Written in Blood: The Murder of Karen Pannell (Part 1)

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
John (00:11):
Before we get on with tonight's show, I want to take a moment to say this
on behalf of me, Angela, and everyonehere at the Dark Dialogue Podcast Network,
happy holidays to every single one of you.
However you're spending this season,whether that's surrounded by family
chosen family, friends, or justgetting through it one day at a time.

(00:34):
We're genuinely grateful that you chooseto spend some of that time care with us.
These stories matter because youlisten, because you care, and because
you keep these conversations alive.
As we close out this year, I alsowanna invite you to join us for
something special on New Year's night.

(00:55):
We're going live with adark dialogue, live show.
It's a chance to hang outtogether in real time.
We talk about the cases, the stories,the strange and the serious, and
look ahead at what's coming nextfor the network in the year ahead.
No edits, no polish, justreal conversation live.

(01:16):
If you want to join us, you can find allof the details in the live stream link
right now at dark dialogue.com/live.
You can set a reminder, bookmark it,and jump in with us when we go live.
So wherever you're listeningfrom, thank you for being here.
Thank you for supporting independentstorytelling, and we hope you'll

(01:37):
ring in the new year with us.
Live.
From all of us here at Dark Dialogue,happy holidays, take care of each
other and keep the dialogue alive.
Quiet Florida Night, an oldsmartownhouse complex settling into sleep,
the soft hum of a refrigerator on theother side of a thin interior wall,

(02:02):
A faint tick of an aging ceiling fan,then a heavy, muffled thud and silent.
So complete.
It feels like the world holds its breath.
There are crime scenes that whisper,and then there are crime scenes that
feel like they never stop screaming.
When first responders stepped into KarenPell's townhouse on that October morning

(02:25):
in 2003, they walked into a room frozen.
In that scream, Karen lay on thefloor near the kitchen, lifeless,
brutally attacked, and just above hersmeared on the wall in dark drying
arcs of blood were three letters.
Letters written in shaky, uneven strokesby a finger dragged through chaos.

(02:48):
A message.
A name, a final moment capturedin the quiet of a dying home rock.
ROC.
Whoever wrote it was trying to saysomething desperate, urgent, unmistakable
the kind of message investigators dreamof and dread in the same breath, because

(03:08):
dying declarations, real or staged,can steer an entire case before anyone
realizes how far they've been led.
But before she became a crime scene,Karen Pinnell was a woman living
a life she had built carefully.
She was 39, a former modelwho transitioned into a career
in the airline industry.

(03:29):
She had friends, a steady job plans.
She was finally beginning toprioritize, and lately she'd
been trying to step away from arelationship that no longer felt safe.
Karen lived alone.
She kept her home neat,orderly, comfortable.
She was the type of person who checkedon friends, followed up on messages,

(03:50):
and made sure people got home.
Okay.
The type of person, everyone describedthe same way, warm, grounded,
impossible, not to like, and yet.
In her final hours of life,something terrible found its way
through her locked front door.
As investigators surveyed the scene,questions piled up faster than answers.

(04:12):
How had the attacker gotteninside without a trace?
Why had the violence been so suddenand so overwhelming, and that message
on the wall, those three letters,was it a clue, a warning, a trap?
Because stage crime scenes, theytend to reveal more than they hide.
They tell two stories at once.

(04:33):
The story of the victim's last moments,and the story that killer wants the
world to believe and buried somewherebetween those two is the truth.
Tonight we start with the moment Karen'slife was taken, and the moment her voice
smeared in blood began to speak for her.
Only question is, was itreally her voice at all?

(04:54):
Hey Angela.
How's it going tonight?

Angela (04:57):
It's going.
It's one of those nights wherethe case has been sitting
with me all day, you know?
Yep.
Not in a loud way, butquietly in the background.
The kind of case that doesn'tdemand attention, but won't
let go once you notice it.

John (05:10):
Yeah.
This one does that.
I've been carrying itaround for a long time too.
Matter of fact, saw it the first timeon forensic files, the original one
years ago, and it's not because there'sa mountain of information, but because
there isn't, the absence is what is heavy.

Angela (05:30):
Exactly.
Some cases overwhelming with detail,and this one does the opposite.
It's defined by what isn'tthere, the silence, the gaps, the
ordinary setting where somethingvery much not ordinary happened.

John (05:46):
And those are often the hardest stories to tell responsibly
because there's a temptation tofill the quiet with speculation.
And we're not gonna do that tonight.

Angela (05:55):
Nope.
We're going to let thequiet speak for itself.

John (05:58):
So welcome back listeners to Dark Dialogue, the podcast where we unravel
the shadows of the human mind and divedeep into the mysteries that haunt
small towns and big cities of life.
I'm your host John.
And I'm

Angela (06:09):
Angela.
And together we shine a, shine a lighton the stories that keep us up at night.
Unsolved disappearances.
Life's stolen too soon, and thequestions that refuse to be buried.

John (06:20):
Tonight's case is one that doesn't come with spectacle.
There's no dramatic openingscene, no obvious villains
stepping out of the shadows.
No clear moment whereeverything goes wrong.
Instead, there's a woman, anormal day, and then nothing,

Angela (06:38):
and that nothing is where so many families are left to live.
That's the part peopledon't always understand.
When there's no crime scene, noconfirmed timeline, no definitive
answers, the disappearance doesn'tfreeze in time it stretches.
It follows the people who loved theminto every year that comes after that.

John (06:58):
Karen Fennell is one of those names that never became a
headline outside of her region.
No National Media frenzy, no viraldocumentary, just a family, a community,
and a question that never was resolved.

Angela (07:12):
And yet when you look closely, her murder carries many of the
same themes We see again and again,routine trust and f familiarity
in a moment when something quietlybreaks away from the unexpected path.

John (07:26):
That's why this case matters, not because it's sensational,
but because it's representative.
It reminds us how vulnerablenormal life actually is.

Angela (07:37):
It also forces us to confront how investigations unfold or fail to
when there's no immediate evidenceto react to when a disappearance
doesn't announce itself as a crime.
When time becomes the enemy before anyonerealizes they're racing it, we're gonna

John (07:53):
approach this case carefully, methodically, respectfully, we'll
walk through the setting Karen'slife, the circumstance surrounding
her disappearance and what followedwithout rushing ahead of the facts.

Angela (08:05):
And just as importantly, we're going to talk about what wasn't done.
The moments where silence settledin the institutional limitations.
The unanswered questionsthat still deserve attention.

John (08:18):
This isn't a story about assigning blame prematurely.
It's about understanding how awoman can be murdered and how
the system meant to protect.
People sometimes struggle whenthere's no obvious crime to chase.

Angela (08:30):
It's also about memory, because as long as Karen's name is spoken, as
long as her story is told with care,she hasn't disappeared completely.

John (08:39):
And that's why we're here.
That's why we tell thesestories the way that we do.

Angela (08:43):
So tonight we start at the beginning, not with what happened, but
with where, with place, with context,with the environment that shaped the
quiet rhythms of Karen Parnell's life.

John (08:54):
So let's talk about where this story unfolds.
Angela, tell us about Oldsmar Florida.

Angela (09:00):
Oldsmar Florida.
That's quietly at the northern edge,edge of Tampa Bay, where the water
narrows and feels more contained,less open Gulf, more inland tide.
It's a small waterfront city inNortheast Pinellas County, positioned
between Tampa and Clearwater, closeenough to the region's, larger cities
to benefit from their growth, but farenough away to maintain its own rhythm.

(09:25):
Oldsmore was not a town that formedorganically over generations.
It was designed.
Its origins traced back to the early1910s when automobile magnate Ransom.
Eli Olds, I love that name.

John (09:39):
It's a pretty cool one.
Uh,

Angela (09:40):
of Oldsmobile and later, REO Motor Car Company Fame purchased
more than 30,000 acres alongthe northern shore of Tampa Bay.
His vision extended beyond land ownership.
Olds imagined.
A planned community built on orderproductivity and modern infrastructure.
Roads were laid deliberately.
A bank, railroad depot, sawmill,and docks were constructed early,

(10:05):
anchoring the settlement with thetools of commerce and transport
before a population had fully arrived.
Originally known as reels farm, thedevelopment blended agricultural
ambition with residential planning model.
Farms were paired with town lotsand the area was marketed heavily
to Northerners looking for winterhomes or investment opportunities.

(10:30):
As the focus shifted away from theagriculture and toward a full town
site, the name evolved into oldsmar,a combination of olds and Tampa.
Really?
Who saw that?
I

John (10:40):
don't know.

Angela (10:40):
Anyway, I, I'm struggling with that signaling the transition
from farmland to coastal community.
Even in its earliest years,Oldsmar reflected tension
between intention and reality.
After olds reduced his directinvolvement, land promoters took over
marketing efforts, sometimes relyingon spectacle rather than substance.

(11:02):
Sales events included gimmicks likestaged gold rushes, where prospective
buyers were invited to dig for buriedprizes on vacant land during Florida's
speculative land boom in the 1920s, excessand misrepresentation took their toll.
Controversy surrounding underwater lotsand misleading sale practices eventually

(11:22):
led the town to briefly rebrand.
Rebrand itself as Tampa Shores inthe late 1920s, an effort to distance
the community from growing distrust.
By 1937, had to look at thatagain and make sure it was 19.

John (11:35):
Yep.

Angela (11:36):
By 1937, the town reverted to the old, or to the name Oldsmar.
The damage, however, had already shapedits traject trajectory for decades after
Oldsmar remained small and semi-rural.
There's that word, cattle grazing.
You're leaving this in rightbecause people laugh at me.
Cattle grazing hob farms andtruck farming were common.

(11:58):
The town existed on the marginsof Florida's larger coastal
development, insulated in part bygeography and in part by choice.
It wasn't until postwar highwayexpansion and the growth of the Tampa
Bay metropolitan area that Oldsmarbegan to change more noticeably.
Population figures reflectthat gradual shift.

(12:18):
Did John write me some census records?

John (12:21):
Yeah, I sure did.
Nice.

Angela (12:23):
In 1970, Oldsmar had roughly 1500 residents.
By 18 or 18, by 1980, the numberhad grown to around 2,600.
The most specific growth came in thefollowing decades, over 8,300 residents.
By 1990, approximately 12,200by 2000 and nearly 14,900.

(12:44):
By the 2020 census, recentestimates placed the population
in the mid 1400 range thousand.
No.
I'd just like you to correct me.
I've missed a zero.
You did.
Thank you.
Recent estimates placed thepopulation in the mid 14,000 range.

(13:05):
Showing modest.
How do you put up with me

John (13:08):
Now you gotta read that with, I felt big emphasis.

Angela (13:11):
I know.
How do you put up with me?
Recent estimates placed the populationin the mid 14,000 range showing modest
fluctuations rather than rapid expansion.
Today, old smart occupies ademographic middle ground.
It is neither a ruraltown nor a large city.
It functions as a suburban community,tied closely to the broader Tampa St.

(13:32):
Petersburg, Clearwater economy,while still maintaining a
distinct local identity.
That identity is reinforcedthrough public spaces and community
planning parks, walking trails, andwaterfront access feature prominently
in how Oldsmar presents itself.
Re Olds Park named afterthe city's founder.

(13:52):
That's, I don't know why that struck me.
Funny.
Serves as a focal point forpublic gatherings and events to
reinforcing a sense of continuitybetween the town's past and present.
From a public safety perspective,Oldsmar is general, generally
regarded as stable something I'm not.
Crime data places the cityslightly below national averages.

(14:15):
Overall with violent crime ratesremaining relatively low year to year
property crime, particularly theftand vehicle related offenses, accounts
for most reported incidents on paper.
Oldsmar reads as predictable andmanageable Perception plays a
powerful role in places like this.
Oldsmar is a city shaped byroutine commutes to nearby cities,

(14:39):
evenings, near the water, familiarstreets, and repeated patterns.
It's the kind of environment where peopleassume irregularities will stand out
quickly, where someone going missingwould immediately register as wrong.
The city has also produced an unusuallyhigh number of professional athletes
and figures for its size, particularlyin baseball, basketball, and football.

(15:02):
While those names bring a sense of pride,they exist alongside the far more common
experience of daily, unremarkable life.
The kind defined by schedules,neighbors, and consistency.
Oldsmore sits within Pinellas County,a Peninsula County bordered by
Tampa Bay and the Gulf of Mexico.
Is it still the Gulf of Gulf of Mexico?

John (15:21):
No, it's the Gulf of America.

Angela (15:22):
Yeah.
It's the Gulf of America now, point

John (15:25):
a hundred percent.

Angela (15:26):
Pinellas is one of Florida's most densely populated counties
known for tourism, beaches, andlong established coastal cities
like St. Petersburg and Clearwater.
Smar differs from those communities.
It is more inland, more controlled,and less shaped by transient
tourism that distinction matters.

(15:47):
Oldsmar is not a place peopleassociate with instability.
It is designed to feel orderly, safe.
Predictable.
And in communities like this, disruptiondoesn't arrive with noise or warning.
It often reveals itself slowlythrough absence rather than action.
Understanding oldsmar meansunderstanding the contrast.

(16:07):
The city built intentionallya population shaped by steady
growth rather than upheaval.
A place where routines carry weightand more silence when it appears
can linger far longer than expected.

John (16:19):
Thank you, Angela.
You are so welcome.
I guess.
So Karen Fennell was born in Germany,the daughter of a US state, uh,
United States Air Force servicemaninto a life shaped early by
movement structure and adaptability.
Like any army brats, you know, any.
Military kids, military familieslearn quickly how to make a

(16:42):
sense of home wherever they,wherever they happen to land.
And Karen grew up doing just that,adjusting to new places, new routines,
and new faces with an ease that wouldlater become one of her defining traits.
Eventually, the familysettled primarily in Florida.
Karen was one of six children andthe only girl among five brothers.

(17:03):
That position shaped herin quiet, but lasting ways.
She learned how to speak up withoutforcing attention, how to move
comfortably in male dominated spaces,how to be warm without being fragile.
Her brother Michael, would laterdescribe her as someone who could
strike up a conversation with anyone.
The kind of person who made strangersfeel like acquaintances within minutes.

(17:28):
Family members consistentlydescribed Karen as upbeat
social and emotionally open.
When relatives spoke with her in theperiod leading up to her death, there
was no warning signs, no expressionsof fear or unease about her life.
She sounded busy, engaged content.
Whatever stress existed in her world, itwasn't something she carried outwardly.

(17:51):
Karen grew into adulthood withthe same ease of connection.
She built a career ratherthan drifting into one.
By the early 1990s, she was workingfor American Airlines at Tampa
International Airport, a job that shewould hold for roughly 12 years in
the airline world, longevity matters.
It speaks to reliability,interpersonal skills, and an

(18:13):
ability to manage constant change.
And Karen did all of that well.
She worked in customer service, a rolethat demands patience, composure, and an
emotional intelligence that can be trainedinto someone who doesn't already have it.
Coworkers remembered her as apopular and dependable person.
Someone you wanted, besides you.

(18:34):
During a busy shift, someone whocould calm and angry passenger without
escalating the situation, someonewho fit naturally into that social
ecosystem of airline life, thatlife extended beyond the terminal.
Karen's social circle was built partlyaround colleagues and partly around
the broader Tampa Bay community.

(18:55):
Airline work creates its own rhythm.
Irregular hours, shared stress.
Shared downtime, and Karen leaned into it.
She traveled, she went out.
She made friends easily, but shealso valued her independence.
She loved Florida, not just as aplace to live, but as a lifestyle.
Friends remembered her passion for thewater, beach days, boating, diving, and

(19:20):
spontaneous trips out into Tampa Bay.
She loved being on the water, lovedthe physical freedom of it, the sun,
the salt, the sense of movement.
Some of her friends, most vividmemories of Karen were simple ones,
days spent hopping between smallislands, returning at sunset, sunburned,
and tired in the best possible way.

(19:41):
By the early two thousands, Karen hadestablished herself firmly in Oldsmar.
She lived alone in a villa ortalent home in a quiet residential
neighborhood, an area neighborsunderstood as safe and non-eventful.
This wasn't a place definedby transient or instability.
It was the kind of neighborhood peoplesettled into once they felt rooted.

(20:03):
Shortly before her death, Karen hadpurchased a new black Volkswagen.
It's a small detail, but one that matters.
Buying a new car israrely an impulsive act.
It suggestibility planningconfidence in the future.
Family members described her asbusy during this time, working,
socializing, moving forward.

(20:23):
There was no sense that her lifewas contracting or unraveling.
It was expanding.
Those who knew her consistentlyreturned to the same descriptions.
Friendly, approachable, kind.
Her brother said that anyone meeting Karenwould be greeted with a big smile, a warm
hello, and likely a genuine conversation,not small talk, real engagement.

(20:47):
She wasn't guarded.
She didn't move throughthe world suspiciously.
She trusted people easily because formost of her life, trust had been rewarded.
Karen's independence didn'tmean isolation, it meant choice.
She liked her space.
She liked her routines.
She liked knowing that she couldcome and go on her own terms.

(21:08):
That independence extendedinto her romantic life as well.
Karen had experiencedserious relationships before.
One former boyfriend rock, herpitch was significant enough in
her personal history that hisname remained emotionally relevant
long after the relationship ended.
Details about their time together arelimited in public records, but what is

(21:29):
clear is that Rock represented an earlierchapter in Karen's life, one that carried
weight, familiarity and emotional imprint.
Their relationship had ended before theevents of 2003, whatever it had been.
It was over and Karen had moved onand I was able to find that, you know,
I think Rock was kind of an assholeand he didn't treat her very good.

(21:51):
There was some insinuationthat he was an abusive.
I will say that the dude looks creepilylike Tom Beringer, like creepily.
Really like Tom Beringer.
Yeah.
I. If you see anything, at least at thetime that forensic files was recorded,
which would've been a long time ago,but if you it, it is, it is eerie.

(22:13):
So anyway, by 2003, Karen wasinvolved in an on again, off
again relationship with Timothy.
No one is Tim Perimeter.
At first, the relationshipfollowed a familiar pattern,
attraction connection intensity.
But over time, Taryn began tolearn more about Tim's past details

(22:33):
that unsettled her and changedhow she viewed the relationship.
Tim had a turbulent history marked bymanipulation and criminal behavior,
including involvement in pimping.
These were not things that Karen knewat the outset when she did learn them.
Her perspective shifted.
Friends and later court testimonywould describe her growing

(22:55):
discomfort, not just with his past,but with his behavior, controlling
tendencies, pressure, a dynamic thatno longer felt safe or balanced.
Karen did not accept that dynamic.
Quietly, she attemptedto end the relationship.
That decision, choosing distance,choosing autonomy was consistent

(23:16):
with who Karen had always been.
She valued her independence,she valued her peace, and when a
relationship no longer aligned withthose values, she tried to step away.
That is where her victim backstory ends.
Not with fear, but not with retreat, butwith a woman asserting control over her
own life, having already lived decadesas someone who built community career

(23:40):
and independence on her own terms.
Karen pin's Body was discovered onthe morning of Saturday, October
11th, 2003, inside her villa at 2030Montego Court in Oldsmore, Florida.
She was found laying face up on thekitchen floor in a pool of blood.
The person who discovered her was heron again, off again, boyfriend Tim er.

(24:05):
According to statements later given tolaw enforcement, Tim said that he came
to Karen's home that morning, enteredthe residence, and found her unresponsive
on the kitchen floor covered in blood.
He then called 9 1 1 toreport that she was dead.
Deputies later noted that in thedays following the discovery, early
local reporting referred to Timas Karen's current boyfriend and

(24:28):
identified him as the person who hadfound her body that Saturday morning.
During the 9 1 1 call, whichwould later be played in court
proceedings and documentaries, Timsounded distraught and emotional.
He told the dispatcher variationsof Karen is dead, presenting himself
as shocked as a shock partner whojust stumbled upon a homicide scene.

(24:49):
When deputies arrived at theVilla, Tim's behavior reinforced
that initial impression.
Reports indicate that he appearedextremely upset and vomited in the front
yard after law enforcement arrived.
A reaction that at the time wasinterpreted as shock and trauma rather
than with any kind of suspicion.
In addition to calling 9 1 1, Timalso contacted Katherine Mallet, a

(25:14):
coworker and a friend of Karen's.
During that call, he told her thatKaren had been quote, shot or stabbed.
A level of detail that would later bescrutinized by prosecutors who argued
that he should not have been able todetermine the nature of her injuries from
the limited vantage point that he claimedwhen he first saw her dun, dun dun.

(25:37):
Inside the villa Deputies from thePinellas County Sheriff's Office
found Karen lying on her back onthe kitchen floor with extensive
blood around her upper body andmultiple visible stab wounds.
She was clearly deceased by the, bythe time first responders arrived near
her body on a wall in the kitchen area.

(25:57):
Deputies observed three letterswritten in blood ROC at the time.
The writing appeared to resemble adying declaration and immediately
drew investigative attentiontoward a person with that name.
Also present in the home.
Were a pizza box with several slicesmissing and beer containers details

(26:20):
that were documented during theinitial walkthrough and would later
become relevant in reconstructingthe final hours before Karen's death.
The rest of the homeappeared largely intact.
There was no obvious signs of forcedentry, no indication that the residence
had been ransacked observations that ledinvestigators to believe early on that the

(26:40):
attack was personal rather than the resultof a burglary or a random intrusion.
After a confirming Karen's death,deputies secured the Villa as a
homicide scene, requested crime scenetechnicians, and began canvassing the
Montego Court neighborhood for witnessesand reports of any suspicious activity.
Within days, the Sheriff's Office informednearby residents that there was, quote,

(27:04):
nothing to worry about signaling thatinvestigators believed the killing was
targeted and did not pose an ongoingthreat to the surrounding community.
In the immediate aftermathof the discovery, the
narrative took shape quickly.
Tim Perner was viewed as the grievingpartner who had walked into a nightmare.
The word rock on the wall appeared topoint investigators towards her former

(27:27):
boyfriend, and with those two elements,the discover and the bloody name, the
initial direction of the investigationwas set long before the forensic
evidence would begin to challenge it.
After confirming Karen Purnell's deathcrime scene technicians photographed the
position of her body, the surroundingblood patterns, and the word rock

(27:48):
written in blood on the kitchen wall.
The writing was treated as acritical piece of potential
evidence and preserved for lateranalysis, investigators conducted
a detailed processing of the scene.
Items believed to be connected to thefinal hours of car of Karen's life
were collected, including the pizzabox, with the slices missing, the

(28:09):
pizza receipt, the beer containers, andother objects found in the residence.
Fingerprints were lifted from surfacesthroughout the home, including the
pizza box, and biological sampleswere collected for DNA testing.
Investigators obtained Karen's cellphone records and collected messages
from her phone to reconstructher recent communications.

(28:31):
Detectives reviewed her calls andtexts in an effort to understand
her movements, recent interactionsand any conflicts or tensions in
the days leading up to her death.
So while detectives were lookinginto the possible connection of rock.
They also were interviewing Tim er,who presented himself as the grieving

(28:51):
boyfriend who had discovered Karen's bodyand he cooperated with investigators.
He allowed searches and provideda timeline of his movements.
He claimed that he had left Karen's homearound seven 30 on Friday night, well
before the estimated time of the killing.
As part of the timelinereconstruction, detectives located
and interviewed the Pizza Hutdelivery driver who had delivered

(29:14):
food to Karen's home that evening.
The driver placed Karen alive and Timpresent at the residence around 8 48
to 9:00 PM directly contradicting Tim'saccount that he had already left the home.
Meanwhile, forensic examination of Karen'sbody recovered skin cells from beneath her
fingernails and other biological material.

(29:37):
Subsequent testing identifiedTim ER's, DNA, mixed with
Karen's blood at the scene.
Evidence that would later becomecentral to the investigation.
At this early stage, detectives wereworking along two parallel tracks, one
shaped by the apparent message on the wallpointing towards rock, and another shaped
by the emerging timeline, inconsistenciesand forensic findings connected to the man

(30:02):
who had reported discovering Karen's body.
Once investigators documented thecrime scene and the word rock written
in blood on the on the kitchen wall,attention shifted quickly to a man
whose name appeared to have beenleft behind by the victim herself.
Rock Perpich, who was Karen's formerboyfriend, detectives learned that
Karen and Rock had begun datingshortly after her divorce rock work

(30:26):
as an insurance adjuster, and wasknown as a Harley Davidson writer.
The relationship escalated quicklyand the two eventually lived together
for about a year from the start.
The relationship was described as volatilefriends, acquaintances, and rock himself
later characterized it as mutuallytoxic arguments were loud and frequent.

(30:47):
Police were called todomestic disturbances.
On more than one occasion,though, no arrests were ever made.
Karen filed at least one domesticbattery complaint against rock
and Rock admitted that during oneargument, he kicked in her door.
Even after the relationshipended, tension remained.
The breakup had occurred roughly a yearbefore Karen's murder, but the two were

(31:09):
still locked in a lingering dispute.
Over a $900 rollout, desk roll, topdesk rock wanted the desk returned.
Karen refused to give it up.
Investigators would later viewthis unresolved conflict as
evidence that resentment betweenthem had not completely cooled.
By October, 2003, however,rock's life had moved on.

(31:31):
He was living with his newgirlfriend on the night.
Karen was killed.
He was at home while his girlfriend'syoung son hosted a backyard
sleepover with several friends.
A detail that would soon become important.
Still.
When deputies first saw rockwritten in blood, the implication
felt immediate and unavoidable.
Investigators initially treated thewriting as possibly a dying declaration.

(31:55):
The name matched a former boyfriend witha documented history of domestic conflict.
From an investigativestandpoint, it appeared to be
a rare and direct accusation.
Even Tim ER reinforced this early framing.
During interviews, he told detectivesthat Karen had a rocky relationship
with an ex-boyfriend named Rock pointinginvestigators further in that direction.

(32:19):
In the earliest phases of the case,detectives essentially treated
rock as their primary suspect.
Internally, the narrative appearedstraightforward, a volatile ex-boyfriend,
a history of domestic violence,unresolved disputes, and a name written
in blood above the victim's body.
Rock understood the gravity immediatelywhen he became aware of the murder and

(32:41):
saw press coverage describing the crimescene, he later said his first thought
was that no one would ever believe thathe hadn't done it because his name was
literally written in Karen's blood.
Detectives polled records documentingrock and Karen's history together,
they reviewed prior domestic violencecomplaints, police responses to loud

(33:01):
arguments and reports describingphysical confrontations that included
objects being thrown during fights.
They also noted rock's, pastdrug issues and Mitre legal minor
legal troubles, factors that addedto his perceived risk profile.
Investigators then went directly to rock.
They informed him that Karen hadbeen murdered and confronted him

(33:24):
with the fact that rock had beenwritten on the wall near her.
Body.
Rock did not deny the volatilityof their relationship.
He acknowledged the screaming matchesthe police visits, and the fact that
they had been bad for each otherrather than minimizing the past.
He openly described it as toxic.
At the same time, detectives treated himnot just as a person of interest, but as

(33:47):
someone who could plausibly be the killer.
Rock was subjected tophysical examinations.
The bottoms of his feet were photographed,his fingernails were clipped.
Investigators were preparing to compareany trace evidence from his body against
material recovered from the crime scene.
They also moved quicklyto verify his alibi.
Detectives confirmed that on the nightof the murder rock was at home with

(34:11):
his current girlfriend, the presenceof her son and several other children
attending the sleepover provided multipleindependent witnesses placing rock at that
location during the critical timeframe.
As forensic results begancoming in, the picture shifted.
There was no physical evidence.
Tying rock to the stabbing bloodpattern analysis began raising

(34:33):
questions about the timing and theauthorship of the writing on the wall.
Investigators learned that Karenwas exclusively left-handed.
While the letters appeared consistentwith a right-handed stroke.
The blood used to write rock hadbeen applied over dried spatter,
suggesting it was written sometimeafter the man assault piece by piece.

(34:58):
The assumption that the message was agenuine dying declaration, eroded with
a corroborated alibi, no forensic linkto the scene, and growing evidence
that the writing itself was staged.
Detectives ultimately clearedrock, her pitch as a suspect.
What initially looked like acase solving itself, a violent ex

(35:19):
named in blood, began to look likesomething else, entirely a frame job.
As the investigation continued,forensic results began arriving
that fundamentally altered howdetectives understood the scene.
Inside Karen Purnell's Kitchen examinersrecovered skin cells from beneath Karen's
fingernails, along with other biologicalmaterial collected during the autopsy

(35:43):
and seen processing laboratory testing.
Later identified Tim's DNA, mixed withKaren's blood at the scene, physical
evidence that placed him in close contactwith her during the violent encounter.
At the same time, blood spatterand pattern analysis focused
on the writing on the wall.
Examiners determined that theword rock had been written over

(36:06):
older, already dried blood spatter.
This finding was critical.
It meant the writing was not createdduring the assault itself, but
after the main attack had alreadyoccurred, the significant bleeding
had taken place and enough time hadpassed for blood to dry on the wall.
That conclusion directly undermined theidea that the word was a dying declaration

(36:28):
written in Karen's final, final moments.
Further analysis raised additionalproblems with the theory.
Investigators noted that Karenwas left-handed while the letters
on the wall were consistentwith a right-handed stroke.
The height of the writing alsodrew scrutiny, given the nature of
her injuries, including evidencesuggesting that she was likely

(36:49):
paralyzed by the first stab.
Examiners found it improbable that Karencould have stood, reached the wall at
that height, and deliberately writtenthe letters herself taken together.
These findings forced a reassessment.
The message that initially appearedto point outward toward a former
boyfriend now looked increasinglylike something added after the fact.

(37:14):
With the forensic evidence beginningto connect Tim ER directly to the
violence, the investigation center ofgravity shifted away from the name on
the wall and back towards the man whohad reported discovering Karen's body.
Cell tower evidence became one of themost significant technical challenges
to Tim ER's alibi from the beginning.

(37:36):
Tim told investigators that hehad left Karen Pell's home early
on the night of the murder.
He claimed that he departed aroundseven 30 and was already driving North
on US 19 when he placed a call tohis roommate, George Solomon at 9 32.
According to Tim, that call provedthat he was well away from Oldsmar

(37:57):
by the time Karen was killed.
He repeated that version ofevents under oath on the stand.
Tim testified that he had only quote,popped in briefly at Karen's home,
left while she was still alive, andmade the 9:32 PM phone call as he
headed toward Newport Richie, notfrom anywhere near her neighborhood.

(38:18):
Investigators tested that claim.
Prosecutor Brian Na Navin subpoenaedTim's T-Mobile phone records obtaining
not just the call logs, but theassociated cell tower routing data
for more than a dozen calls madearound the time of the homicide.
Those records were analyzed by aT-Mobile network engineer identified

(38:39):
in court testimony as Sean Sparks.
Sparks testified that the 9:32 PM calldid not route through a cell tower
along US route 19 miles away, as Timclaimed instead the call connected.
Three tower located veryclose to Karen's home.
According to the engineer, the callwas likely made from near Pell's house

(39:02):
and bounced off a tower, estimatedto be between one third of a mile
and one mile from her residence.
That placement directly contradictedTim's account of being on the highway
heading north and placed him in theOldsmar area at the time when he claimed
that he had already left the tower.
Data also aligned with other evidence.
Investigators were already weighingthe Pizza Hut delivery driver

(39:26):
independently placed Tim insideKaren's home around 8 48 to 9:00
PM speaking with Karen at the door.
While Tim stood nearby, thatobservation conflicted with Tim's
assertion that he had left by seven 30.
In addition, three neighbors latertestified that they saw Tim's
BMW Park outside Karen's home atmultiple points during the night

(39:49):
around 10:00 PM 2:00 AM and 5:00 AM.
Those sightings suggested repeatedpresence rather than an early departure.
Together, the cell tower evidenceallowed investigators and prosecutors
to reconstruct a completely differentsequence of events, an argument and
killing sometime after the pizza delivery,followed by staging inside the home

(40:14):
and a phone call while Tim was still inthe area, not from a distant highway.
The phone records did not stand alone.
They just fit.
As investigators continueddismantling, Tim ER's alibi, their
attention turned to George Solomon.
A man Tim had attempted to use as both analibi witness and ultimately a confidant.

(40:36):
George Solomon was Tim'sfriend and former coworker.
The two had worked together at a cardealership on Gulf to Bay Boulevard, and
during a period when George was separatedfrom his girlfriend, he had lived with
Tim as a roommate near the dealership.
By October, 2003, George wasno longer living with Tim.
He had reconciled with his girlfriendVicki Speakman, and was staying with her

(41:00):
and their daughters in Newport, Richie.
Even so, George and Tim remainedin regular contact and continued
socializing from the beginning.
Tim attempted to place Georgeinto his timeline as an alibi.
Tim told investigators that afterleaving Karen's home early on Friday
evening, he went back to his apartmentand later drove to Newport Richie to

(41:23):
have drinks with George and Vicki.
In that version of events, Tim claimedthe visit was planned, that he had
been invited, and that he spentthe night with them, effectively
positioning George as a witness whocould place him away from Oldsmar.
During the time that Karenwas killed, George's account
didn't quite match that story.

(41:45):
George testified that around 10:30PM on the night of the murder,
he received a call from Tim.
Tim was the one who initiated thecontact According to George, Tim said
that he needed to come up to NewportRichie because, quote, he needed
to talk in person about something.
They agreed to meet a gasstation near Port Richie.

(42:06):
That detail mattered.
It showed the meeting was nota casual continuation of an
evening out, but something Timurgently sought after the killing.
When George arrived at the gas station,he immediately noticed Tim's condition.
He described Tim asquote, shaky, very shaky.
Visibly agitated and upset in a waythat went beyond someone dealing

(42:29):
with an argument or a breakup.
During that gas station meeting,George testified that Tim told him
there had been an incident with Karen.
He then asked George to quote coverfor him to say that Tim had been
with George earlier and for longerthan he actually had detectives and
prosecutors later interpreted thisas a direct request for an alibi.

(42:51):
After the gas station conversation, Georgeinvited Tim back to the house where he,
Vicki and the children were staying.
George said part of thereason was concerned.
Tim was clearly unsettled, andGeorge wanted to understand
what the hell was going on.
Later that night while drinking, Georgetestified that Tim abruptly confessed,

(43:13):
according to George, Tim blurted outthat Karen was dead, telling him words
to the effect of quote, she's gone.
I killed her.
I killed Karen.
Tim went on to explain that the killingfollowed an argument and said it
happened after he had quit his job.
George's account placed Tim not onlyseeking, seeking an alibi after the

(43:36):
fact, but admitting responsibility forKaren's death during what he described
as an unguarded moment for investigators.
George Solomon was no longer just anacquaintance mentioned in Tim's timeline.
He became a central witness.
One Tim himself hadbrought into this case.
As detectives began focusing more closelyon Tim er, they uncovered a background

(44:01):
that sharply contrasted with the personthat he had presented to Karen Pinnell.
When Tim entered Karen's life, heportrayed himself as a successful,
intelligent professional,someone who appeared stable,
articulate, and forward moving.
Friends and family later said,Karen believed that he worked in a
conventional respectable field and sawhim as smooth, capable, and engaging.

(44:26):
The investigation revealedsomething very different.
A routine criminal history checkshowed that Tim was not simply a
man with minor run-ins with the law.
He was a longtime felon with a history ofviolence, exploitation, and manipulation.
Detectives learned that in his late teensand early twenties, Tim had operated a

(44:48):
small chain of escort and prostitutionbusinesses in Gainesville, in Tallahassee,
using names such as Esquire escorts.
In prior interviews from that period,Tim himself claimed that the operation
grossed six to $7,000 a day bythe time that he was 20 years old.
In 1990, Tim was involved in agunfight at the Capitol Ridge

(45:12):
Apartments in Tallahassee.
In Tallahassee with a rival pimpconnected to an escort service
called exclusively Yours accountsdescribed Tim as the aggressor.
The other man was shot twice.
The incident became a, becamecentral to his criminal record.
Tim's name later appeared inmedia connected to broader

(45:34):
scandals reporting Tide.
Esquire escorts to allegations that aUniversity of Florida booster had paid for
prostitutes from Tim's operation to havesex with basketball player Dwayne Shin.
The same escort service surfacedduring the downfall of UFC President

(45:54):
Steve Altman, who claimed that he hadused the service only for massages.
Beyond the escort business, detectivesconfirmed that Tim had served
approximately 12 years in Florida Stateprison for attempted murder, a conviction
tied to the Tallahassee shooting.
By the time Karen waskilled, Tim was on probation.

(46:15):
Later documentation and commentarydescribed him as quote, a 16 time felon
with convictions and charges spanningfraud, violence, and related offenses.
A far cry from the professionalimage that he had projected.

Angela (46:30):
Was it actually 16?

John (46:32):
Yeah.

Angela (46:33):
Okay.

John (46:33):
Yeah, I mean, I didn't go through everything, but
he's a total piece of shit.
So investigators also learned howKaren herself became aware of his
past during an earlier domestic typenine one one call involving Tim.
A patrol deputy responded to Karen's home.
While on scene, the deputy ran Tim'sinformation and saw that he was

(46:55):
on probation for attempted murder.
Recognizing the seriousnessof what he had uncovered.
The deputy made the decisionto inform Karen directly.
He told her that Tim's criminalhistory and probation status
were public record and warned herabout who she was involved with.
For Karen, this informationwas a turning point.

(47:17):
Friends later said that when she begandating Tim, she knew none of this.
She believed that he was workingin a legitimate field and saw
him as charming and intelligent.
The revelation that he had beena pimp and a violent felon came
months into their relationship.
Not at the beginning.
Karen confided that she was disturbedby what she had learned and that this

(47:41):
was not the life or the history thatshe had signed up for, according to
later reporting and case summaries.
Her discovery of Tim's past wasone of the primary reasons that she
decided the relationship had to end.
Despite the decision, Timcontinued trying to stay close.
He presented himselfcarefully to Karen's family.

(48:02):
He attempted to maintain access, butinvestigators would later frame the
situation as one in which Karen hadseen behind the mask and was actively
trying to disengage in the investigativenarrative that followed Tim's background
became critical to understanding motive.
Detectives and prosecutors describeda pattern, a former pimp, accustomed

(48:23):
to control a man who had alreadyresorted to gun violence and a
felon facing a girlfriend who nowknew the truth and wanted out.
George Solomon's testimony that Tim saidthe killing followed an argument after he
had quit his job, and that Karen wantedto end the relationship fit squarely
into that framework for investigators.

(48:46):
Tim's hidden past and Karen'sbelated discovery of it,
formed the emotional fuse.
Once she knew who he really was andmoved to leave a man with a documented
history of violence and exploitationreacted in the way that he had before
with force, and this time it was fatal.

(49:07):
Advocates and researchers usethe phase exit ramp danger zone
to describe a critical realityin domestic violence cases.
The moment a woman plans to leaveactively leaves or has just left an
abusive partner is statistically themost dangerous phase of the relationship.
This is not theoretical, it's measurable.

(49:29):
Multiple studies and advocacyorganizations consistently report
that 70 to 77% of intimate partnerhomicides occur during separation
or an attempted separation.
Violence does not decline.
Once a victim leaves, it often increaseswith some reviews showing a roughly 75%

(49:51):
spike in serious violence that can lastfor a year or more after separation,
and in many cases up to two years.
The reason is controlled abusiverelationships are not sustained
by affection or conflict alone.
They're sustained by control.
When a victim begins to leave,that control erodes for an abuser.

(50:15):
The loss of control is frequently thetrigger that turns coercive or emotional
abuse into physical abuse or escalatesexisting physical abuse into lethal force.
Researchers and advocates see the samepattern repeatedly during this phase.
In the pre-departure stage, victimsoften plan quietly, they gather

(50:37):
money, secure documents, arrangetransportation, identify safe housing.
This secrecy is notdeception, its survival.
Economic dependence and isolation are twoof the largest barriers to leaving safely.
As the abuser senses withdrawal, fewercalls, emotional distance, hidden

(50:58):
belongings, legal consultations,behavior often escalates, monitoring
increases, phones are checked.
Digital surveillance intensifies,interrogations become constant threats.
Turn explicit statements like, ifyou ever leave me, I'll kill you,
are not rare during this phase.

(51:19):
The immediate separation window, thathours, days, and weeks, just before or
after leaving is the most lethal point.
This is when researchers see sharpincreases in strangulation use of weapons,
forced entry, and ambushes at predictablelocations such as the victim's home

(51:40):
workplace, or during child ex exchanges.
Even after physical separation,danger does not automatically end
many abusers shift to post-separation,coercive control, using courts, custody
disputes, finances, and repeatedlegal filings to maintain power.

(52:00):
Advocates describe this as abuse by proxy,where institutions are used as tools to
continue harassment, surveillance, andpunishment Because of these patterns,
recent or impending separation is treatedas a standalone lethality risk factor.
In many domestic violence riskassessments, it sets alongside other

(52:22):
high risk indicators, such as priorstrangulation threats to kill access
to weapons and obsessive jealousy.
Hotlines and advocacy organizationsconsistently emphasize that the
first 12 to 18 months after leavingremain especially dangerous.
Many of the most serious injuriesand homicides occur in that window,

(52:46):
not during the relationships, earlyvolatility, but during its attempted end.
This is why advocates push back sostrongly against the phrase just leave.
Leaving is not a single act.
It is a process, and it's one thatrequires planning, support, and timing.

(53:07):
Survivors are urged to createstructured safety plans that may include
confidential shelter options, legalprotections, financial preparation,
and controlled methods of departure,national and local hotlines.
Frame separation as a medical level riskevent, not a spontaneous decision point.

(53:28):
In short, the exit ramp is not freedom.
It is the most dangerousstretch of the road.
By the time investigators finished pullingapart the evidence, one thing was clear.
Long before a courtroomever heard the case.
This wasn't a mysteryborn out of randomness.
It wasn't a stranger in the night.

(53:48):
It wasn't chaos without context.
Karen Pinnell was doing somethingmillions of women try to do every year.
She was stepping away from arelationship that no longer felt safe.
She was reclaiming space, reclaimingagency, reclaiming her life.
And in domestic violence cases, thatmoment, the moment control slips is

(54:09):
often the most dangerous one of all.
The word written on our wall tried totell a different story, pointed outward.
It suggested an old conflict,an old rage, an old villain.
For a time at Worth.
It redirected attention.
It brought, it bought time.
It nearly rewrote thenarrative or of her death.

(54:29):
But evidence doesn'tcare about performance.
Forensics don't respond to emotion.
Cell towers don't bend to alibis,and people who are asked to lie
often end up telling the truth.
Instead, what investigators uncoveredwas not just who was responsible, but why
the story was staged the way it was, whyblame was redirected, why control had to

(54:53):
be reasserted even after Karen was gone.
This episode ends where many victimstories do at the edge of separation,
at the point where warning signsare clearest and danger is highest.
Next time we step into the courtroom,we examine how the state dismantled the
lie piece by piece, how the evidencewas presented, and how a man who tried

(55:16):
to rewrite Karen's final moments wasultimately confronted with the truth
that he couldn't escape because KarenFennell's voice was not written on a wall.
It was carried forward by evidence,by testimony, and by the refusal
to let her story be rewritten,and that's where will continue.

(55:37):
Before we step any further intoevidence, testimony, verdicts, we
need to pause and return to theperson at the center of this story.
Karen Pinnell was not a case file.
She was not a crime scene.
She was not a cautionary headline.
She was a woman who built a life.
Karen grew up in a military familylearning early how to adapt, how

(55:59):
to connect, and how to make herselfat home wherever she landed.
That ease with people, stayed with herfriends and family, remembered her as
warm, outgoing, and genuinely kind.
Someone who could strike up aconversation with anyone and
make it feel natural, not forced.
She worked hard.
She built a career in airlinecustomer service, a job that

(56:22):
demands patience, empathy, andresilience for more than a decade.
She showed up every day in her rolewhere people are often stressed,
frustrated, or angry, and she met themwith professionalism and humanity.
Coworkers described her as reliable,well-liked, and easy to work
alongside outside of work, Karaloved the life that she had chosen.

(56:47):
She loved Florida.
She loved the water.
She loved being outdoors,boating, diving, spending time
with friends under open skies.
Those who knew or talk aboutbeach days, small island
trips, sunsets over Tampa Bay.
Moments that weren't flashyor dramatic, but deeply lived.

(57:07):
Karen understood joy in itssimplest forms, movement,
laughter, connection, and freedom.
She valued her independence.
By the time she settled inOldsmar, Karen had created a
life that reflected that value.
She lived on her own.
She made her own decisions.
She wasn't searching forsomeone to complete her.
She was choosing how and withwhom she shared her time.

(57:30):
And that matters because too oftenwhen women are killed by intimate
partners, their stories are reducedto the relationship that ended
them as if their identity beginsand ends with who heard them.
Karen was more than that.
She was a sister, a daughter, a friend, acoworker that people trusted, a woman who

(57:51):
laughed easily and welcomed others openly.
In the months before her death,Karen was doing something profoundly,
ordinary and profoundly brave.
She was recognizing that a relationshipno longer aligned with the life that she
wanted as she was trying to step away.
There is nothing reckless about that.
Nothing naive, nothing provocative.

(58:14):
It is an act of self-respect.
Karen did not cause what happened to her.
She did not miss the signs in away that makes her responsible.
She did not invite violence bywanting something better for herself.
The responsibility belongs solelyto the person who chose to harm her.
In telling Karen's story, ourobligation is not just to explain how

(58:36):
she died, but to honor how she lived.
To remember her as a wholeperson, not a lesson, not a
warning label, not a statistic.
This tribute is not theend of that remembrance.
It's the beginning.
In our final episode, we'llreturn to Karen one last time.
Not through evidence or arguments,but through legacy, through what her

(58:59):
story teaches us about listening,believing and protecting people when
they say they need space to be safe.
Karen Pinnell deserved more time, and shedeserved to be remembered for far more
than the violence that took her life.
We need to stop pretending that leavingan abusive relationship is simple.

(59:19):
It isn't.
For decades, survivors have beentold some version of just leave as
if walking away is a single decision,rather than a dangerous process
that unfolds under constant thread.
Research and advocacy work and livedexperience all say the same thing.
Leaving is often the most dangerousmoment, not the safest one.

(59:42):
That doesn't mean leavingisn't worth doing.
It means it needs to be donecarefully and with support.
If you or someone that youknow is in immediate danger,
the priority is survival.
In the United States, that means calling9 1 1 right away, but many situations
fall into a quieter category wheredanger is real, but not yet explosive.

(01:00:05):
That's where planning matters.
Advocates stress that leavingshould be treated like a high
risk event, not an impulsive move.
For many survivors, the safest firststep isn't packing a bag, it's talking
to someone who understands the risks.
Confidential hotlines existfor exactly this reason.

(01:00:26):
They don't pressure people to leave.
They help assess danger, plan,timing, and identify options that
fit the reality of the situationin the us The National Domestic
Violence Hotline is available twentyfour seven by phone chat or by text.
Trained advocates can help withsafety planning, local referrals,

(01:00:48):
and legal information for NativeAmerican and Alaskan native survivors.
The Strong Hearts Native helplineoffers culturally specific support.
The National Center for Victimsof Crime also provides a broader
victim support services, includingdomestic and dating violence.
One of the most important tools advocatesemphasize is a personalized safety plan.

(01:01:13):
A safety plan isn't a checklistthat you download and forget.
It's a living strategy builtaround your specific risks.
It may include planning how to leaveduring a low risk window, identifying
safe places to go, setting up codewords with trusted people, and deciding
how to protect children, pets, andyourself during and after separation.

(01:01:37):
Safety Planning also means thinking beyondthe moment of leaving many survivors face
increased stalking, digital monitoring,or legal harassment after separation.
Advocates now routinely include digitalsafety, changing passwords, disabling
location sharing, checking devicesfor tracking as part of exit planning.

(01:02:00):
Legal protections like protectiveorders can help, but they work
best when paired with practicalsafety steps and local support.
Another reality advocates are clearabout you do not have to do this alone.
Local domestic violenceprograms and shelters don't
just offer emergency housing.
They help with planning legal navigation,financial steps, and long-term safety.

(01:02:25):
Many people never stay in a shelter,but still benefit from the guidance
that these programs provide.
The most important message survivorshear from advocates is this, you are
not weak for staying while you plan.
You are not wrong for being afraid,and you are not responsible for
the violence used against you.

(01:02:45):
Leaving safely is not about bravery alone.
It's about preparation,timing, and support.
If you're listening to this andrecognize pieces of your own life and
Karen's story or in this conversation,know this, help exists confidentially
without judgment and reaching out forit can be the first step towards safety.

(01:03:09):
Not because leaving is easy, butbecause your life is worth protecting.
And that brings us to the end ofthis episode and the end of the
first half of Karen Purnell's story.
What we've walked through isn't justan investigation, it's a reality
that plays out far too often whensomeone tries to step away from

(01:03:30):
control and reclaim their life.
Karen didn't disappear.
She didn't leave behind amystery for the sake of intrigue.
She was trying to createdistance, and that moment became
the most dangerous one of all.
In our next and final episode of thisarc, we'll step into the courtroom
will follow how the evidence dismantledthe staging, how testimony reshaped

(01:03:51):
the narrative, and how the truthultimately held when the lies could not.

Angela (01:03:56):
And before we leave this episode, we want to be
clear about something important.
Listening to these stories matters, butwhat you do after listening matters too.
The show isn't just about telling stories,it's about keeping victims visible,
cases alive, and families supported.

John (01:04:13):
One way that you can do that is by joining our Adoptive Victim
program@www.darkdialogue.com.
That program allows listeners todirectly support one missing person
or unsolved case through recordsreview research and investigative
assistance, real work that helps casesmove forward when attention fades.

Angela (01:04:35):
You can also visit that same website, www.darkdialogue.com to
read and share our victim blog posts.
Those aren't summaries.
They're detailed, respective profilesdesigned to keep victims' names.
Stories and humanity visiblebeyond a single episode.
Sharing those posts helps families,advocates, and investigators

(01:04:57):
more than you might realize.

John (01:04:59):
If you'd like to support the show itself and receive members only perks,
you can do that in a few different ways.
You can do it at patreon.com/darkdialog pod coffee.com/dark dialog,
or you can subscribe to our substackat dark dialogue crime.substack.com.
Each of those supports researchproduction and long form investigative

(01:05:21):
work and gives you access toexclusive content and updates.

Angela (01:05:26):
We also want to hear from you.
If you have kudos, questions,corrections, or critiques, you can email
us directly at info@darkdialogue.com.
The show is better when it's aconversation, not a broadcast,

John (01:05:38):
and this one really matters.
Please like, share, subscribe, leavea review, give a thumbs up and ring
the bell wherever you listen or watch.
It sounds small, but it, itmakes a massive difference.
Those actions push the show intomore feeds, more searches, and more
recommendations, which means more peoplehear these stories and more victims.

(01:06:00):
Stay visible.

Angela (01:06:01):
If you're new here or if you want more information from the network,
be sure to check out our other shows,the Dark Dialogue Main Show, and
Dark Dialogue, shadow Chat Sessions.

John (01:06:11):
You can find all of our main podcasts anywhere podcasts are
listened to on all major platforms.
Thank you for listening.
Thank you for caring enough tostay engaged and thank you for
helping us do more than tell storiesfor helping us keep them alive.
And keep the dialogue alive.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

The Joe Rogan Experience

Two Guys, Five Rings: Matt, Bowen & The Olympics

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Written in Blood: The Murder of Karen Pannell (Part 1)

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

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

The Joe Rogan Experience

Two Guys, Five Rings: Matt, Bowen & The Olympics

All Episodes

Written in Blood: The Murder of Karen Pannell (Part 1)

Stuff You Should Know