Veronica Gedeon: Easter Weekend Triple Murder

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
The.

Speaker 2 (00:39):
So when we think of Easter weekend, we think of kids
running through parkscollecting finding Easter eggs.
We think of kids runningthrough parks collecting finding
Easter eggs.
We think of people going tochurch and family gatherings,
and this is our Easter episodeof Deviant Criminology.
I'm Richard.

Speaker 3 (00:54):
I'm Heather.

Speaker 2 (00:55):
And today we're going to discuss the murder of
Veronica Ronnie Gideon.
This is kind of a tragic taleon multiple fronts and again
kind of goes to theconversations we've had before
about how multiple people canhave different sides to them.
So some people can be monstersand killers while also being
victims themselves.

(01:16):
This is a case that when westarted looking at it, it was
really interesting to me.
We started collecting data,reading things about it, and
then we did a Google search tokind of look at her pictures,
because this is an individualfrom the 1930s and when I saw
the pictures it brought back amemory.

(01:37):
It's kind of like one of thoselight bulb moments that I had
actually heard about this casebefore about this case before,
because if you're listening tothis podcast, you're probably
also a true crime person and acriminal justice person, like we
are, and there was an episodeof the TV series A Crime to
Remember that covered her, andthis is really a sad story in so
many ways that we'll get into.
So, heather, if you would liketo take it from there, Sure.

Speaker 3 (02:01):
Veronica was also known as Ronnie, was born in
1917 to Hungarian immigrants,joseph and Maryinarian approach,
and he also had a successfulupholstery business.

(02:29):
During Prohibition he also rana speakeasy from the family's
basement and even though it wasprofitable, it eventually got
raided and closed.
The family dynamics wereincreasingly strained because
during the Roaring Twenties andtransitioning into the Great
Depression, joseph's strictparenting style was conflicting
with Ronnie or Veronica'sfree-spirited nature and she was

(02:55):
described as boy-crazy andwe'll talk more about how
free-spirited she was here in alittle bit.
But this tension ultimatelyresulted in Joseph's
estrangement from the family,although he did continue to come
for holiday celebrations, andthat will also be something that
will be important in ourconversation later on.

Speaker 2 (03:13):
I do think it's interesting at this time.
You know, hey, we keep gettingdrawn back to the 1920s and 30s.
I think it's because that issuch a defining era from or
before that era and then whatwould come afterwards, because
so many organizations, laws andthings came out of this time
period.
But how women were portrayed inthis time is, even if you

(03:35):
talked to another boy, youtalked to two or three boys like
you were boy crazy is almostkind of slang for like slut or,
you know, being loose, as wouldhave been used in like the 70s
or 80s.
So there's a lot of labelingthis young lady as a very
certain way.
That unfortunately does almostcast type her in the episode

(03:58):
that we are reading here.
So in the early 1930s MaryGideon moved the family to 316
East 50th Street in Manhattan'sTurtle Bay neighborhood.
I read that like I know wherethat is.
I have absolutely no ideabecause I've never been to New
York.
But to support the familyduring the challenging economic
times she began operating aboarding house welcoming a

(04:21):
diverse array of tenants,welcoming a diverse array of
tenants.
There's also some connectingher to maybe some brothels, and
I don't want to say prostitutionbut prostitution.
So Ronnie Gideon attendedWilliam Cullen Bryant High

(04:42):
School, maintaining connectionsto her Hungarian heritage
through her immigrant parents.
The family's move from Astoriato Manhattan marked a
significant change in theirliving situation and social
environment.

Speaker 3 (04:55):
So Mary, who again is the mother, was managing this
boarding house at their East50th Street residence until
December of 1936.
After this point, the propertywas overseen by a superintendent
and, prior to running theboarding house, marriott
operated several speakeasiesduring the Prohibition era,

(05:15):
showcasing the family'sadaptability in difficult
economic times.

Speaker 2 (05:20):
So while there's no concrete evidence linking
Marriott to prostitution orbrothels, the nature of her
boarding house, operating in theDepression era of New York,
likely attracted a varied andsometimes questionable clientele
.
But also you already have somelinks to if you're running a
speakeasy in New York at thistime you've got connections to

(05:43):
organized crime.
You've got to be getting thealcohol from somewhere.
So there is a lot moreconnections to illicit activity,
even if it's harder to find inthis specific case.
So in this environment may haveexposed young Ronnie to a range
of influences and experiencesthat shaped her later life and
career choices.
I mean, you've got alcohol, alot of people drinking.

(06:03):
She would have been exposed tothat.
It was happening inside theirhome and inside the environments
.
They had the potential ofshort-term rentals by men with
young women around.
So illicit sexual acts andthings like that definitely
would have influenced especiallyher developmental age and her
father's not around looking atmen that are coming in and out
for a different aspect of whatmen's behavior was supposed to

(06:26):
be towards women.

Speaker 3 (06:27):
And, of course, their family story reflects the
broader immigrant experience ofthe early 20th century in
America, which encompassed thechallenges of assimilation and
the impact of major historicalevents like Prohibition, the
Great Depression, andgenerational conflicts that
often arose between traditionalimmigrant parents and their more
Americanized children.

(06:47):
We talked about a lot of thisin one of our earlier episodes
in relationship to IrishAmericans.

Speaker 2 (06:54):
And that's a conversation that we even have
today with a lot of SouthAmerican families that come here
, where their parents orgrandparents that come with them
have a more traditional view,especially Catholic view, coming
from South America, then thekids born here that are more
acculturated into Americansociety don't share those same
values and there's a conflicteven in the family.

(07:15):
So that happened even here,like she had those Hungarian
roots, but she's also reallystarting to see America, which
the same things that broughtpeople to this country as
immigrants were also sometimestheir downfall, because the
freedoms that were had here andkind of the more melting pot
society did expose people to newavenues, new thoughts, new

(07:37):
trends.
America has always been kind ofespecially New York has always
kind of been seen on the vergeof a lot of growing trends that
end up taking over a lot ofcultures.
So to me or immigrant familiescome to the U S, new York was
probably like the one place thatwas going to be the most heavy
exposure and quickly hard toadapt to environment.

Speaker 3 (08:00):
Quickly changing because of everybody who's
coming in.
So with all of those influencesthat we were just discussing,
veronica or Ronnie ended uppursuing a career in modeling
and that modeling career, atleast for that time, would have
been considered controversialand provocative.

(08:21):
So a lot of those photographswhich Richie was mentioning
earlier we were trying to findsome on the internet um were
provocative or disturbing, orthat time the pictures that we
were able to find didn't lookall that risque, I didn't think
more like swimsuit type.

Speaker 2 (08:42):
I saw her ankles, ma'am, oh Lord, it gave me the
flutters.
Um no, they, they reallyweren't and some of the like
doing research again.
Like a lot of this stuff's beenlost, like a lot of stuff that
I read and even that I saw on,like some of the shows that were
related to her before I linkedit.

(09:04):
There were fires in a lot ofthese old buildings that housed
negatives and things, so it'shard to go back and tell, but
some of the things show thatthere was what they called
nudity or semi-nude.
Those photos aren't around, ifthey existed.
But also slandering of peoplethat were involved in this work
at that time was not unheard of.
A lot of what you see is morewhat we would almost call pinup

(09:27):
style photos and then kind ofprovocative, but not anything
that.
I mean.
I have the internet andeverybody else has the internet,
so not what we would callInstagram porn nowadays or
anything like that, not evennearly as revealing as that.
But she did a lot of covers ofdetectives novels, like a lot of
people knew her face.
She was very popular at thattime because of so I think there

(09:49):
is some slut shaming anddefinitely bias against her that
starts to develop just in thedefinition of how we portray her
career, but very beautifulwoman, very talented, very
friendly.
From everything that peoplesaid about her before and after,
which I think, at least for me.

(10:09):
More disturbing were some of thetitles that went along with her
photos and the photosthemselves yeah, that does like
there's a few of those thatdefinitely kind of make you
think yeah, yeah, so I don'tknow.

Speaker 3 (10:22):
Um yeah, so I don't know, we get into some of those.

Speaker 2 (10:27):
Yeah, so some of the more notorious titles featuring
Ronnie's work included PartyGirl, which seems kind of now
would seem not very.

Speaker 3 (10:37):
Racy.

Speaker 2 (10:37):
Racy, but back then definitely Racy is a great word
for that Pretty but cheap.
And now we're starting to get alittle smuttish.
And another was I am a whiteslave, which that's just icky.
Yeah, it just comes off ickylike, especially when you move
100 years forward and we talkabout human trafficking now and
everything like.
There's some raciness there andsome sleaziness to it.

(11:01):
But these photo shoots depictedher in various states of undress
and in compromising positions,reflecting the darker
undercurrents of depression erasociety and the exploitation
often faced by young women inthe entertainment industry.
You can say that about today aswell, but especially the
depression era, like a.
There were a lot of thesedetective novels and stuff that

(11:23):
were popping up because because,damn it again, but dillinger,
bonnie and clyde van meter, likeall these other people that we
talked about, the gangs inchicago that were running like
this was like popular.
These were a popular um form ofcommunication and almost
anti-hero of the 1930s.

(11:44):
So she was sometimes the victim, sometimes the harlequin, and
that's how she was dressed.
So it really does show thatthat was kind of the only work
women could get back then.
We've talked a lot about justeven in the criminal justice
system, how they weren't reallyallowed to be on juries.
They were removed fromsituations.

(12:05):
They weren't believed.
So imagine not going into theworkforce this time when there's
not enough jobs.
You're in depression, area ofprohibition.
You're looking at things likelounge singer, risque photo
shoots, going into industry andhaving to do ungodly things.
Just a shot to do somethingthat may pay some bills and, at

(12:27):
the worst case scenario, um sexwork yeah, I mean hopefully she
didn't have to do that part ofit.

Speaker 3 (12:34):
I mean hopefully the pictures were paying the bills
for her and a lot of stuff.

Speaker 2 (12:39):
I would like the.
The place that she worked forwas reputable in what it was and
they seemed to really careabout her and talked very highly
of her and were actually veryimpacted by her loss, as we'll
talk about later.
The nature of Ronnie's modeling, as we're kind of alluding to,
attracted a mix of fascinationand moral disapproval from the

(13:00):
public, of fascination and moraldisapproval from the public.
While it provided her with asteady income, it also
contributed to her reputation asa wild and boy-crazy young
woman and characteristics thatwould later influence the
media's coverage of her murder.
And again, like for lack of abetter term, it's the slut
shaming, it's you don't fit ourmoral code that we have placed

(13:23):
on you.
So we're going to kind ofalmost you are asking for it.
Well, if you didn't want him todo that, why would you dress
that way If you didn't?
You know it's very much victimblaming and one thing that I
think this case really bringsoddly for an Easter episode but

(13:44):
brings is even today just theway that we view women and shame
women, and still in courts andin the criminal justice system
we'll see victim blaming ofwomen even in their own sexual
assaults.

Speaker 3 (13:58):
And that happens far too frequently.
And I also think it'sinteresting that there's the
whole judgment of her picturesbut at the same time people are
buying them.
So people on the one hand wantto condemn her for allowing
herself to be in thesephotographs, but then at the
same time they're out therebuying the magazines that her

(14:20):
photographs are in.

Speaker 2 (14:22):
What was the?
It was kind of like a Cheatingwebsite when men could go on and
like it was supposed to bediscreet and you could hook up
with other people.

Speaker 3 (14:34):
But it was supposed to be Ashley Madison, maybe,
yeah.

Speaker 2 (14:37):
So kind of like there were a lot of like Kind of
middle well-known figures thatwhen that whole list got leaked
there were a lot of names, somereally pure christian upstanding
people that suddenly were likeoh shit, because their names and
emails were on those lists.
It's kind of the same thinglike look at that slut over
there, those pictures she'staken, like that very double

(15:01):
standard that we have ofmorality that ebbs and flows
through this country.

Speaker 3 (15:07):
So, again, it's one of those tragic, ironic twists
that she was a model for thesedetective novels and took all
these pictures and, at the sametime, the end of her life ended
up with her and at the same time, the end of her life ended up
with her being a victim of acrime in one of these similar

(15:30):
type manners, because she doesend up being strangled.

Speaker 2 (15:43):
And I mean again, I don't know, trying to go back
and do psychoanalysis and crimescene analysis, especially when
none of this stuff's on there.
But what are the chances ofthis being a small community?
And then we'll come to find outthat the killer knew her, that
he had seen some of these.
So maybe there was, and thisindividual as we'll talk about
was an artist himself and maybehe saw a twisted irony and art
in doing that.
I don't know, there may be moreto it.

(16:04):
That's me getting reallyphilosophical about murder and
death and kind of the thingsthat lead people to do it.
But, as you will present hereshortly, there are some
obsessions that go into thisthat could lead very well to
this is what you wanted.

Speaker 3 (16:19):
And it's hard because we don't have a lot of
information as far as hisexposure to the photos.
We don't know that he ever sawthem, but we also don't know he
didn't see them, so it's hard tosay if that had any influence
on his behavior or not.

Speaker 2 (16:32):
Exactly, ronnie's modeling career extended beyond
magazine work.
She had also appeared at anillustrator's society show for
models which was rated by theNework city police department on
november 8th 1935 furtherhigher, highlighting the
controversial nature of herprofession and this kind of like

(16:52):
.
Some of the portrayals I'veseen of this like it call it a
modeling show.
Some of the description I'veseen made it kind of sound like
more of like a burlesque show,possibly so again, even in the
media in this time and some ofthe reports that I was able to
find and I know some researchershave been able to dig much
deeper, especially some I'veseen out of new york I'm not in
new york, I don't have accesssome of the stuff, but that

(17:16):
sometimes they kind ofsugar-coated it almost to cover
if people were seen there theyshouldn't have been there.
And of course we do know thatsometimes raids in New York,
especially there's time periodLike this, may not have been
about the girls as much as itwas.
Was there alcohol beingprovided and who ran that club
and where people rating eachother and selling each other out
?
That was extremely common.
So but this does kind of takeit to more that she may have

(17:39):
been involved in more than justthe simple photo shoots, maybe
doing more burlesque or what wewould know more as kind of like
adult entertainment shows.

Speaker 3 (17:50):
So, with her having that background and those
pictures being out there because, just like the internet, you
put something out there and it'sthere forever these pictures
are out there and had the crimenot occurred, I don't know how
many of those photos would havecome to light and been so public
.
But because of thesensationalist nature of her

(18:12):
modeling work prior to hermurder, the media coverage
following her murder used agreat deal of those photos to
spin this story.
When they reported on it, thenewspapers and the tabloids
capitalized on her provocativeimages when they were reporting
on the murder, running thosepictures alongside the headlines

(18:36):
, and that greatly contributedto the case's notoriety and the
public fascination with thiscase.

Speaker 2 (18:47):
I think this is like we've talked about.
We're like this is somethingthat's gone on almost since
photography was done, Like Imake that joke, but it's kind of
like one that was made, like Ican see your ankle and people
would be like ostracized fromsociety from that, and I think
even today, like you, have a lotof models that are out there on
websites and instagram and allthese, uh, social media

(19:09):
platforms that are puttingthemselves out there because it
does make quick money and it's away to make money, not
realizing the ramificationsthat'll come back.
Like I don't know what thatlooks like.
Like, nancy, what, like?
What do you think about asituation like this?
Like just the way women areviewed nowadays, especially with

(19:30):
social media and things hello.

Speaker 4 (19:35):
Uh, this is nancy.
I was going through and I wasediting this episode and I
didn't realize that in theoriginal recording you could not
hear my answer at all.
So now I'm sitting here bymyself re-recording it Not a fun
experience, I've learned.
This is not my job, but youknow it is what it is.

(19:57):
So in my opinion.
You know, I'm a teenage girl,so I spend a lot of my time just
going through TikTok andlooking through social media.
So for me, I have seen some sexworkers that you know and
honestly, I think there are alot of people who look up to

(20:20):
those women because they usetheir platform as a way to
educate and empower themselvesand other people.
I think there is a vulnerabilitythat comes with doing that job
and there are a lot of risksthat you have to accept.

(20:41):
But for people who do that astheir job and as a genuine way
to make money, I think they knowthose risks.
But there's another issue thatgoes alongside this.
Unfortunately, I've heardstories in my own school.

(21:03):
There was a kid who madeAI-generated photos of girls in
our classes and that's notbecoming an uncommon issue and
that's not becoming an uncommonissue.

(21:26):
There are now ways for people tomake explicit photos of people
without consent and, honestly, Ifear that that is the biggest
worry that instead of sexworkers being worried that oh no
, my line of work is getting outand people are seeing it, there
are people who are now havingto worry that photos of them

(21:48):
that aren't real are being sentaround.
I don't think there should be ademonization of people who
genuinely use this for a line ofwork and to get paid, but for
people who are being exploitedwithout their own knowledge,
without their consent.
Honestly, I do have a lot tosay about this and I don't think

(22:10):
I have enough time for this inthis episode, so hopefully we'll
get another chance to talkabout this and maybe I can share
more, but for now, those are mythoughts that I can share.
So, yeah, thank you.

Speaker 2 (22:25):
And I think that that's apparent in like there's
some new stories that I've seenover the last couple of weeks of
women that have done OnlyFansor had very risque Instagrams
that were trying to either getinto, like, certain events that
they were trying to go to or getjobs, or their children found
them on the internet and it'scome back and had real world

(22:45):
consequences that they didn'tsee.
That really, in the end, I'mI'm pro sex worker, like if you,
as long you know, as long as wecan combat human trafficking
and sex trafficking, like we'restarting to see in some
Indian-Avian countries and stuffwhere sex workers are actually
given medical benefits andthey're being treated as a real
job field.
But if we can give thoseprotections, there shouldn't be

(23:07):
a shame in that.
It's a job, you're making money, you're bringing home income,
um income.
But even today we see that nowin a much more sexually open
world.
I mean, we have a multi-billiondollar sex toy industry in just
the united states, so obviouslywe're not a mirror to country.
So if we can see the shame thatwe're still seeing in

(23:29):
individuals now, I can onlyimagine what this poor young
woman went through and thebastard and demonization that
was done to her.
And then, lo and behold, oneaster sunday, march 28th 1937,
she's one of three victims intriple murder and they use her
lifestyle almost as ajustification for her homicide.

(23:53):
So, like I said, on eastersunday, march 28th 1937,
horrific triple homicideoccurred at 316 east 50th street
in new york city.
The victims were 20 year oldveronica ronnie uh gideon, her
mother mary, and a boarder namedfrank barnes.
Joseph gideon and his otherdaughter, ethel so that would be

(24:17):
Ronnie's sister discovered thegruesome scene when they arrived
for a planned family dinner.

Speaker 3 (24:24):
That refers back to.
We talked about how dad hadleft and he was separated, but
he still came back for familyevents.
This was one of those familyevents that he was coming back
to, for them to come together asa family and unfortunately,
instead of coming together incelebration, that day, he and

(24:45):
Ethel discovered the rest oftheir family who had been
murdered.
Specifically, ronnie's body wasfound in her bedroom, in her
bed, and Mary was also in herown bedroom and they had both
been strangled.
But Frank, who was somebodythere as a border, he was found

(25:08):
in a third bedroom but he hadbeen stabbed multiple times.
So it definitely shows thatthere was a difference in the
way the victims were treated andthe way the suspect was looking
at the victims, because theywere killed in different ways.
I don't know if you've seenthat also as a police officer.

Speaker 2 (25:28):
So there's certain like keys here I see in the
three different ones.
So one, ronnie A, she was foundnude and strangled and posed on
the bed.
So I don't to me that's more of.
I want to see this person wherethe mother is found clothed,

(25:48):
strangled as well, and thenshe's stuffed under her bed like
I don't want to see you.
That could be guilt or thatcould be.
You're not a key player in myfantasy.
And then Frank, he's stabbedmultiple times in the head and
neck and that's just brutal.
You are a threat he sees, andthat's probably partially.

(26:11):
He's not an unintelligent guy.
We're just going to learn.
He's got a lot of mental healthproblems.
So he probably very muchidentified that frank was a
threat trying to stranglesomebody.
You're going strength tostrength but hitting him with a
knife, especially going throughthe head, a.
That takes a lot of energy andmuscle but even from that first
blow you're going to have themat a disadvantage or

(26:32):
strangulation.
It's very easy if you're astrong man to get through that.
So I think it shows that ronniewas definitely the person he
was most interested in and asodd as this is going to sound
treated the best.
Frank was a, a threat that hadto be neutralized.
And then mary was just anafterthought, like that was just

(26:52):
getting rid of somebody that hedidn't see as being part of
that.
And I do think we talked aboutthe brutal nature.
But really strangulation,strangulation, jesus is not
brutal, it's very personal andit's very so.
That's a very personal kill.
The one with frank is definitelybrutal.
I mean with strangulations likethey use brutal because it

(27:15):
sounds sensational but there'sno blood.
Really you might get a littlebit I don't want to get too
graphic with Frank is definitelybrutal.
I mean with strangulations likethey use brutal because it
sounds sensational but there'sno blood.
Really you might get a littlebit I don't want to get too
graphic but through the airwaysand stuff, but it's not what
you're going to see with bloodywounds from a knife.
So I definitely think thatshowing Frank was a threat worth
it, but the other two he wantedto treat a little bit more and
also a strangulation.

(27:35):
You don't have screaming andstuff, where Frank probably
screamed at some point if he wasbeing stabbed.

Speaker 3 (27:40):
And I think that another thing with the
strangulation is you're usuallyface-to-face, so you're looking
at the person as they're passingaway, so I think that can
sometimes be more intimate,whereas if you're stabbing them
maybe they're in a dark room.
You don't want to turn on thelight and wake Frank up if
you're trying to eliminate athreat.

(28:01):
So you might not evennecessarily know exactly what's
going on with Frank, but withthese women he's going to be
face to face.

Speaker 2 (28:11):
I don't know I'd have to see the crime scene photos
Because if I was, if I was goingto do it, I'd come from behind,
because it's a less chance forthem to be able to make contact
with me.
So if I'm face-to-face with you, your hands are just as
dexterous as able to move.
If I come from behind, yourability to reach me is very

(28:35):
hampered by just ourarticulatable abilities of our
limbs.
Your shoulders can't bend.
The same way, your ability totry and reach me and make me
stop is going to be a lot lessthan if I come at you from the
back compared to the front.
So I'd have to see on that one,because, yeah, that makes a big
difference on the ease of it,that one Because, yeah, that

(28:56):
makes a big difference on theease of it.

Speaker 3 (28:57):
So on the strangulation thing, I think
it's interesting your take of it, because I think of things in a
different light To me.
If I'm trying to take somebodydown, like in the street, or
somebody who I'm trying to, atarget that I'm trying to take
down, I would probably take thattype of approach.
But if it's something whereit's personal, where it's
somebody that you know,especially if you're having a

(29:18):
confrontation and a conversationand you're face-to-face, then
you're going to be coming atthem from the front.
So if you're lying in wait forsomebody, it'd be more of an
attack from behind.
But if we're having aconversation or an argument or
some type of a conflict, I wouldthink that would end up being
more face-to-face.

Speaker 2 (29:35):
And I think it depends again on the dynamics in
the room.
So, like, if you're having aface-to-face argument and I'm
just going to use my bare hands,then yeah, probably coming that
straight hands on.
If we're having an argument andthere's something that I see
that I'm going to use you know anecktie, you have a scarf on
I'm going to wait till you turnaround or I'm going to try and

(29:56):
spin you around.
If you're behind and I don'thave anything like that, then
I'm going to go more for a chokehold from behind, either using
a rear naked choke hold or, youknow, getting my elbow in and
really locking that in, or ifyou're using a grot or something
like that.
I think it all depends on whattools individual has on hand and
how comfortable he felt.
So if they're having anargument and it gets isolated

(30:19):
and he comes at her from thefront, then yeah, I could see in
that being bare hand.
If any evidence at the sceneshowed the use of some type of
scarf device to garrote almost,then I would think that was more
from behind, because youcouldn't get the same pressure
when you're doing it from thefront.
You're using those thumbs totry and crush that absent idol

(30:41):
from the back You're trying tocut off.
So that might've been a littlebit more graphic than I meant to
get into, but that goes back tomy combat training.

Speaker 3 (30:48):
So Well, and there's also a difference too in reach,
because, just like you weretalking about not being able to
fight back, if you are takingthe person out front to back
instead of face to face, if it'sa male-female dynamic, then a
lot of times the male's going tohave a farther arm span.
So if he's holding her by theneck, there's a possibility that

(31:10):
even if she's reaching out, shecan't actually reach his person
, but could only get like armsor hands, and not actually to
him, his person.

Speaker 2 (31:18):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (31:20):
So the initial suspect and again this kind of
boggles my mind was Joseph, herfather and Mary's ex-husband and
that was due to that strainedfamily relationship.
But at the same time, like itboggles my mind that you would
look at Joseph and think youstrangled your wife and stuffed

(31:40):
her underneath the bed.
You strangled your daughter anddisplayed her this way, killed
the other border and then wentand got your other daughter and
brought her with you to discoverthe bodies together.
Like that I don't know.
That's like beyond anything Ican comprehend.

Speaker 2 (31:58):
So the fact that they immediately thought it was him,
to me just it's crazy to thinkthat they would think it was him
initially but isn't that kindof what we always do in any
domestic killing like this, youusually look at the closest
first to find the suspect, likewho had the most intimate
connection to want this persondead?

(32:19):
Was it a spouse, was it a lover, was it a family member?
Because we do know that mostespecially, murders and violent
crimes are committed by somebodythat somebody knows.
So he just happens to show upafter the murders bringing the
daughter.
But then there would be otheraspects of this that, like you
you said, would make youquestion that that like he did
bring the daughter and where waswhen did he meet with the

(32:42):
daughter?
What was his relationship likewith?
There's a history of him comingto these type of events.
There doesn't seem to have beenany animosity.
But again, sometimes, especiallyfrom the law enforcement
standpoint and just thepsychology of it, you just found
three people murdered, twopeople dead, one beautiful young

(33:03):
woman dead.
You want somebody to punish,right, then, like you're just
angry, you want so and you wantanswers and this is like okay,
here's the answer, it's got tobe this.
Like this is who?
Because you just want thatquick resolution, you want
answers and this is like okay,here's the answer.
It's got to be this Like.
This is who?
Because you just want thatquick resolution, you want to.
I don't think people thinkabout how much toll just being

(33:24):
on that crime scene and seeingthose things and the social
emotional damage it does toofficers day in and day out, and
just I want to solve this.
Here's the most likely suspect.
We're going to grill this guyuntil he confesses and just.

Speaker 3 (33:38):
I want to solve this.
Here's the most likely suspect.
We're going to grill this guyuntil he confesses.
I could definitely see that asplaying a factor which they end
up with Joseph.
They question him for over 30hours, which I mean that's a
long time to be questioned.

Speaker 2 (33:49):
It's a good way to get a false confession.

Speaker 3 (33:52):
Yeah, exactly, exactly.
And they end up arresting himunder an unrelated gun charge.
And at one point they thoughtit might be one of Veronica's
ex-boyfriends because they founda diary where she wrote
something about beingboyfriendwhose name was Bobby.

(34:14):
But as luck would have it forBobby and for her dad, they
ended up finding a little soap,like a little piece of soap that
had been carved into a littlefigure.
So this little sculpture ofsoap at the crime scene is found

(34:35):
, and I'll let you explain whythat was so significant.

Speaker 2 (34:37):
Okay, and before I get into that, one thing about
Joseph Gideon.
I think didn't help is he had ahistory with law enforcement.
It included, like someorganized crime issues running
these Speakeasies, sospeakeasies and potentially
connections with brothels andstuff, and potentially
connections with brothels andstuff.
So, unfortunately, usuallypolice do also see patterns and

(34:59):
oh, if you're a shithead in thisarea, then what's the potential
that you're a shithead in thisarea?
So, but in this case the littlesculpture was important because
it linked them to a potentialnew suspect.
So what we're going to do isnow we want to take this
narrative to talk about RobertIrwin.
This is because, though he isthe suspect at this point in our
narrative, he also has a verytroubling life history and

(35:23):
severe history of incarcerationsand mental institutions and
institutionalization that kindof spin, a tragic tale of his
own, let alone of what happenedto Veronica, mary and the border
.
So Robert George Irwin was alsoknown as Fenelon Aurora Seco
Irwin.
He was born on August 5th 1907in Aurora Seco Park near

(35:49):
Pasadena, california.
If I pronounced any of thatwrong, send me an email.
His unique birth name wasinspired by the nearby river and
one of his father's favoritetheologians, francisco Francisos
Penelon, and I know Ipronounced that wrong.
I apologize, but Erwin'sparents were very devout

(36:11):
evangelists.
His father was a reverend namedBenjamin Hardin Irwin, a
nationally known figure in theholiness movement who had
founded a racially integratedradical holiness denomination in
1898.
So very open to society andworking with other people, but
very evangelical at the sametime.

(36:31):
So this created kind of atumultuous upbringing for Irwin.
Um, it sounds great.
You have this great religiousfamily.
He's really about bringing alldifferent cultures together and
then fucker bails on you whenyou turn three years old.
So when robert was three, hisfather just ups and leaves the
entire family, leaving themimpoverished.

(36:54):
This early abandonment likelycontributed to his later mental
health struggles and we'll talkabout the links there between
attachment and developmentalstatuses of youth and how it can
lead to mental health.
But at a young age Robertvolunteered to spend 15 months
in a state reformatory after afamily court judge suggested

(37:16):
that he could learn a tradethere.
It sounds very interesting tome.
I don't really see anythingabout what brought him into the
court system that led to thisdecision, but also a lot of
research that I was trying to do.
In different sources there'sinformation about his upbringing
and his father and stuff, butit's all superficial, it's not
really in depth, so not reallysure how he ended up in this

(37:39):
situation.
But he ends up going into thisinstitution and finds that he
has a knack and almost a naturalability for sculpting and he
develops that skill and itbecomes part of his identity.
That skill and it becomes partof his identity.
So Irwin demonstrates artisticprowess from an early age,
developing skills as a sculptor,and his youth he worked with

(38:03):
renowned sculptor Gutzon Borglumwho was known for creating
Mount Rushmore, and during thelate 19th and early 20th century
he is Gutzon is a booming um umsculptor and really a great
mentor for erwin.
This experience likely honedhis artistic abilities and

(38:24):
provided him with valuablementorship.
Later erwin's talents led himto work for a wax studio in los
angeles where he carvedcommercial bus of public figures
, including president Franklin DRoosevelt.
So at this age we're seeingsomebody that's had a little bit
of trouble.
Obviously he's ending up in thecourt system.

(38:45):
He's voluntarily turned himselfinto a mental institution.
I believe he said at the age of15, no, I didn't, it just is.
At a young age Again, it washard to find things for 15, but
for 15 months.
So he obviously was having sometype of mental struggles at a
young age, but by the time he's17 he started to develop an

(39:05):
obsession with achieving godlikepowers and knowledge through
visualization techniques, whichis kind of, um, something that's
done with sculpting and reallyhad to do with being able to
make life like sculptures andhimself becoming a god and being
able to make these unique, veryvivid statues, and this

(39:27):
fixation would play asignificant role in his criminal
actions later on.
Oren's mental state wasdescribed as brilliant, if
erratic at some times, and alsoviolent, indicating that he did
have a volatile personality thatstruggled with the ability to
be stable.

Speaker 3 (39:46):
So his first documented encounter with mental
health institutions occurredwhen he consented to be
committed to a state mentalhospital, where he initially
stayed for a year, and thatvoluntary commitment suggests a
level of self-awarenessregarding his mental state.
Unfortunately, he wasdischarged and then moved into

(40:07):
the rooming house owned by MaryGideon, which, of course, that
decision would have very fateful, fatal consequences.

Speaker 2 (40:18):
During the time of the Gideons' rooming house,
irwin became infatuated withMary's daughter, ethel, so this
unrequited attraction wouldlater become a central element
in his delusional thinking.
After he stayed with theGideons, irwin underwent further
mental health treatment atRockland State Hospital in
Orangeburg, new York, for twomore years, and then he was

(40:43):
released in the summer of 1963,approximately nine months before
the murders.

Speaker 3 (40:48):
You said 1963, 1936.

Speaker 2 (40:49):
1936.
This is why dyslexics haveproblems reading numbers.
I apologize, my dyslexiasometimes does kick in when I'm
reading fast.
One of the things that thiscontinues to show is that he has
an awareness that something isnot right with him and he's
trying to seek help.
But I think the problem iscoming from a mental health
professional now and somebodythat has studied mental health

(41:13):
and psychology kind of over thelast 120 years and the
development of where we're at.
They just weren't there at thetime.
They probably at this timereally couldn't understand what
was wrong with him, and eventoday we don't have treatments
for the type of things that hewas showing.
So at some point if peoplecouldn't afford to pay for his
treatment, the state wasn'tgoing to keep him.

(41:33):
Like the state's got a finitenumber and we already know from
kind of some of the stuff we'vedone on some prisons and these
institutions were already beingoverran.
They weren't very safe, theyweren't healthy.
There was a lot of infections,abuses that were happening, so
it wasn't an environment thatwas going to help him anyway
with what he was already dealing.

Speaker 3 (41:55):
So, as you said, he left approximately nine months
before the murders and at thatpoint in time, following his
release from Rockland StateHospital, Irwin attempted to
pursue higher education byenrolling as a student at the
Theological School of StLawrence University in Canton,
New York.
However, his mental instabilitycontinued to manifest, which

(42:18):
led to his expulsion on March18th 1937, which was just 10
days before Easter due to hisinstability.

Speaker 2 (42:28):
And this very well may have been a triggering
moment for him, Like it seems.
Unfortunately, in the 1930s.
Mental illness is still verynew.
It's something that you know,yeah, Freud had talked about 100
years before probably not thatlong but we were trying to

(42:51):
understand it, but we reallydidn't have any scientific basis
for it.
It was still very kind of inthe voodoo phase of mental
health.
And, of course, the university,they're not at all equipped for
this.
They just see that something.
You know, I couldn't findanything that said what led to
this expulsion, just that he isexpelled, uh, just 10 days

(43:12):
before easter due to some typeof instability.
So I don't know if that'slashing out, if he was living in
the dorm, like there's just alot of missing information.
But this kind of leads up tonow.
What I see is a reallyunfortunate life for this man.
He's at this point he's 30years old, he's continually
trying to get help.

(43:32):
His father abandoned him as achild.
They haven't made officialdiagnoses yet and he just
continues to end up back on thestreets.
And now he's back on thestreets, not even out of a
mental institution where theremay have been some resources
that were provided to him whenhe was let go, Like, hey, here
are some places you go.
This is just a university Likeno get out.

(43:53):
So in the days leading up to themurder, Er, like no, get out.
So in the days leading up tothe murder, Irwin's mental state
appears to have deterioratedrapidly.
Again, this is a triggeringevent.
I want to go be a sculptor I'vegotten into school, finally,
I'm trying and they just kickedme out.
And he may not even understandwhat he did wrong because he's
in this mental fritz.
So he rented a room for asingle day in a house on 52nd

(44:14):
Street in New York City, severalblocks from the Gideons'
rooming house.
During this time, hecontemplated suicide,
considering drowning himself inthe East River before ultimately
deciding to visit the Gideons'residence.

Speaker 3 (44:28):
And, unfortunately for the Gideons, that's where he
ends up going In a confession.
We'll talk about the way thisconfession came about later, but
just to make the events seemmore clear, we'll talk about the
confession now, just becauseit'll make the murder make more
sense.
In his confession he statedthat he went there to kill Ethel

(44:51):
because she was the dearestobject in the world to him and
that he accidentally killed theothers instead.
Now how you accidentally killpeople, I'm not really sure.
Luckily for Ethel she had movedout of the house and was, I
believe, married at that pointin time with somebody else, so
luckily she wasn't there.

(45:11):
But he went there with theintent to kill ethel and his
plan was to behead her and thenmake a death mask for her once
he had killed her.

Speaker 2 (45:22):
So I got a question on that.
Uh, did you look to that morethan I did?
Um, are we talking like ed gainstyle, like taking the skin off
and making a mask, or are wetalking about the old hollywood
style where you would make alike a plaster cast?

Speaker 3 (45:38):
okay, so he wants to make a plaster cast of her, okay
right right, which againdoesn't make a whole lot of
sense to me, I think it again,being a sculptor, I would think
you might say something like hey, can you model for me so I can
make a bust of you, like I didfor the president?
But you know, no, that wasn'twhere his mind went for this

(46:00):
particular art project.

Speaker 2 (46:02):
Well, do you want me to go off that one for a second?
Because he wanted to own her.
Yeah, he knew he couldn't haveher, but he could make something
out of the cast that wouldforever be his.
Because one thing that ittalked about is and you see it
like a couple times in differentstuff that was condensed down
but he was obsessed with her.

(46:23):
So if he couldn't own her, hecould own her face and her soul.
So that's why I asked, like thetwo difference, because if you
can cast her face, especiallywith his skills, you could make
hundreds of her.
He needed that mold to be ableto control and have and own her.
In his in I'm going to say itlike I usually I wouldn't use

(46:45):
her, but in his diluted, insanemind that made perfect sense.
And if it meant killing her,that's fine, because I still
have.
You is your essence, is yourbeauty, that's what attracted.

Speaker 3 (46:56):
That would be one of possible profiles on that which
is very scary, I mean, and andit's again that like scary,
interesting thing, ethel's oneof the ones who later say he
couldn't have done this, he'stoo sweet, he couldn't be the
one who did this and to thinkthat he was wanting to behead
her, Like it.
Just it's, it's scary andmind-boggling that she didn't

(47:20):
even see him as a threat, likenot even possibility on the
radar blip at all.

Speaker 2 (47:25):
Even after they come to her with the evidence she
still says, uh, he's too sweet,that couldn't have been him that
did it I think that's somethingthat you see with like family
members and stuff, and I it'sprobably one of the creepiest
things that comes out of whenyou start backtracking,
especially serial killers andmass murders and things like
that is, oh, they were thesweetest person, I never thought

(47:47):
they could ever do somethinglike this.
They walked the old lady acrossthe street and stuff, but then
they went like massacred fourpeople and you're like just
never saw that coming.
Nobody's ever like, oh, thatdude was a psychopath and I just
waited for the day that he tookout.
The entire community justalways seems that it's like, oh,
we never saw that coming.

(48:07):
But then once you start kind ofdoing more research, you're
like, yeah, everybody shouldhave seen that coming yeah, yeah
, well, especially with numberof times he went in and out of
mental health yes carefacilities I was identified as
already being violent andvolatile, but the question is is
that the mask that they saw orwas he ability?

(48:28):
did he have the ability to masksome of that in front of them?
Right like here's a girl I likeI'll hide my crazy everybody at
work and at school and stuffsees me lose my temper yes, and
maybe from what we're going tolearn here in a minute and one
of the psychological diagnosisit gives.

Speaker 3 (48:46):
He saw them as the safe side where everybody else
was a threat side so in hisconfession um, you know again,
he said he went there for Etheland then when he found Mary
there, he strangled her aftershe told him he needed to leave.
And after he strangles her atsome point, veronica arrives.

(49:08):
There's also, at some point aneighbor closes a door, and I'm
not sure if that happened beforeor after Veronica arrives.
But Veronica arrives.
I read someplace it was from adate and that she was
intoxicated.
I don't know if that's true ornot, but she comes home.
And when she comes home the twoof them have some type of a
confrontation.
And when he hears her say hisname and he realizes that she

(49:34):
knows who he is, he decides hehas to strangle her because she
can identify him.
And then, once he strangles her, he realizes that Frank is in
the back bedroom and he'sworried about leaving a witness.
So at that point he goes backand stabs Frank.
And the irony in this is thatFrank was deaf.
So if he had just walked outthe door, frank wouldn't have

(49:57):
been a witness to anything,because he didn't hear anything,
because he was deaf, and he wasasleep in the back room with
the door closed.
So he was like the third victimin this where just wrong place,
wrong time.

Speaker 2 (50:12):
And a mentally unstable person and the complete
throes of their disorder.

Speaker 3 (50:22):
So at that point in time, after he's killed them, he
goes on the run.
So I don't know if you want totalk a little bit about his time
on the run.

Speaker 2 (50:32):
Well before that he did have some interactions with
a Dr Bernard Gleck, who was aprominent psychiatrist who
evaluated Irwin, determiningthat he had developed
schizophrenia 14 years prior tothe murders and was still
suffering from it at the time ofthe crimes.
And Gleck's assessmentsindicated that Irwin's actions

(50:54):
fit with the parameters of aconsistent delusion related to
his obsession with achievingtranscendent knowledge and power
.
So again, as we talked aboutwith this over, like he wanted
to become a God almost in hisabilities and schizophrenia is
uh.
So one thing I thought is like,when we're looking at this, if
we're going to go this far,let's take it to a little bit of

(51:16):
an educational session on kindof what schizophrenia is and is
not.
So very few people with thedisorder of schizophrenia will
ever be violent.
Most of the time they are moreof a threat to themselves than
ever to the outside.
So and schizophrenia is a severeneuropsychiatric disorder.
It typically manifests in lateadolescent or early adulthood,

(51:39):
which kind of fits what we'reseeing with him.
It's up to 17.
He's doing decent, he'slearning, sculpting, but then
something changes.
So maybe that's the onset ofthe schizophrenia.
The average onset again ofsymptoms is around the 20s.
The predominant symptoms mayappear up to nine years before

(52:00):
diagnosis.
So before you've hit full-blownschizophrenia, you may already
start showing some of thesesymptoms that I'll talk about
here in a second.
And for men, like I said, it'sgoing to be late teens, early
20s, where with women,schizophrenia usually onsets
late 20s, early 30s.

(52:20):
So he's in that frame of whatwe're talking about.
If they're talking about 14years before, he's within that
schizophrenic window.

Speaker 3 (52:26):
Which said he was 30 at the time of the murders, and
I also thought it wasinteresting that in 1907, he was
born in 1907 was also when herparents came to the United
States.

Speaker 2 (52:37):
Those weird time frames are so interesting.
And with him he's got this onsetof disorder, schizophrenia, and
these are new diagnoses at thistime.
There were some of psychopathybut he doesn't really fit that
as much as some of the thingsthat because of his extensive
time in mental health facilitiesthat we kind of know.

(52:58):
But with schizophrenia, some ofthe positive symptoms.
So these are things when we saypositive we're not saying
they're a good thing, we'resaying that these are added
things to his mind and body.
So he's now havinghallucinations, he's having
delusions and then a thoughtdisorder.
So you have disorganizedthoughts.
You have either audible orphysical hallucinations.

(53:19):
You're having delusions ofmaybe grandeur, of godlikeness.
So some of the symptoms we'veseen reported, some of the
negative symptoms.
So these are things that he'slosing, that normal people have.
So he's having a reduction inthe expressions of his emotions,
so he's not able to express hisemotions well.
So that's why we're maybeseeing these violent or volatile

(53:41):
outbursts, his inability toreally explain his affections to
people, like he's trying towith Ethel, and maybe he comes
off just a little weird orelusive or a little sporadic.
It's decreased motivation.
Now that one I'm not sure aboutbecause we don't really get
into it.
We know he's still carvingstatues and stuff, um, but
something happened at schoolthat he was thrown out, so I

(54:03):
don't know if there's anythingthere.
And again, social withdrawal itdoes say like he kind of
checked into a hotel by himself.
They don't really mention otherpeople in his life.
So, and then finally, cognitivesymptoms impaired, impaired
working memory.
I don't know if that's hereAgain.
I'm just reading what they are.
I don't know if I had that ornot, but he was diagnosed by a
psychiatrist, so we're going tosay yes, he had it.

(54:25):
Difficulty with attention andconcentrating that seems to be
here.
The sporadicness with even thedifferent victims, the casualty
of what's going on, and thenproblems with executive
functioning.
That's 100% here.
I mean he's murdering people.
He doesn't have the ability, itseems, to control his emotions
or realize what he's doing.
He knows it's wrong.
These are people he cares about, so there's definitely

(54:47):
something there.
So early onset schizophreniaagain occurs before age 18,
which would have put him around15, 16 is what the doctors are
saying and it may present withadditional signs in children,
such as language delays, motordevelopment issues and
difficulty distinguishingbetween reality and imagination.
So some of that could have beenthere and he may have already

(55:07):
been feeling that when he'swillingly going into
institutions he's alreadynoticing something's not right.
And the ages, if we look atthat, match up.
That schizophrenia isdefinitely something that was
going on here.
So oran's mental healthstruggles um culminated in the
brutal easter weekend murders of1937.
His descent into violence wasdriven by his delusional belief
that killing elfo, uh, gideonwould allow him to achieve a

(55:30):
higher spiritual plane andrealize his artistic potential.
And that's because one of thethings was he thought that death
mask of her that he couldcreate his perfect masterpiece.
Because that was how he saw her.
So big delusions not only ofhis godlike status, but she was
almost this angel that wouldtake him to that next level.
So failures of the mentalhealth system really did help to

(55:53):
not address his, did not helpto address his mental health,
leading to untreated mentalillness, putting him back on the
streets and unfortunately nowwe're about to get to of the
aftermath of the crime so afterthe crime happened, he went on
the run In June of 1937, he wasin Cleveland at a hotel and one

(56:19):
of the people noticed hisresemblance and mentioned
something to him and he took off.

Speaker 3 (56:27):
And again, because of all these pictures, ronnie, all
these headlines are goingacross the whole country talking
about the murder with herpicture, and all of this is
being sensationalized and themedia is selling it because it
makes some money.
And so this is now something.

(56:48):
You know that, even though ithappened in new york sorry, even
though this is something thathappened in New York we're over
in Cleveland now and peoplethere know about it and are
saying, hey, you look a lot likeRobert Irwin in Chicago.
He's the lead story day afterday on all these newspapers.
He contacts the Chicago Tribuneand basically says hey, if you

(57:15):
want to pay me, I'll come in andgive you an exclusive interview
before I turn myself in.
And they think, ah, it's just,you know, crank call, and they
ignore it.
So he calls the Chicago HeraldExaminer and makes them the same
offer and asks for $5,000 andthey say OK.
So they end up paying him$5,000 and he turns himself into

(57:39):
them.
And it's that point, that thatconfession I was referring to
earlier is made.
It's to the newspapers,newspapers.
So one of the things that youknow ethically we can talk about
or think about is we now have apaid confession from him that's
going to be used against him inhis criminal case.

(58:01):
How ethical is it to takesomething like that where he you
know, for $5,000, he told thesepeople that he knew were
selling news a new story beforehe turned himself in?
Is that really going to be anaccurate confession at that

(58:22):
point, because he's getting$5,000 for it?

Speaker 2 (58:25):
I mean maybe I mean that's a little bit more of a I
know I'm going to get caught soI can use this money to at least
maybe have my.
I mean I don't think he'sthinking that clearly, but I
think he knows he's screwed.
But I also think there's abigger question about ethics and

(58:49):
journalism.
That is not my area to talkabout, but I know some people
that I could reach out to thatcould give some information.
But I think another thing aboutthis manhunt is this spanned
eight states and became thelargest manhunt since, at this
time, the Lindbergh kidnapping,the Lindbergh kidnapping.
So even though this is a womanthat they demonize and they

(59:12):
lambast and they morallybankrupt her in the media, she's
still getting this muchattention.
But I think it shows almost anoutward like oh disdain, look at
this porn star in their termsthat was killed.
But yet there was a lot ofreverence for her by some people

(59:33):
that really cared and wanted tobring justice to this situation
.
And then maybe also some peopleknew who this guy was and they
feel they screwed up, lettinghim back on the street.

Speaker 3 (59:41):
So I think there's a lot of different facets to this
case.

Speaker 2 (59:46):
And that's why, you know, usually we cover the
victim and a little bit aboutthe case, or we cover like a
killer and then their victims inbetween.
But here I thought it wasimportant to give details for
both because in a weird way theyare both victims.
Yes, we can and will neverexcuse what he did, but both of

(01:00:09):
them came from very broken livesand unfortunately, a system
failed multiple times and failedhim when he was trying to get
help.
It led to this woman's deathand even when we're talking
about this manhunt asking for$5,000 and in his mind he may
have not been looking for muchas money, as protection.

(01:00:31):
If he's schizophrenic andthinks if the cops get a hold of
me, they're just going to killme, that could be too.

Speaker 3 (01:00:37):
So after he gives his confession to the newspaper,
they sent him back to New York.
And when he gets back to NewYork City he crosses paths with
Samuel Leibowitz, who is thedefense attorney we were just
talking about in one of ourother episodes.
So it was just kind of funnythat his name popped up in this
case, when I didn't even realizethat he was going to be making

(01:01:00):
an appearance in this one.

Speaker 2 (01:01:01):
That guy makes a lot of appearances as defense lawyer
for some really big cases.

Speaker 3 (01:01:06):
But yeah.
So when I was looking up moreabout Samuel, it said that he
saved 123 murder defendants fromthe death penalty, which is
what they were wanting to dowith Irwin.
They wanted to seek the deathpenalty against him.
And to me it was interestinglike from again, like that
public safety standpoint peoplewho are in charge of these

(01:01:31):
things the detectives, theprosecutors, things like that In
the beginning they're sayingthat he's crazy, and then they
flip around and they say he'snot crazy, he can stand trial.
But then after he's incarceratedthey say again that he's crazy.
And there's just thatflip-flopping back and forth

(01:01:52):
Whenever it's convenient theysay he is, and when it's not
convenient then he's not.
And you know there wasInspector Lynn and his initial
view was that he was insane.
And you know, with thisdetective he was convinced that
he was crazy but at the sametime thought that he, once he

(01:02:16):
was caught, said oh no, he wasnormal at the time of the
murders and he knows exactlywhat he was doing.
So that person alone made twodifferent statements and
flip-flopped when it wasconvenient for him.

Speaker 2 (01:02:29):
Or if there might've been political pressure on him.

Speaker 3 (01:02:31):
And that's the other thing I was going to say is that
I'm sure there was some type ofpolitical pressure going on,
because now you have those threemurders in New York City at a
boarding house.
You have people who are comingto stay in New York City at
boarding houses, so I'm surethat having three people killed
and making the front page of allthese newspapers is not a good
thing for tourism or peoplemoving to the area.

(01:02:52):
You also have a districtattorney's election going on,
because at the beginning of itis district attorney William
Dodge handling the case, butthen there's an election and he
loses and district attorneyThomas Dewey takes over and
resumes the prosecution afterthe election.
So there's a lot of differentmoving factors behind the scenes
with other people in this story.

(01:03:14):
But because of his defenseattorneys I mean brilliant work
really.
I mean he really, really,really went to bat for him on
this case and he was able to gethim a plea where he pled guilty
to three counts of seconddegree murder in exchange for

(01:03:34):
avoiding the death penalty andhe also, as part of the plea
negotiation, wanted a promise ofthe return of a pair of
trousers that he had abandonedin a suitcase at grand central
station in 1937, so the the yearprior, so that again.

Speaker 2 (01:03:53):
The ramblings of a stable genius.

Speaker 3 (01:03:55):
Exactly, exactly.
Don't put me to death.
And oh, by the way, please findmy lost pants.

Speaker 2 (01:04:03):
Which is weird, Totally off base, but I'm going
to throw it out here.
I've arrested a lot of peoplethat had drugs or guns and stuff
in their pants and they werefirst to say those aren't my
pants.
This may be one of the firstcriminal that was like no, those
are my pants.
So props to him for being likeno, those were my pants and I'd
like them back, Cause mostcriminals like those aren't my
pants.
Those drugs were in those pantswhen I to party last night and

(01:04:27):
you're like uh, what?

Speaker 3 (01:04:28):
so props so yeah, crazy it definitely was, because
first they say he's crazy, thenhe's not even in the middle of
the um case's procedural.
The judge postponed the trialin september of 1937 to try to
get a finding from a threemember commission evaluating his
sanity.
But they come back and they sayhe's sane.

(01:04:50):
He takes the plea agreement.
He gets sentenced to 139 yearsin prison.
There was 99 years to life forFrank, 20 years for Mary and 20
years for Veronica, which Ithought was interesting.
I didn't know why he deserved99 years versus the other two

(01:05:11):
were 20.
Like what?
What factor was in that?

Speaker 2 (01:05:15):
You got 99 years for the person he killed that had a
penis.
Yes, and 20 years each for thewomen who did not.

Speaker 3 (01:05:23):
Exactly.

Speaker 2 (01:05:24):
That seems to be the only difference.
I don't know if maybe there mayhave been an aggravated,
because the guy was deaf.

Speaker 3 (01:05:30):
He didn't know, he was deaf.

Speaker 2 (01:05:31):
But do you have to?
I mean, is lack of knowledgetake away the actions of your
crime?

Speaker 3 (01:05:39):
It depends on what it is Like.
If it's a hate crime, like ifif you're charging me with a
hate crime saying I killed youbecause you were of this subset
and I didn't know you were amember of that subset, it's kind
of hard to say I did it becauseyou were a member of that
subset if I didn't know you wereof that subset, but if I
present that your victim wasmore vulnerable because of their
disabilities, Right, then, thatwould be a difference.

Speaker 2 (01:05:59):
Then that would be like he didn't even have a
chance to defend himself, rightthat?

Speaker 3 (01:06:03):
would be a difference .

Speaker 2 (01:06:05):
Almost like you attacked a child.
They can't defend themselves.
You attacked a handicappedperson that couldn't hear in the
middle of the night, in themiddle of the night, so that
aggravates the.
It may have played onheartstrings a little bit more
than they were able to sellthese two women that they
probably lambasted and justterrorized us because their

(01:06:25):
connections this boarding houseand these things.
This was a hard-working man.
These were two women involvedin sex trades and pornography
and alcohol and alcohol and allthis other stuff.
So, yeah, he murdered them, butthey're not worth as much as
this hard-working man thatunfortunately had um a
disability and he massacred forno reason yeah, so that's, that

(01:06:47):
was something I just thought waskind of interesting.

Speaker 3 (01:06:49):
No, it's extremely interesting yeah, and it's a
huge quality it's not like 30years and 20 years, like 99
versus 20 and 20 yeah, that'svery interesting but then at
that point he sent to sing singprison and there with his
psychological evaluation theyruled him very definitely insane
and sent him on to the statehospital and I think that's

(01:07:12):
something that is again a wholenother conversation.

Speaker 2 (01:07:15):
You could probably teach classes about this at the
graduate level, but just how thecourt systems and the people
that work inside that side ofthe criminal justice system view
mental illness and mentalhealth compared to the
psychologists, social workersand psychologists that work on

(01:07:38):
the other side of treatment andwith people that are already
inmates or could become inmates,maybe in probation or something
like that.
Because I think they'reprobably going to look at those
two very different where thepeople that are working with
already judged offenders orpeople that could become
offenders or that could be, youknow, get worse, they're seeing
treatment possibilities and thepeople in the court system for
like they're monsters.
We need to put them away asmuch as possible.

(01:07:58):
He knew what he did.
Like the person's obviously toanybody else is, has some type
of a psychotic break orsomething, but you so much want
the prosecution to they willnever see the light of day again
.
You're like no, they can stayin trial.
And the people with the degreeswere like no, like this, this
person has mental healthdisorders and needs treatment,

(01:08:19):
but on the other side, you wantthat prosecution.
You're like no, no, they'reperfectly mentally fine.
They knew everything they weredoing, and it's just a battle
between two sides that both Idon't even say both want the
same thing, both have theeducation, but they're coming in
from a different.

Speaker 3 (01:08:36):
And I think maybe in some ways they do want the same
thing, because at the end of theday, we want everybody to be
safe.

Speaker 2 (01:08:40):
Yes.

Speaker 3 (01:08:41):
And I think that's the goal.
We want everybody to be safe,whether he's in a hospital
getting treatment or a prison,as long as he's not killing
anybody else.
That, or a prison as long ashe's not killing anybody else.
That's the goal at the end ofthe day is that he can't kill
anybody else.
From you know, at least for meas a prosecutor.
Um, but the flip side of it isI'm not a mental health
professional.

(01:09:01):
I don't know.
I don't know if you're faking,I don't know if you're real.
I'm relying on all these otherpeople to give me that
information.
And on the flip side, ifsomehow, like we don't do a plea
, like, let's say, we decidethat you are not mentally
capable of going to trial orentering into a plea agreement
and you're going to go to thehospital instead, if you're

(01:09:23):
treated for 20 years and nowthey say at the hospital well,
he's better now.
Well, now, what happens to you?
In theory, at that point youshould come back to be tried for
your crime.
Well, now it's been 20 years.
What evidence do I have?
How many of my witnesses havedied?
You weren't able tocross-examine them, which is
your right under theConstitution, something you know

(01:09:52):
that they recorded becausethey're not subject to
cross-examination.
So at that point he can't.
You don't have a case that youcan win, so then at that point
he could potentially getreleased from prison and, like
he was 30 years old when he didthis, if he goes there for 20
years then he's 50.
I don't want him to walk outthe door at 50, you know, and
not have any accountability.

Speaker 2 (01:10:11):
You know probation, no parole, no, nothing but he's
now spent 20 years in mentalhealth getting treatment.
Is that person that's gettingout even the same person that
went in there?
it's an interesting questionwith if, if, under treatment,
non-proper medications andgetting all the things that
erwin didn't get, is the personthat walks out from there 20

(01:10:32):
years later better than theperson that possibly could walk
out 50 years later that nevergot any treatment whatsoever?
And that's literally like thedebate that I think we're still
having in the entire prisoncriminal justice system in the
US, ireland, england.
They're well ahead of this.
Like I think it's really sadthat when you look at the

(01:10:52):
criminal justice system andwe've gotten a little off topic,
but I think it's an importantconversation to have happy
Easter is that in the end, wehave always been reactive to
what other people have alreadydone, and it's usually decades
after.
Like our system started basedoff the Irish concept we when it
came in, that was in the early,late 17, early 1800.

(01:11:13):
And it's usually decades afterlike our system started based
off the Irish concept we when itcame in, that was in the early,
late 17, early 1800s.
And then when Ireland, englandand Nordic countries started
going into a more redemption andmore, less punitive, more
rehabilitation system, 20, 30years later, the US did that as
well, and now we're seeing likethese really great prison

(01:11:35):
systems and correctionsfacilities in Denmark, sweden,
europe, england, ireland, butwe're still 30 years behind and
being much more punished andyou're just creating people like
this and we're still seeingpeople that are going into
prison, getting no treatment formental health illnesses, that
have done very violent crimesand put right back out on the

(01:11:57):
street untreated and theycommitted again.
And then the criminal justicesystem.
So well, we didn't see thiscoming.
They did 20 years in prison butthey're mentally ill and
they're not understandingbecause you haven't gotten them
treatment.
And unfortunately, erwin andwe'll get to this he kind of, in

(01:12:20):
a sad but positive note out ofall this kind of helps us start
to address this back in the1930s.

Speaker 3 (01:12:24):
And I think that's where your key was about.
Is he a different person whenhe comes out?
And I think that's as aprosecutor sitting and looking
at the case today I don't knowif 20 years from now, if when he
comes out, he will be adifferent person or not.
And so I think that's the fear.
The fear that you have as aprosecutor is, if I don't figure
out a way to get this guy that99-year sentence, what if?

(01:12:48):
What if he finds a way to getout?
And what if he kills somebodyelse?
Because then that will be myfault, even though we all know
it's not, because other peoplemake their own decisions.

Speaker 2 (01:12:59):
And the jury makes their own decisions and the
judge makes a decision aboutwhat counts.

Speaker 3 (01:13:04):
So I think that that's always something, though
you know, when you're going backand forth with those dilemmas,
something that's in the back ofyour mind is you want to make
sure that something doesn'thappen to another victim, and I
think anytime you have somebodyre-offend on some level, you
feel like you failed.

Speaker 2 (01:13:21):
And what's even kind of weirder at this time and I
was kind of looking at this isone of the treatments for this
back then would have beenfrontal lobotomies at the time
and the treatments that theywould have done at the same time
, probably, what are the chancesthey could have made it worse?
Shock therapy, frontallobotomies yeah, he wouldn't

(01:13:43):
have been the same man.
He may have been no man, he mayhave been a complete vegetable.
So that's not what we're hereto talk about today.
But Erwin really, unfortunately,was in a very bad time for
mental health treatment in thiscountry.
Institutions were starting tobe really ramped up but not
staffed.
Understanding of mental healthwas still in its infancy and I

(01:14:04):
would go to say that we arestill very much in the infancy
of mental health and the prisonsystem wasn't at all aimed for
this.
Colleges weren't ready for this.
So Veronica, mary and Frankreally much were the victims of
a much broader system that wasfailing one individual that was
actively seeking help, and Ithink that's one of the big

(01:14:26):
takeaways from that.
This wasn't a sick, derangedmonster that was out trying to
kill people.
This is somebody very awarethat there was something wrong
with them, and when, systemafter system after system.
Let them down.
The delusions just finally gotto them.

Speaker 3 (01:14:43):
And I would agree with that.
And to me this case it'sinteresting because it brings up
so many ethical things, likethe paid confession, the role
that media played in this caseas far as the attention they
gave the case, the headlines,the pictures that they sent out,
all of those things, um, youknow, and and they nearly he

(01:15:06):
nearly ended up in the electricchair because of all of the
publicity and everything elseand the confession that he gave
for that $5,000 payment.
And another interesting thingthat came out of this is when
people were reviewing theinitial list of jurors, there
were 841 names on the potentialjuror list and none of them were

(01:15:29):
women and I don't know whofigured that out or how that
came to somebody's attention.
But when that was found outagain, because this case had so
much press associated with itthat people looked at this case
and said wait a second, this isa problem.
And the day after that thecourt began making sure that
women were on the jury list forcases like this.

Speaker 2 (01:15:53):
And, like you said, one of the things that I think
really tainted was, again,almost victim shaming.
Like I said, they're puttingall these pictures out there or
they're calling her boy crazyand they're basically, again, as
I did, in modern terms slutshaming.
And did she ask for this?
It in modern terms, slutshaming and did she ask for this

(01:16:15):
?
Um, it's really, it's reallydisgusting, and I think we've
talked about this, as in othercases too, where sometimes the
media has to step up and valuetheir own ethics, because
sometimes either they indirectlylead to the very crimes that
happen or they're so quick tomake money, paying a murderer
five thousand dollars becauseyou're so desperate to get their

(01:16:37):
story sensationalizing andshaming a victim to sell more
articles instead of you knowyour headline, you know pen pen
up nudist, salacious womanmurdered by crazy man.
It should have said you knowbeautiful, young, caring woman,

(01:16:58):
family person, working lady,murdered by untreated mentally
ill patient who would ask forhelp?
who had asked for helprepeatedly, but instead it was a
lot of shaming her and it's sadtoday and it makes me fearful.
You know, as a father of adaughter and stuff, you know,
even today we see women notbeing taken seriously, um, and

(01:17:21):
often, well, they asked for it,or or how do we know what
they're saying is true?
And a lot of that does go backto media portrayals and how
quick people are to latch on tothings without knowing the facts
and just demonizing people.
That's my soapbox.
On that we'll get back toronnie.
But just looking at her picture, like even just looking at like

(01:17:41):
, there's a little bit of sorrow, like even looking at that for
me, I mean, I know I'm a littlebit more attuned to like victim
feelings because, having workedwith victims and stuff, many
times you're just you look ather especially in just the light
that's in her eyes, like whatcould you have offered if
somebody had protected you?

Speaker 3 (01:18:00):
I think there's an interesting quote from the uh
new york daily news publisher,joseph patterson, when he was
responding to the criticism likeyou're talking about
journalistic ethics and he saidthat murder sells papers, books
plays, because we are allfascinated by murder.
And he went on to talk about atthe time there was some news

(01:18:25):
about President Roosevelt'strying to hack the Supreme Court
.
And he went on to say perhapspeople should be more interested
today in the Supreme court thanin the Gideon murder.
But we don't think they are.
So it it comes back to us too.

Speaker 2 (01:18:41):
I would say I would.
I mean I would agree with that,and I think there's multiple
things.
I think a we are a true crimepodcast, so we totally support
people's interests and like truecrime and stuff Don't cancel us
.
But a like the Supreme courtlike to a point, of course,
people aren't going to beinterested in that because at
this time period and I think nowto a point, not getting

(01:19:02):
political but just beingrealistic is a lot of people
don't think they have anycontrol over that Like,
especially like stuff with thesupreme court, because we don't
elect those people.
They're just going to do whatthey're going to do.
They're seen as the mostcorrupt institution in the world
by many people.
I think they have a favoritismrate of like 10 or less.
But here's a young, beautifulwoman that's murdered.
How, why could I be a victim?

(01:19:24):
And and again it's veryinteresting a lot of statistics
also show women are like thepeople that are most interested
in true crime and stuff.
So I think there's always thatfear of an interest in how, why,
what leads people to do this.
I mean, half of my industry isbased off of why do people do
the things they do and how canwe keep it from happening and

(01:19:44):
then also a little bit of thatfear factor.
One thing I'm getting way offtopic, but this is kind of good
because I like having theseconversations because one of the
cases that we're going to dohere later is Ed Gein.
And one thing about Ed Gein isthat's like, if you would think
of all the things you see in themedia about him now and how
much he's been covered, that hewas this monster of a person.

(01:20:05):
He did some like graphic things, but he wasn't a serial killer,
he wasn't a mass murderer, hewas just a guy and we'll talk
about that.
But his influence led to thisculture of fear in this country
that engulfed and infatuatedenough people that it set off

(01:20:26):
whole genres.
So there is something, and Idon't know if it's the fear of
death, if it's the fascinationwith death, and maybe not murder
but just death, the afterlife,because you do tend to see the
people that are reallyfascinated with true crime.
Also, there is a kind ofcrossover into other genres,
like like um, hauntings, ghosts,the paranormal cryptids,

(01:20:49):
mothman's the only thing that'sreal Um, and UFOs and stuff like
that Mothman forever, um, thatpeople are more interested in,
like who's and why's, and Ithink some people look at a
different things.
You'll see people that are veryinterested in like the people
that did it, and they almostbecome obsessed with them and
unhealthy obsession.
Um, that's not how I got intothis, that's not why I got into

(01:21:12):
this, that's not why I'm intothis.
I'm very much into it in thevictims and I think that that's
probably the bigger group, andespecially women.
It's more of trying tounderstand the victims and how
not to be a victim, and I thinkthe media never portrays it that
way, as much as they focus onthe killers.
But I think one thing that weneed to get better at and I
think true crime podcasts, andespecially some true crime
podcasters out there that Idon't name because we're not
affiliated with them and Ireally kind of don't know the

(01:21:34):
guidelines on calling peoplelike you're good or you're bad,
um, you're all great, I love you, but is teaching how not to be
a victim, like fuck the fuck thekillers, like we'll tell you
what they did, but they're thepieces of shit.
How do we protect the peoplethat weren't?
So, going back even now and I'mgoing to get into this in just
a second, not like in this caseI'm a little bit more coming

(01:21:57):
from the social work side, likeIrwin, like fuck, we let you
down, man, like we let you downas a society.
You were asking for help and wejust let you down.
And at the same time, veronica,I'm sorry like we fucked up, we
let you down.
But can anything good come fromthis?
And the reality is that fromthis case there were a couple of

(01:22:21):
things that came out of it.
So after the trial andeverything was done, there were
some legislative changes thathappened in New York.
They tried to answer some ofthe problems that they saw.
So first there was alegislative hearing and what I
could find was late 1938, afterErwin was adjudicated as

(01:22:45):
mentally ill, the statelegislator held hearings that
were set up to investigate thetreatment of individuals with
mental disorders.
These hearings focused not onlyon treatments for individuals
but also examined the nature ofpsychiatric treatments and the
hospital system's effectivenessof providing adequate services.

(01:23:06):
There were also somepsychiatric reforms.
So, like after the BleakmanHills murders case, resulted in
far reaching psychiatric reformsin the state of New York.
While specific details of thosereforms were not easy to find,
they did include improvementsand assessments and treatments

(01:23:27):
of potentially dangerouspsychiatric patients.
So kind of what that would havedone for Irwin is if he would
have been brought in and talkedto a psychiatrist, he would have
gone through an assessment.
They would have usedevidence-based tools to say,
okay, what is he on these scales?
It could have led, maybe, toability to hold him longer.
Those scales would have lookedmuch different than the ones we
use now.

(01:23:47):
But and then there was a lotmore put on hospital scrutiny
because he was obviously havingmental health issues, he was
obviously very volatile, therewere problems and he was just
being thrown back out on thestreet.
So this case led to intensescrutiny of the hospital system,
resulting in several topdoctors losing their positions,

(01:24:07):
actually for having allowedIrwin his freedom.
And then the suggestion wasalso given for tightening
policies regarding the releaseof potentially dangerous
patients from psychiatricinstitutions.
So, yes, there were some lightsand rays of hope that came out
of this case.

(01:24:28):
Um, there's not a Veronica's law, there's not an Irwin's law,
but there is a legacy there.
And again, like this case hasbeen immortalized in multiple
different cultural areas.
The one again I saw was theepisode of A Crime to Remember
Great series.
If you're into true crime, itcovers a lot more older crimes,
kind of like we do.
Or the old people podcastsuddenly it covers a lot more

(01:24:51):
older crimes, kind of like we do, where the old people podcast
suddenly Just kidding Love the1930s but and then a Mystery at
the Museum episode as well.
So it's a really sad tale.
I mean, this was a beautifulyoung woman, her mother and a
hardworking man that were takenway before their time because so
many failures of thepsychiatric and mental hospital.

Speaker 3 (01:25:10):
On a side note, Douglas and Irwin apparently
were friends at St Lawrenceuniversity.
They were in Canton, New York,and used Vincent Van Gogh and
when he did the Vincent Van Goghfilm lust for life used Irwin
as his model when he wasportraying Vincent Van van gogh.

Speaker 2 (01:25:33):
The couple pictures I've seen of erwin again a lot
of like.
I'm trying to empathize withthat, but he looks like the
fucking basis for the joker,like he very much the smile he
almost has that paleness.
Now again, these are kind ofblack and white photos, but if
you see pictures of erwin thatis the joker just saying so.

(01:25:53):
But I guess to end this outlike this was our easter episode
because the the massacre ofveronica, mary and frank
happened over easter weekend.
But the bigger takeaway is,like you know, maybe there's a
chance to find redemption forindividuals if we give them the
chance and the resources thatcould keep them from committing

(01:26:14):
violent and horrific crimes likethis, and that we need to take
mental health seriously in thiscountry and provide better
services and be better humans.
I want to thank you all so muchfor listening to our little
podcast.
This is created with love andpassion for criminal justice and
true crime.

(01:26:34):
So if you're enjoying thepodcast, please follow us, like
or rate us on whatever systemyou're listening to us on,
subscribe to our podcast anddownload episodes.
Downloads are important for ourgrowth, as is growing our
listeners.
So if you wouldn't mind, takethe time to ask your friends,
family, co-workers, tell themabout us through word of mouth,

(01:26:58):
social media.
I don't care if you even screamat strangers on the streets.
To help us kind of get outthere who we are.
If you're interested inlearning more, you could visit
our website atwwwdeviantcriminologycom.
There you'll find some stuffabout our backgrounds,
references, show notes for eachepisode.
You can also follow us on ourFacebook page at Deviant

(01:27:20):
Criminology.
We also have an Instagram page,which is Deviant underscore
Criminology.
Or find me at Drrichardweaveron Instagram.
And as we grow, we hope todevelop a community that will
grow with us.
So again, thank you for takingthe time to listen and have a
good week.
Thank you.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.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;}Veronica Gedeon: Easter Weekend Triple Murder

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

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

All Episodes

Veronica Gedeon: Easter Weekend Triple Murder

Stuff You Should Know