved to California. I
(16:29):
have a friend who lives out there in Humble County.
I called the police from California and told him I
was there. That you know, if you need me for
any further questioning, this is where I'm at. It wasn't
like I was living in the mountain siding from anybody.
I just wanted to start over, so I left.
Speaker 1 (16:46):
The case went cold for nearly fourteen years, and during
that time Dan had built himself a happy, comfortable life.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
I had a family. I had a wife, I had
step kids, I had a house. I had a good job.
I was working in a lumber mill eighty eighty five
thousand a year. I finally was doing good in my life, finally,
and then everything went down hill.
Speaker 1 (17:10):
In early two thousand and six, Pittsburgh Police cold case
detective Scott Evans and Jr. Smith inexplicably reopened. In nineteen
ninety three Columbia fire investigation.
Speaker 5 (17:21):
They do a huge press release where Scott Evans and Jr.
Smith release all of the information that we've talked about
so far out to the news. Then they put a
ten thousand dollars reward in the paper for anybody for information,
and thirteen years later on a ten thousand dollars reward.
In this press release, they talked to Shane Evans, who says, now,
in this well lit area, I saw six foot four
(17:44):
Dan CARNIVALI face to face leaving that Columbia apartment building.
They asked Shane Evans in nineteen ninety three, did you
know who Dan CARNIVALI was? And Shane Evans, of course says,
I grew up with him my whole life. One hundred
percent it was him, and I was watching the fire
later and he came up to me unsolicited, unprovoked and
(18:05):
screamed out loud. I was at the sandwich shop. And
when he testifies at trial, he says those same things,
except he also says, and by the way, Dan Carnivali
was covered with soot. Now, let's remember some of the
things that we've talked about so far. Dan Carnivali had
told everybody his alibi that he was at the sandwich
shop after being at the lunar bar. We also know
(18:26):
from the criminal investigation file that Larry Steele, in his
confession was covered in soot. Shane Evans is receiving information
somewhere from someone to add those two pieces of information
into this situation. When he told everybody in nineteen ninety three,
when the fire was still going, that he did not
recognize the person.
Speaker 4 (18:46):
All of a sudden, in two thousand and six, it
was me. He saw me.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
Ten grand can be pretty persuasive. And meanwhile, the state
disposed of those original statements from nineteen ninety three in
which Evans had said he could and identify the suspect,
only sharing this two thousand and six David which goner
the arrest wererant.
Speaker 4 (19:06):
I was coming home from Warp one day, riding up
to my house, and I knew there was a helicopter
following me, and it was driving all the way up
through fifty until I got close to my house, and
then the car pulled out beside me and the lights
went on, and then I seen the Pennsylvania badges, and
then I was like, oh, what the hell. So then
(19:27):
they started questioning me about the fire. I told them
a million times I did not do this, You're making
a mistake. But all they kept doing was yelling at me, well,
think about the people that are dead, Well, think about
what you're doing. You're a resting or wrong person, so
you know what I mean. That's all they kept telling me.
I didn't know what to tell them. Finally I said,
let me have an attorney. I don't want to talk
to you'all anymore. Next thing you know, I'm sitting in
(19:47):
the county jail.
Speaker 5 (19:49):
And now emerge as a jail house informant by the
name of Sean Burns. Here's what Sean Burns tells everybody
in all of this time, Dan CARNIVALI explains to Sean burns.
This individual in protective custody the Alleghany County Jails that
I didn't mean to burn down the building, but what
happened was I was at the bar and somebody told
(20:09):
me that it's possible that in the future they might
put video surveillance on the Columbia Apartment building, and so
in order to get ahead of them setting up video surveillance,
I'm gonna break into the Columbia and I'm gonna go
into the office, but I don't find any video surveillance.
Speaker 3 (20:28):
It's not there.
Speaker 5 (20:29):
But just out of an abundance of caution, I'm gonna
take this can of lacquer thinner and I'm gonna douse
the office, not the maintenance, from the office with this
whole can, and then i'm gonna light a match. I'm
gonna throw it behind me, and I'm gonna walk out
with the can of lacquer thinner, get rid of it,
and hopefully that fire will contain itself in that office
and burn the video surveillance equipment that I couldn't find
(20:51):
in that I don't know exists. And in the process,
I'm gonna take two blank checks in instead of on
the owner, and then go set them down on the
doorstep of the owner building.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
The allegend motive was as far fetched as it was
inconsistent with the ATFS theory, which if their theory is
to be believed, then why was Burn's alleging that Dan
burned the office, not the maintenance room and then left
with the lacquer thinner when the can was in fact
found in the building. Either way, Sean Burns did not
(21:24):
make this statement for free.
Speaker 4 (21:25):
Sean Burns had gun charges. He also had some kid charges,
some child rape things, and if he would have went
to state prison he wouldn't have made it through. So
he was doing anything he could do to come up
with getting himself out of jail, and he got out
of jail four days after my trial.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
What we later find out, Sean Burns has not only
testified in Daniel Carnivali's case during two thousand and seven,
He's testified on behalf of the commonwealth as an informant
in two other cases just.
Speaker 5 (21:58):
That year for the same prosecutor, for the very.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
Same prosecutor, they got the deal of a century for
cerial cooperation.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
So it seems like this prosecutor, Jennifer di Giovanni was
willing to overlook the inconsistencies in Burns's statement to try
to close the Columbia fire case, and with Shane Evans
and Sean Burns in her back pocket, she offered Dan
three and a half to seven years. Pretty incredible deal
if you think about it. If she really thought he
(22:29):
was guilty of a triple murderer, I.
Speaker 4 (22:31):
Wasn't taking a plea. I wouldn't care what they were
giving me. I didn't do it, and I'm not taking
a plea. I really thought that there was no way
they could find someone guilty that wasn't guilty. I just
I found out the hard way. I was roam.
Speaker 1 (22:45):
Dan went to trial in August two thousand and seven
with his attorney Frank Walker, and in addition to Evans
and Burns, ATF agent William Patritis testified from memory. Right
fourteen years removed from the investigation and testified from memory
the physical evidence had all been destroyed, making it impossible
to do a full reinvestigation. Meanwhile, Patritis was sure that
(23:05):
an alleged assailant started the blaze with lacquer dinner in
the maintenance room, backing his claims up with ancient arson gobbledegook.
Speaker 2 (23:14):
He says that the thing that really stood out to
him was the low burn patterns that were present on
like the doorway of the mechanical room, which today we
know low burn patterns are not indicative of an unnaturally
or an accelerant set fire. We know that if the
(23:35):
structure reaches full room involvement, meaning flashover, that low burn
patterns are absolutely naturally occurring. But Patritis's testimony, you know,
led the jury to believe that these low burn patterns
were unnaturally occurring, were indicative of only a fire that
could have been set through the use of an accelerant.
Speaker 1 (23:57):
And this non scientific observation was then backed up by
allegedly scientific analysis from ATF chemist William Cannard, whose credibility
was falling apart in the lead up to Dan's trial.
In two thousand and six, three fire scientists were hired
to examine his analysis of an alleged arson in Indiana,
(24:17):
the notorious Christine Blench case, in which he said there
was presence of an accelerant in her son's bedroom when
in fact there was none.
Speaker 2 (24:26):
And William Canard is really exposed as having falsified report.
We know that in August two thousand and seven, the
ATF is asked to reevaluate William Cannard's original chemical analysis
in Dan's nineteen ninety three case. Chief Julia Dolan real
evaluates all of the gascarmatographs and she says that the
(24:50):
levels of lackarthinner are so low as to be meaningless.
She disagrees with every single finding. Canard has reported that
report that Julia Dolan does is not shared with defense counsel.
Speaker 5 (25:06):
But the Julia Dolan memo is dated August of two
thousand and seven, and Dan was tried August twenty sixth.
In August twenty seventh of two thousand and seven, so
somebody knew. Somebody had the information. But Jennifer Digivanni gets
Frank Walker croml defense attorney to just stipulate, Hey, you
(25:27):
don't want.
Speaker 3 (25:28):
To go get an expert.
Speaker 5 (25:29):
Let's just accept the ATF just stipulate, don't get an expert.
Speaker 3 (25:33):
This is legit.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
And then Petritis just reads in William Connard's original chemical
analysis telling the jury that lacquer thinner has been found
in all of these samples.
Speaker 5 (25:47):
And so that evidence was always just assumed to be
one hundred percent true.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
And then with all of the information that was withheld
from defense counsel, any of the alternative perpetrators, the steel
alleged confession, and Julia Dolan ATF report saying that the
lack of Thurner conclusion was meaningless.
Speaker 1 (26:06):
Dan was convicted of arson, burglary, aggravated assault, and three
counts of second degree murder. So instead of three and
a half years, he got three consecutive life sentences.
Speaker 4 (26:18):
My trial lasted one day, by the way, I mean,
I had a triple homicide. I picked the jury one day,
which found guilty the next I was just shocked. I
was in shocked for probably the first year. My personality
(26:50):
got me through prison. I could be a comedian because
I had to make it to where I wasn't going
to get in trouble in jail, or have enemies or
or whatever. I just did the best I could. I
was in a supermax prison. You know, I had three
life sentences. It's bugging me right now. I can't get
it out of my fucking hay, just hearing all the
(27:12):
stuff that they did to me over and over. It's
you know why, they had enough stuff to prove me innocent,
but they lost it. All a little strange, ain't it?
Speaker 2 (27:25):
Like, Let's just recap. They alleged to have lost the
jacket that Dan turned over for testing as to whether
he had any kind of like trace of accelerants on
his jacket. They do not have the polygraph that Dan took,
which you know, indicated that he was not being deceptive.
At trial, they testified that they lost any indication that
(27:49):
Shane Evans had come forward on the night of the
fire and made original police statements.
Speaker 1 (27:56):
Yet the original statements turned up years later, and with
Shane Evans, who knew Dan CARNIVALI could not identify the
man he saw. Rather, Evans had described someone who did
not match Dan's profile. But before those statements were discovered,
Dan's earlier appeals focused on the information Dan had received
about Sean Burns.
Speaker 4 (28:17):
This guy sent me a message to my self saying
that he wanted to talk to me out in the
yard about something really important. I'm starting to stress out
what the hell is wrong now? So I go out
in the yard and he tells me, hey, did you
ever hear of David Dixon? I said no. Then he goes, well,
do you know Jennifer di Giovanni. I said yes, why
And then he started explaining that she put him in jail,
(28:37):
and they had Sean Burns as also as the jail
how's informant, blah blah blah, and he ended up getting
twenty years and he just wanted to let me know
that it happened.
Speaker 1 (28:48):
To him to David Dixon, who had spent time with
Sean Burns, swore an affidavit that Burns had admitted fabricating
Dan's alleged confession, which became part of a post conviction
relief motion. Along with the sweetheart deal. Burns had received
fourteen months and immediate parole eligibility. He was released four
days after Dan's trout. However, both Dan's post conviction motion
(29:10):
and his habeas were denied by twenty sixteen, by which
point the Pennsylvania Innocence Project had reviewed Dan's case and
Liz paid him a visit.
Speaker 4 (29:19):
Once Liz came to see me for the first time,
everything changed. I knew that something was going to happen
because I was innocent. I don't even know what the
Saydal is anymore, because she's just like the best thing
that ever happened to me.
Speaker 2 (29:31):
I'm sorry, I love you too, and our first step
was to retain our expert, Douglas Carpenter, and he did
that review pro bono, even though we were missing quite
a bit of documentation. He really laid out for the
court the evolution of the NFPA nine twenty one of
(29:53):
how fire sigence and fire investigation what would have been
done in twenty seventeen that just was not done in
Night eighteen ninety three, was not even conceptualized in nineteen
ninety three, and alleged that this fire should not have
been determined an arson or intentionally set, that at the
very least, it should have been undetermined. And his theory
(30:17):
was that it was an accidental fire and that the
boiler overheated, causing superheating within the joists, and he, you know,
talked very much about like the steam pipes and how
they ran throughout the building, how they ran straight up
into that northwest corner that collapsed, the ways in which
witness statements afterwards really supported the fact that this could
(30:37):
have been an accidental boiler overheating.
Speaker 1 (30:40):
But the state argued that this was just a battle
of experts and their petition was denied. However, Liz's work
on Greg Brown's case another Canard victim, by the way,
appears to have been the catalyst that brought the Julia
Dolan report in Dan's case to light in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
I can't say exactly what happened here, but if I
had to assume, that assistant US attorney in Greg Brown's
case requested all of the ATF files arson files that
were conducted in Alleghany County through a specific time period,
so nineteen ninety to nineteen ninety five. Right one of
(31:20):
those case files was Dan Carnivali's and within that ATF
case file was that Julia Dolan report saying that the
Lacquer thinner results that were originally reported in Canards nineteen
ninety three report were meaningless. That was then turned over
to the PCRA attorney that was working on Dan Carnivali's case.
(31:44):
And thank goodness for the ethics of that PCRA prosecutor,
because they turned it over to US as they have
a constitutional duty to do. And because of that report,
the Alleghany County District Attorney's office agreed that Dan deserved
a new trial.
Speaker 1 (32:03):
While the DA was deciding whether to even bother with
a new trial, Liz reached out to Julia Dolan.
Speaker 2 (32:09):
I was able to interview Julia Dolan and ask why,
in two thousand and seven, very coincidentally, in the same
month as Dan's trial, did you reevaluate Cannard's report? And
the only response I was able to achieve was I
cannot recall. And I was like, was it a specific
(32:31):
request from Alleghany County to reevaluate this analysis or were
you doing a more systemic review of like analysis from
this time from this particular chemist because he had been
discredited in the Bunch case, and she says, I have
never done a systemic review of one of my colleagues.
Speaker 1 (32:53):
In addition to this Brady violation that should have prevented
Dan's two thousand and seven trial from ever happening at all,
Liz was now able to locate even more evidence.
Speaker 2 (33:04):
In the District Attorney's response to our PCRA petition. One
of the attachments was a document from the insurance agency
that represented the owner of the Columbia building, and it
gave me the actual name, which was Northwestern National Insurance.
(33:24):
Many times, especially in these Arson cases, the insurance company
will do a much more in depth investigation in order
to determine whether they should pay the claim than sometimes
the Arson squad will. When I tried to locate how
many Northwestern National insurance companies there were, there was like
over two hundred. So I just made a list and
(33:47):
started down this list. I think I got to probably
seventy five, maybe one hundred calls when finally I spoke
with this woman and I gave her the insurance claim number,
and she said, yes, that reflects a claim number. That
would have been a claim number that we used at
the time. But they were in the process of destroying
all of these old documents, and I was like, stop
(34:10):
where you are. If you have these old documents, I
need them, And so immediately sent her a subpoena and
she located six thousand pages of insurance documents and within
that box were those original police reports from Shane Evans
that the cold case detectives said were lost, and there
(34:32):
were three police reports. He did in fact speak with
three police officers on that night, but despite his trial
testimony saying it was light, I immediately recognized it as
Daniel CARNIVALI his police report said unknown white male did
not see face all three. And so when I presented
(34:56):
this a district attorney's office finally said we're going to
nol prost. We're going to pititition the court to withdraw
all charges, and Dan was finally released and exonerated.
Speaker 4 (35:08):
I got released March eighteenth, the first day of COVID
that nobody was.
Speaker 2 (35:12):
Allowed out of the house the very first day of
like everybody was being kind of like sent home from
your work.
Speaker 4 (35:19):
I went out anyway I used to. I was walking
all over Pittsburgh. I was taking money and giving fight
older bills the homeless people down town Pittsburgh. So I
haven't been in Pittsburgh for twenty six, twenty seven years.
So I'm back in Pittsburgh. I'm living with my brother,
and he's taking good care of me. Like he bought
me a motorcycle. He let me use his car, He
(35:39):
helped me get my driver's license. KK Radio station, helped
me get the job. I mean, there was a lot involved.
I just oh, and I had a house something in
Pittsburgh that my parents had and they had squatters and
stuff living in it. So I just went there and
cleaned it and we sold that. And it was pretty
crazy when I got out, But life got so good.
Then I met my wife, Donna, who's sitting next to
(36:02):
me right everything changed. We're on our second home since
I got out. You know, just I work ten hours
a day, six days a week sometimes and just I'm
loving life.
Speaker 2 (36:14):
I will say that when I first met Dan, just
the sweetest, most sincere man. And you know, Dan's case,
Greg's case, every case that I work on is the
best thing that I could possibly do with my jurse doctorate.
But like knowing that I never have to have a
conversation with Dan in those orange uniforms in that mind
(36:36):
green room.
Speaker 3 (36:38):
That's enough.
Speaker 2 (36:38):
That's enough that I have done with my career.
Speaker 3 (36:40):
I could stop today.
Speaker 5 (36:42):
Dan is the most incredible person that I've ever met.
He I have a four year old boy, my oldest boy.
Dan is a very successful baker. He loves the bacon
he bakes for one of the probably the most famous
bakery in all of the Pittsburgh.
Speaker 4 (36:56):
Areia, third best in the country, third best.
Speaker 3 (36:58):
In the country.
Speaker 5 (36:59):
On his own dime, Dan surprised my four year old's
junior pre kindergarten class with Halloween cookies that he made
for them. And then on Thanksgiving and we you know talk,
if not every day every other day, said Alec, you
gotta try my homemade pumpkin pie.
Speaker 4 (37:17):
I do it.
Speaker 5 (37:18):
I'm gonna get there, Dan, I'm gonna get there. And
I said, I love pumpkin pie and he said it's cheesecake,
but I do a special sauce on top. And so
my family, my two boys, my wife, we all met
Dan and he gave us this homemade pumpkin pie. And
then we called Dan and I said, Dan, let's go
to Eaton Park, sort of this well Owneditzburg dive. And
(37:39):
we get there and Dan's talking about the super Burgers
rave it about a super Burger.
Speaker 2 (37:43):
You're so obsessed with Bidnax and Superburger.
Speaker 3 (37:46):
Obsessed with it.
Speaker 5 (37:47):
And I'm like, Dan, fuck the super Burger. I'm getting
turkey dinner. And Dan looks at the waitress and he
goes give me the exact same thing. And then this
woman walked over unsolicited. Dan had a Steelers tattoo on
the side of his head and said, sir, I love
your tattoo. And Dan made a joke to her.
Speaker 3 (38:07):
She lit up. He he is a guy that just
makes everything better. You make everything better.
Speaker 1 (38:13):
Okay, So just in case I find myself in Pittsburgh
anytime soon, what's the name of this bakery.
Speaker 4 (38:17):
Oakmont Bakery number one in Pittsburgh for sure.
Speaker 1 (38:21):
Well shout out to Oakmont Bakery. We're gonna have them
linked in the episode description as well. But meanwhile, we
wish you all the best in the civil suit as
we go now to closing arguments, where first of all,
I thank you guys so much for sharing this story.
And then I'm just gonna take these next few minutes
to sit back in my chair and listen to anything
(38:41):
else you feel is left to be said. So let's
start with Alec, then Liz, and of course finally Dan.
Speaker 5 (38:51):
There's nothing really for me to add except to reiterate.
Speaker 3 (38:54):
You know, Dan, you know we all love you. This
is about you.
Speaker 5 (38:58):
Others are hurt, but you know we're in your fight
and you really do make life better. You made my
life better, You made my family's life better.
Speaker 4 (39:05):
Thank you. I'll bring you some work cook.
Speaker 5 (39:07):
Well, those compliments will only continue as long as you feed.
Speaker 4 (39:10):
Me, right, Okay, Liz, what do you guys to say?
Speaker 2 (39:13):
By takeaway? And I expressed this to Alec quite a bit,
is I just don't understand why Dan was targeted, and
not even in nineteen ninety three, right, it was years
later in two thousand and six, it feels like more
of an effort to target Dan as opposed to actually
(39:35):
following the tangible leads that they had. And I feel like,
you know, when you lie, when you cover up, you
not only have to remember the lies and the cover
up that you did, but the lies and the cover
up that you asked others to do, which seems much
much more difficult than just conducting a really straightforward and
logical investigation. And so I just will I will never
(39:58):
understand this case. I will never understand why Dan was targeted,
especially because he was out of state. You know, he
wasn't in our state, he wasn't in our community, he
wasn't causing a problem, he wasn't making enemies. And so
I hope someday, Dan, you have an answer to that.
I would like to have some answers, and to have
(40:19):
those particular people who cost you thirteen fourteen years of
your life and all of the trauma that you experienced
while you were in prison answer for that.
Speaker 4 (40:32):
Yeah. I don't even know what to say. I just
thank god things had happened the way they did. At
the end, you know, I'm just happy to be living
my life not inside that hole anymore. I can't understand it.
I will never understand it. So that's about all I
got to say. Thank you for having me on this show, Liz,
(40:55):
thank you for being here analog. You know, I don't
know what else is. I thought i'd ever eat a
big bac again. I think that's why I like big
macs much.
Speaker 3 (41:03):
You know, I'll lead a big back with you.
Speaker 4 (41:05):
Dan. All right, well, yeah, we could just do super burgers.
Speaker 5 (41:08):
No, let's we'll get distracted by a turkey dinner.
Speaker 3 (41:10):
Let's go get a big Mac.
Speaker 4 (41:12):
They got double ones.
Speaker 5 (41:13):
Oh, Chris.
Speaker 1 (41:22):
Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. You can listen
to this and all the Lava for Good podcasts one
week early by subscribing to Lava for Good Plus on
Apple Podcasts. I want to thank our production team, Connor
Hall and Kathleen Fink, as well as my fellow executive
producers Jeff Kempler, Kevin Wartis, and Jeff Cliburn. The music
in this production was supplied by three time OSCAR nominated
(41:43):
composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow us across all
social media platforms at Lava for Good and at Wrongful Conviction.
You can also follow me on Instagram at it's Jason Flamm.
Wrongful Conviction is a production of Lava for Good Podcasts
and association with Signal Company.
Speaker 2 (41:58):
Number one
Speaker 4 (42:00):
Was the wind that work and many dream
Hosts And Creators
Lauren Bright Pacheco
Maggie Freleng
Jason Flom
Popular Podcasts
True Crime Tonight
If you eat, sleep, and breathe true crime, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT is serving up your nightly fix. Five nights a week, KT STUDIOS & iHEART RADIO invite listeners to pull up a seat for an unfiltered look at the biggest cases making headlines, celebrity scandals, and the trials everyone is watching. With a mix of expert analysis, hot takes, and listener call-ins, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT goes beyond the headlines to uncover the twists, turns, and unanswered questions that keep us all obsessed—because, at TRUE CRIME TONIGHT, there’s a seat for everyone. Whether breaking down crime scene forensics, scrutinizing serial killers, or debating the most binge-worthy true crime docs, True Crime Tonight is the fresh, fast-paced, and slightly addictive home for true crime lovers.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.