August 29, 2025 ā¢ 27 mins
***
Rachael Geiser shares her experience working as a criminal defense investigator on some of America's most notorious trials, including the West Memphis Three case and several death penalty cases. She offers a behind-the-scenes look at the methodical process of criminal defense investigation and the importance of thinking creatively when approaching complex cases.
- Currently works for the Major Cases Team at the Shelby County Public Defender's Office handling first-degree murder cases
- Joined the West Memphis Three case in 2005 when Fran Walsh and Peter Jackson funded a renewed investigation
- Developed a systematic approach to case investigation through comprehensive task lists
- Learned the importance of "thinking outside the box" from criticism by one of Jason Baldwin's attorneys
- Collaborated closely with Fran Walsh, who provided valuable input despite being based in New Zealand
- Has worked on three cases where clients received the death penalty: Jesse Dotson, Ricky Bell, and Michael Rimmer
- Believes that scientific evidence, particularly DNA testing, holds the key to solving cases where witness testimony is unreliable
š Join the conversation: Subscribe free at thegeiserfiles.substack.com
for bonus content, behind-the-scenes notes, and a place to share your thoughts and theories.
ā Support the show: Leave a rating and review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listenāit helps more people discover The Geiser Files.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Tony (00:03):
For the last 26 years, Rachael Geiser has worked in the
shadows of America's mostnotorious trials.
As a criminal defenseinvestigator, she stood beside
defense teams in cases thatshook the country Damian Eccles
in the West Memphis Three, JesseDotson in the Lester Street
case and many more that nevermade the headlines but changed
lives forever.
Let's pull back the curtain andhear what really happened.
(00:26):
Welcome to the Geiser Files.
All right, hello, and welcometo episode two of the Geiser
Files.
How are you doing, Rachael?
Rachael (00:39):
I'm doing fine, thanks.
Who's that clapping for us inthe beginning of the episode?
Tony (00:43):
Those are all of your many fans.
Rachael (00:46):
I have fans, I don't have fans.
I think I mostly have haters.
Tony (00:51):
That's alright.
Haters can clap for you too.
Rachael (00:54):
Okay, I'll take it.
Tony (00:56):
What do you want to talk about today?
Rachael (00:59):
Well, I think obviously we're going to talk a little
bit about the introduction, asyou teased last week, of my work
on Damian Echols and the WestMemphis 3 case.
But first I think we need toclear up a little bit from the
first episode about what Iactually do now.
Tony (01:16):
Okay, what do you actually do now?
Rachael (01:17):
Well, I am a I'm still a licensed private investigator
under my company of GeiserInvestigative Services, but I
don't actively use or work thatoften under my license.
I have been asked to do somethings privately and I'm allowed
(01:38):
to do that if it doesn'tconflict with my real full-time
job now, which is aninvestigator for the major cases
team at the Shelby CountyPublic Defender's Office.
My official title actually isSpecial Assistant to Capital
Sentencing and I was hired to dothat in 2017.
(01:58):
At the time, we had capitalcases.
We have zero capital cases now,so we actually had to change
the name to the Major Cases Team, and our team handles all of
the first-degree murder casesthat come in and are appointed
to the Public Defender's Officein General Sessions Court.
Tony (02:19):
How is the first-degree murder business in Memphis, in
Shelby County?
Rachael (02:23):
It is very, very busy, Lots of cases often.
Tony (02:27):
Congratulations?
I guess no.
Rachael (02:29):
No, no, but I'm glad.
I mean I really enjoy workingfor the Public Defender's Office
because I get to work the casesfrom the very beginning.
A client is charged, we'reappointed, and then I get to
work.
Client is charged, we'reappointed, and then I get to
work as a private investigator.
When I was appointed to work oncases, I typically would not
(02:50):
get appointed until the clientwas indicted, so sometimes that
would be six months later.
Lots of things have been lostby then, and so, working for the
Public Defender's Office, Idefinitely feel more like an
investigator, because I'mworking the case from the very
beginning and I love it.
Tony (03:08):
That's interesting?
Yeah, because, like asurveillance video from, like,
gas stations or whatever, getsoverwritten or lost.
If it was taken, witnesses getlost or murdered or incarcerated
.
Rachael (03:22):
Yeah, or they just you know.
Their memories fade over timeabout what you know.
Their memories fade over timeabout what you know might have
happened.
Tony (03:28):
It's just harder.
Rachael (03:28):
Yeah, now I will say that sometimes, even when you're
dealing with witnesses rightafter a crime happens, they
might be reticent to talk to you.
So letting some time passsometimes is not necessarily a
bad thing.
So if I do try to reach out toa witness very early on, I will
(03:49):
almost always then go back.
I'll wait until we get thediscovery from the state body
cam, see what they saidoriginally and then go back and
revisit them.
Tony (04:00):
Okay, so that's what you're doing now.
Yes, what were you doing in Mayof 1993?
Rachael (04:08):
In May of 1993, I was finishing up my junior year of
college at Rhodes College.
Tony (04:13):
Okay, I'm sorry, yeah, may 2005.
I should have said May of 2005?
You know what Forget May.
Rachael (04:20):
So he keeps saying May.
Forget all of May I know, Iknow, I think what you're
getting at is when was I firstintroduced to the West Memphis
Three case.
Tony (04:29):
That's what I?
Yes, that's what I said.
Rachael (04:31):
Correct, Correct.
So, as we mentioned previously,from May of 1999 through
February of 2008, I worked forthe Inquisitor Inc.
Ron Lacks' privateinvestigation firm and Ron, as
we know, worked on Damien's caseas Damien's investigator in
(04:54):
1993 and 1994.
Tony (04:58):
Inquisitor was the original investigation team.
On behalf of Damien.
Rachael (05:01):
On behalf of Damien.
Yes, and so Ron is.
You can see him in the ParadiseLost movies.
He did a lot of things on thepre-trial part of that case and
subsequently in post-conviction.
I'm not sure if it was, I don'tthink it was in a formal
capacity, but he was asked to dothings even after, as many of
(05:25):
us are.
You know, there are times I'masked to do, you know,
interviews and post-conviction,which I'm usually very happy to
do anything to help the client.
So Ron did that.
And so when I was hired in Mayof 1999 at Inquisitor, I still
knew very little about the WestMemphis 3 case.
I mean, I knew Ron worked on it.
(05:47):
If we were, if he and I were inWest Memphis, he would almost
always mention a location likethis is where that happened.
You know things, things likethat, but I did not know the
case.
I had not watched thedocumentaries at that time.
I believe Paradise Lost and Twomight have been out and Blood
(06:09):
of Innocence had been written.
Devil's Knot, I think, waspublished in around 2002.
But I did not keep up with thecase.
I remember seeing Mara Leverettcome into our office and look
through all of the Inquisitorfiles, come into our office and
look through all of theInquisitor files.
You know Ron had one conferenceroom and a whole.
You know bookshelves were fullof the West Memphis Three
(06:30):
materials.
Tony (06:32):
Mara Levitt was the author of Devil's Knot.
Rachael (06:34):
Yes, and she would come in look at the materials and
then her book was published.
But I really, you know, I wasworking my cases and was not
actively at all involved in whatwas happening on the West
Memphis 3 for Damien UntilNovember of 2005.
I had been on maternity leave,as you know.
(06:58):
We had a child in October of2005, our second child I
remember that.
Do you do?
Yeah, okay, and I took sixweeks maternity leave that's all
I got and came back to work andthe I think it was the day I
came back from maternity leave.
In my mind it was the day veryit was very close to right.
When I came back from maternityleave I was in my office.
(07:21):
Uh, at that time our officeswere on South Front Street.
My office was downstairs, ron'soffice is upstairs and Ron kept
coming up and down the stairsand he seemed very giddy, very
happy.
There were people coming inthat day and we it was possible
that we would actually be hiredmore formally to do
(07:42):
post-conviction investigation onbehalf of Damien.
He told me that and he wasgetting ready for the meeting
which was going to be upstairsin our conference room, upstairs
, and the people came in, wentupstairs I don't even know if I
saw them come in At some point.
Ron came downstairs, grabbed meout of my office and said I want
(08:04):
you to come upstairs and meetthese people and so he took me
upstairs and I believe it wasLori.
Was there?
Lori Davis, Damien's wife,Dennis, I believe, was there.
Dennis Reardon and Don Horganmight have been there.
Dennis and Don were Damien'sattorneys at the time, brilliant
attorneys and Ron said you know, this is Rachael, my
(08:28):
investigator.
I want you to meet her.
And then he took me backdownstairs.
It took me into the smallconference room.
We had an inquisitor where theWest Memphis Three materials had
been, and said Rachael, I wantyou.
We're getting hired back on thecase.
Formally.
Fran Walsh and Peter Jacksonare going to be paying for this
investigation.
It's going to be, you know,something that we can actually
(08:50):
really do in a meaningful way.
Tony (08:52):
Yes, Fran Walsh and Peter Jackson of Lord of the Rings
fame.
Rachael (08:57):
Yes.
Tony (08:58):
Okay, that's cool.
Rachael (09:00):
Yeah, no, I mean, obviously that was very cool and
you know just that they areinvolved in this.
I think Lori had told me laterthat and I think she's told this
story on other interviews she'sdone that she had woken up one
morning and noticed there was adeposit into the PayPal account
(09:24):
for the defense and I think,like she did with all deposits,
in an email saying thank you.
You know she didn't know who itwas, I don't think.
And then Fran it was Fran andFran had emailed her back and
they started corresponding aboutthe case and at some point Fran
had said she wanted to do this.
You know, for the longest timethere was a defense fund and
(09:48):
Henry Rollins was a bigsupporter.
I think.
I think you have a HenryRollins story.
I do have a.
Tony (09:54):
Henry Rollins story.
Rachael (09:55):
I'll share it later Later okay, and obviously Pearl
Jam was a big supporter.
Tony (10:01):
I've got a Pearl Jam story too, but I'll share that later.
Rachael (10:03):
Johnny Zepp.
I mean we've seen all thesepeople you know talk about the
West Memphis Three.
And then Fran wanted to getinvolved.
Fran and Peter and they it wasmy understanding.
What I was told is that theywanted to fund the investigation
, help fund the investigation,and they wanted Ron to do it.
(10:24):
They had seen, I guess, thedocumentaries or read the book
and just really felt like Ronwould be the best person.
And I know I don't disagreewith that whatsoever.
I think that the originalinvestigator on a case, if it
was investigated, we know, knowthe case, you know, and it's
(10:44):
really good to have our input.
It might not be good to be toalways have us be the lead.
I will say that there are timesthat I think it's great to have
other investigators look at it,because you do need other
people's input.
I mean you, you might have yourown tunnel vision, so but it is
really, it's a good resource tohave that old, the older
investigator involved in someway, because they have that
(11:07):
background with the case.
Tony (11:08):
Yeah, not everything is in the files right.
There's a lot of tribalknowledge, we call that.
Rachael (11:13):
Yeah, well, you know, and then Ron had interviewed all
the people as well, so he hadrelationships.
He had relationships.
If you were to go and ask him,you know, can you tell me about
Gnarly and Hollingsworth?
Or, you know, lg or whoever Imean he could tell you about the
Hollingsworths, right?
I mean, he lived it, he saw it,he was there and so that is.
You know, there's a hugeadvantage to having that.
(11:36):
So they wanted Ron back on thecase.
But Ron took me into theconference room and said you
know, I've had this case foryears now.
It definitely needs fresh eyesand I want you to be involved in
this and help me with this.
So I did, and the first thing Idid was obviously review all the
(11:59):
materials.
So this would have beenNovember of 2005 2005 and it was
a great bit of material.
As you can imagine, this caseis huge.
I mean, back then it was huge.
I mean everyone sees what'seven published online.
There's the catlion site, whichhas a lot of the discovery
material.
I wouldn't even say thatprobably has everything.
I have no idea anymore what'sin the discovery material.
(12:21):
I left Inquisitor in 2008.
And all those files, I imagine,are still there.
So I don't have access to theoriginal discovery anymore.
So I go to Calhoun quite a bitwhen I want to see something,
but I would not say thateverything is there.
So I went through all thematerials.
(12:43):
Well, first he told me I neededto.
He wanted me to read Blood ofInnocence, he wanted me to read
Devil's Knot and he wanted me towatch the documentaries.
So I did that and then wentthrough the discovery material.
By January of 2006, I had puttogether a list of tasks on the
case and then began working it.
(13:05):
So when?
So the task list?
I want to talk a little bitabout that.
So when I started, aninquisitor, ron was doing
something called discoveryreviews.
So at that time this would havebeen when I started.
It was, you know, 1999.
He would get all this paperback then, really just mostly
(13:28):
paper discovery all these policereports, witness statements,
but it was all paper.
So he would literally bait,stamp all of it and then kind of
go through it and do adiscovery review which I thought
honestly was not that and thenkind of go through it and do a
discovery review which I thoughthonestly was not that and then
put this document together andthen go into the field and work
it.
I thought that that was notreally a good working document,
(13:51):
right.
So I changed, because you'rereally just taking out with you
a document that is a review aregurgitation of another
document, right.
So I started changing that intoa task list.
So I would go through thediscovery material and put
together, I would review it, andI still, to this day, do it
this way.
I review all the material,paper material first, and then
(14:17):
it type nothing.
I just read through it and thengo back.
So at this point I've got in mymind an idea of what the issues
are with the case and so I'llput together a list, I'll do a
summary of what the fact, whatthe state says, the facts are
first specific actionable itemsright and then a list of people
(14:38):
to interview where they might be, a summary of what they've said
and then a whole section onthings I immediately notice we
don't have.
So if it's a shooting case,there should be a ballistics
report of how many casings werefound Were they all similar
casings?
And if we don't have theballistics report, well, are the
(14:59):
casings being tested?
So it's like we don't have this, we don't have this.
So I put that all in onedocument and that is my working
document for the case, so thatwhen I go into the field to try
to talk to people or to eventalk to the attorneys later
about the case and meetings, Ihave that and I can refer to it
(15:21):
and be knowledgeable about whatI'm talking about and work it.
So I did that on Damien's case,right, and that was in January
of 2006.
And I remember actually notlong after I did that initial
task list, I went to aconference in San Antonio, texas
(15:42):
.
Tony (15:42):
You traveled a lot back then I did.
Rachael (15:45):
I did when I worked for Inquisitor.
I traveled quite a bit.
I went to a conference and Iran into one of Jason's
attorneys, jason Baldwin, and hewas at the conference and I was
approaching him.
Let him know who I am.
I'd heard about him, I had notmet him yet and wanted to talk
to him a little bit about thetask list, and he was not at all
(16:08):
complimentary about my tasklist.
Um he, was um, um, I think hemade I don't remember what the
actual comment was but basicallyhe essentially said that it was
not thinking out of the boxenough.
Right, and I walked away fromthat meeting feeling obviously
(16:32):
deflated and embarrassed.
But also what I learned, and hewas 100% right.
Was he.
This case was not.
So when you typically work apost-conviction case, you will
approach it from looking at thetrial and what was done at the
trial and trying to attack eachof those things.
Is there a way to attack orshow what happened at the trials
(16:54):
wasn't correct or the witnesseswere faulty, or you know,
whatever happened at trial isyour main focus.
But this case was not yourtypical post-conviction case.
I mean, this case was waybeyond that and I needed to
start thinking outside the box,and that is something that I
mean it took.
I learned that lesson fromtalking to him that I needed to
(17:17):
do that more and that it wasokay to do that more.
Tony (17:20):
So what does that mean for a criminal defense
investigation to think outsidethe box?
Rachael (17:25):
To consider all options right.
Don't just think about you know.
Well, let's say, take, forinstance, at Damien's case at
trial, you know there werecertain people testified.
You had the Hollingsworths, soyou had people testified, you
had the Hollingsworth's you had,so you had these whole sections
of the Hollingsworthinvestigation.
The softball girls um,obviously, jesse, miss Kelly's
(17:46):
confession wasn't supposed to beconsidered, although we know
that there were.
There was consideration of itin jury deliberations that alone
should have been enough right,you had the alibis right.
So there's all these sections ofinvestigation that you go into,
but also you have what else washappening.
(18:07):
Who, obviously, who else couldhave done it?
Bojangles well, yeah, I mean,he was an obvious, I think he
was definitely in the originaltask list.
So, but no, I really just neededto think outside the box and be
bigger in my thinking period.
So I kind of take that lesson.
I've taken that lesson with mesince that day in all of the
(18:30):
things that I do.
So I thank you.
You know, mr Phillips Warren,for criticizing my original task
list.
Yeah, he's still one of themain attorneys for Jason.
Tony (18:43):
Oh nice.
Rachael (18:44):
So thanks.
Tony (18:46):
So you made a task list, I did yes, and now you're
thinking outside the box whatcomes next?
Rachael (18:52):
Well, you know, you have this task list and then we
have meetings about the tasklist too.
I mean, I had his input, butthen also I had the attorneys I
was working for input and franand peter fran was very, very
involved to.
I mean, I feel like that isminimizing fran, the movie
producer statement yes, franwalsh interesting.
Tony (19:10):
So is fran any good at leading a criminal defense
investigation?
Oh my god, she's, brilliantreally it was amazing talk about
someone who's constantlythinking outside the box.
Rachael (19:20):
She was.
Tony (19:20):
Tell me about that.
Rachael (19:22):
Well, she was intimately involved in what we
were doing, and so every andshe's in New Zealand at this
time.
She's in New Zealand, so adifferent time zone, obviously.
So I would come in to my officealmost daily and have emails
from Fran about what about this,what about this?
You know, and just it wasamazing really to have that kind
(19:46):
of, and they were good emails.
Yeah, up to that point really,the only collaboration that I
was having with people ever onany of my investigations would
be with Ron and the attorneys Iwas working with locally or on
whatever other cases I wasworking on in the office at
Inquisitor.
At that time it was Glory andshe was our mitigation
(20:08):
specialist, and Glory Shuttlesalso worked on Damien's case
pre-trial and there might havebeen one other.
Kelly might have been one other.
Kelly might have been working.
You remember Kelly?
I remember her name.
Yeah, she might have beenworking there then as well.
Yeah, so really there wasn'treally anyone else to
(20:29):
collaborate with and just tohave someone as brilliant as
Fran was, and then Lori as well,you know, was this very team
approach it was a good team.
Yes, and that was refreshingand awesome.
Tony (20:44):
Yeah, yeah, good teams are amazing.
Rachael (20:47):
Yes, because I've been on some not-so-good teams over
the years too, so it is good.
I mean, I've actually had theprivilege of working with some
really awesome people.
You know when I so when I leftthis is off West Memphis three
case, but when I left, ron, thatdidn't end well initially.
Tony (21:10):
We'll talk about that later.
Rachael (21:11):
Yeah, yeah and I don't really want to go into it that
much, but I there were, it waswas.
It's a small world.
Tony (21:22):
private investigation in memphis in particular, and how
many people do this work?
Rachael (21:26):
well, at that time it was really, you know, ron, and
there's a man named clarkchapman who I great friends with
.
Love, clark, um, I think yeah,he was definitely doing it.
Back then there was maybe oneother that was doing criminal
defense work you know, there areinvestigators.
That do you know othersubrogation and surveillance,
(21:47):
things like that.
Right, no, doing criminaldefense.
It's a very small world.
So when I left, you know, I hadno idea if anyone was going to
want to use me, you know.
So I mean, who is is everyone?
Is anyone going to be braveenough really to say, because
everyone loved Ron, you know, Ididn't know anyone who didn't
(22:07):
like Ron.
So, you know, is anyone goingto try to want to use me as an
investigator?
And they were.
Tony (22:15):
Spoiler alert they did, they did.
Rachael (22:17):
Right, yes, they did, which I was grateful for.
Tony (22:21):
Let's talk about how useful I was to you in those
very early days.
Rachael (22:27):
Oh God.
Tony (22:29):
I mean, we had two kids Sometimes.
Rachael (22:30):
I actually this is a really really good conversation
to have, uh-oh, no, I mean,there is no way I would have
been able to do any of this,tony, without you.
I mean, we were young, we hadtwo young kids and I traveled
quite a bit.
There's no way I wouldn't havebeen able to have this job with
(22:51):
children.
Tony (22:52):
I was pretty much a single father.
Rachael (22:55):
No, I remember I would, uh remember I would go out of
town, sometimes working, and Iwould come back and the house
would be like completelyrearranged, like you would move
furniture and try to make itnicer, and I really appreciated
that.
I probably didn't tell you that.
Tony (23:09):
You were a pretty bad wife to me.
I was, you were, but you'remuch better now.
I'm so sorry you weren'tthinking outside the box.
Rachael (23:17):
I was thinking too much outside.
I was too my brain hurt.
Tony (23:20):
You know I'm kidding.
You're a wonderful wife andmother.
You always have been.
Rachael (23:22):
Yeah, but it was.
It was.
I remember I would go out oftown on trips for work and I
would buy the boys littlematchbox cars and so they had
all these matchbox cars and fromall the different little towns
I was in and uh, I remember Idid that.
I wonder if they remember that.
(23:42):
We have to ask.
I doubt it.
Yeah, and where are thosematchbox cars?
Oh, we threw, those youprobably threw those out when we
moved.
Tony (23:47):
Yes, yeah, Do you remember Legos oh?
Rachael (23:52):
Legos Stepping on the Legos.
One day you got so mad One dayI stepped on my last Lego.
Tony (23:59):
You did and I'm like not anymore, sir.
Rachael (24:03):
Right, but yeah, no, back to your original question.
You were amazing.
You were my equal partner inthis.
You were going through your ownstuff.
I mean you were in school, Imean you left the day I gave
birth to Jacob.
I was kind of a late bloomer.
You had a final exam or somekind of exam.
It wouldn't have been final.
It was October midterm probably, and you left to go take this
(24:27):
exam while I'm in labor and yourmom was so mad.
Tony (24:30):
You weren't in labor.
Rachael (24:31):
I was in labor.
I was in the hospital.
Tony (24:33):
You were in the hospital, but you weren't like you know.
No, because well?
Rachael (24:39):
you got back just in time.
You got back just in time.
Tony (24:42):
Right, like I planned it.
Rachael (24:43):
Your mom was so mad, but you took that exam.
What did you get on that exam?
Tony (24:46):
I aced it.
Rachael (24:47):
You did a good job.
Yeah, yeah, well worth it.
Tony (24:50):
Thank you.
You didn't miss his birth, sothat's good.
I pretty much saved the day.
Rachael (24:57):
You definitely saved the day.
So that was my introductioninto the West Memphis 3 case.
Tony (25:05):
Okay, that's a hell of an introduction, and then that was
the beginning of the rest ofyour life, basically.
Rachael (25:13):
Yeah, I mean it's definitely been the most high
profile case I will probablyever work.
Yeah, I do want to talk aboutthere is a certain time period
in my career, my life, like 2010to 2012.
That a lot of things are goingon between Damien's case,
(25:37):
jesse's case had the Ricky Bellcase.
You know I've had in my careerI have three clients who have
received the death penalty ofcases that I worked and.
I alone worked Right, and thatwould be Jesse Dotson, ricky
Bell and Michael Rimmer JesseDotson, ricky Bell and Michael
(25:59):
Rimmer and Jesse's case is onfederal habeas petition right
now, so I'll talk about what Ican and he went to death row in
2010.
And then Ricky Bell in TiptonCounty.
He was sentenced to death in2012.
(26:21):
And then Michael Rumer I thinkit was like 2014.
Tony (26:23):
Okay, yeah, we got a lot to talk about.
26 years worth of cases,countless murder cases.
Rachael (26:28):
Well, I mean, that is just a really strange time
period for me, Right.
So around Damien's release, youknow there is new DNA testing
being done, there's newtechnology that's happening and
some of this is happening rightnow, as we speak.
Right now, the ligatures inparticular that tied up the
(26:50):
Stevie, michael and Chris havebeen sent off to Bodie and they
are using this new technology,dna technology, to test those.
I'm really hopeful that thisnew DNA technology is going to.
Tony (27:20):
Identify somebody.
Rachael (27:21):
Give us who it is.
Mm-hmm.
Because I've said from the Imean I knew, looking at this
case and as I know with most ofmy cases, like science is the
answer here right, interestingScience is going to be the
answer.
It is Witnesses are unreliable.
Right, Interesting Science isgoing to be the answer.
(27:42):
It is Witnesses are unreliable.
I can't say that enough.
Can we actually?
Can we talk about that a littlebit in the next episode?
Tony (27:47):
Sure, unreliable witnesses .
Rachael (27:49):
Witnesses' unreliability is actually, I
think, a bigger point to be made.
A podcast on empty nesting,right.
I think we kind of work that ina little bit and solving crimes
.
Tony (28:00):
I know that I'm hungry and I'm going to go make something
to eat for dinner.
Rachael (28:03):
All right, well, this has been fun it has been good.
All right.
Tony (28:07):
See you next time.
Love you, Maynett.
Rachael (28:09):
Bye, love you, maynett.
For the last 26 years, Rachael Geiser has worked in the
shadows of America's mostnotorious trials.
As a criminal defenseinvestigator, she stood beside
defense teams in cases thatshook the country Damian Eccles
in the West Memphis Three, JesseDotson in the Lester Street
case and many more that nevermade the headlines but changed
lives forever.
Let's pull back the curtain andhear what really happened.
(00:26):
Welcome to the Geiser Files.
All right, hello, and welcometo episode two of the Geiser
Files.
How are you doing, Rachael?
Rachael (00:39):
I'm doing fine, thanks.
Who's that clapping for us inthe beginning of the episode?
Tony (00:43):
Those are all of your many fans.
Rachael (00:46):
I have fans, I don't have fans.
I think I mostly have haters.
Tony (00:51):
That's alright.
Haters can clap for you too.
Rachael (00:54):
Okay, I'll take it.
Tony (00:56):
What do you want to talk about today?
Rachael (00:59):
Well, I think obviously we're going to talk a little
bit about the introduction, asyou teased last week, of my work
on Damian Echols and the WestMemphis 3 case.
But first I think we need toclear up a little bit from the
first episode about what Iactually do now.
Tony (01:16):
Okay, what do you actually do now?
Rachael (01:17):
Well, I am a I'm still a licensed private investigator
under my company of GeiserInvestigative Services, but I
don't actively use or work thatoften under my license.
I have been asked to do somethings privately and I'm allowed
(01:38):
to do that if it doesn'tconflict with my real full-time
job now, which is aninvestigator for the major cases
team at the Shelby CountyPublic Defender's Office.
My official title actually isSpecial Assistant to Capital
Sentencing and I was hired to dothat in 2017.
(01:58):
At the time, we had capitalcases.
We have zero capital cases now,so we actually had to change
the name to the Major Cases Team, and our team handles all of
the first-degree murder casesthat come in and are appointed
to the Public Defender's Officein General Sessions Court.
Tony (02:19):
How is the first-degree murder business in Memphis, in
Shelby County?
Rachael (02:23):
It is very, very busy, Lots of cases often.
Tony (02:27):
Congratulations?
I guess no.
Rachael (02:29):
No, no, but I'm glad.
I mean I really enjoy workingfor the Public Defender's Office
because I get to work the casesfrom the very beginning.
A client is charged, we'reappointed, and then I get to
work.
Client is charged, we'reappointed, and then I get to
work as a private investigator.
When I was appointed to work oncases, I typically would not
(02:50):
get appointed until the clientwas indicted, so sometimes that
would be six months later.
Lots of things have been lostby then, and so, working for the
Public Defender's Office, Idefinitely feel more like an
investigator, because I'mworking the case from the very
beginning and I love it.
Tony (03:08):
That's interesting?
Yeah, because, like asurveillance video from, like,
gas stations or whatever, getsoverwritten or lost.
If it was taken, witnesses getlost or murdered or incarcerated
.
Rachael (03:22):
Yeah, or they just you know.
Their memories fade over timeabout what you know.
Their memories fade over timeabout what you know might have
happened.
Tony (03:28):
It's just harder.
Rachael (03:28):
Yeah, now I will say that sometimes, even when you're
dealing with witnesses rightafter a crime happens, they
might be reticent to talk to you.
So letting some time passsometimes is not necessarily a
bad thing.
So if I do try to reach out toa witness very early on, I will
(03:49):
almost always then go back.
I'll wait until we get thediscovery from the state body
cam, see what they saidoriginally and then go back and
revisit them.
Tony (04:00):
Okay, so that's what you're doing now.
Yes, what were you doing in Mayof 1993?
Rachael (04:08):
In May of 1993, I was finishing up my junior year of
college at Rhodes College.
Tony (04:13):
Okay, I'm sorry, yeah, may 2005.
I should have said May of 2005?
You know what Forget May.
Rachael (04:20):
So he keeps saying May.
Forget all of May I know, Iknow, I think what you're
getting at is when was I firstintroduced to the West Memphis
Three case.
Tony (04:29):
That's what I?
Yes, that's what I said.
Rachael (04:31):
Correct, Correct.
So, as we mentioned previously,from May of 1999 through
February of 2008, I worked forthe Inquisitor Inc.
Ron Lacks' privateinvestigation firm and Ron, as
we know, worked on Damien's caseas Damien's investigator in
(04:54):
1993 and 1994.
Tony (04:58):
Inquisitor was the original investigation team.
On behalf of Damien.
Rachael (05:01):
On behalf of Damien.
Yes, and so Ron is.
You can see him in the ParadiseLost movies.
He did a lot of things on thepre-trial part of that case and
subsequently in post-conviction.
I'm not sure if it was, I don'tthink it was in a formal
capacity, but he was asked to dothings even after, as many of
(05:25):
us are.
You know, there are times I'masked to do, you know,
interviews and post-conviction,which I'm usually very happy to
do anything to help the client.
So Ron did that.
And so when I was hired in Mayof 1999 at Inquisitor, I still
knew very little about the WestMemphis 3 case.
I mean, I knew Ron worked on it.
(05:47):
If we were, if he and I were inWest Memphis, he would almost
always mention a location likethis is where that happened.
You know things, things likethat, but I did not know the
case.
I had not watched thedocumentaries at that time.
I believe Paradise Lost and Twomight have been out and Blood
(06:09):
of Innocence had been written.
Devil's Knot, I think, waspublished in around 2002.
But I did not keep up with thecase.
I remember seeing Mara Leverettcome into our office and look
through all of the Inquisitorfiles, come into our office and
look through all of theInquisitor files.
You know Ron had one conferenceroom and a whole.
You know bookshelves were fullof the West Memphis Three
(06:30):
materials.
Tony (06:32):
Mara Levitt was the author of Devil's Knot.
Rachael (06:34):
Yes, and she would come in look at the materials and
then her book was published.
But I really, you know, I wasworking my cases and was not
actively at all involved in whatwas happening on the West
Memphis 3 for Damien UntilNovember of 2005.
I had been on maternity leave,as you know.
(06:58):
We had a child in October of2005, our second child I
remember that.
Do you do?
Yeah, okay, and I took sixweeks maternity leave that's all
I got and came back to work andthe I think it was the day I
came back from maternity leave.
In my mind it was the day veryit was very close to right.
When I came back from maternityleave I was in my office.
(07:21):
Uh, at that time our officeswere on South Front Street.
My office was downstairs, ron'soffice is upstairs and Ron kept
coming up and down the stairsand he seemed very giddy, very
happy.
There were people coming inthat day and we it was possible
that we would actually be hiredmore formally to do
(07:42):
post-conviction investigation onbehalf of Damien.
He told me that and he wasgetting ready for the meeting
which was going to be upstairsin our conference room, upstairs
, and the people came in, wentupstairs I don't even know if I
saw them come in At some point.
Ron came downstairs, grabbed meout of my office and said I want
(08:04):
you to come upstairs and meetthese people and so he took me
upstairs and I believe it wasLori.
Was there?
Lori Davis, Damien's wife,Dennis, I believe, was there.
Dennis Reardon and Don Horganmight have been there.
Dennis and Don were Damien'sattorneys at the time, brilliant
attorneys and Ron said you know, this is Rachael, my
(08:28):
investigator.
I want you to meet her.
And then he took me backdownstairs.
It took me into the smallconference room.
We had an inquisitor where theWest Memphis Three materials had
been, and said Rachael, I wantyou.
We're getting hired back on thecase.
Formally.
Fran Walsh and Peter Jacksonare going to be paying for this
investigation.
It's going to be, you know,something that we can actually
(08:50):
really do in a meaningful way.
Tony (08:52):
Yes, Fran Walsh and Peter Jackson of Lord of the Rings
fame.
Rachael (08:57):
Yes.
Tony (08:58):
Okay, that's cool.
Rachael (09:00):
Yeah, no, I mean, obviously that was very cool and
you know just that they areinvolved in this.
I think Lori had told me laterthat and I think she's told this
story on other interviews she'sdone that she had woken up one
morning and noticed there was adeposit into the PayPal account
(09:24):
for the defense and I think,like she did with all deposits,
in an email saying thank you.
You know she didn't know who itwas, I don't think.
And then Fran it was Fran andFran had emailed her back and
they started corresponding aboutthe case and at some point Fran
had said she wanted to do this.
You know, for the longest timethere was a defense fund and
(09:48):
Henry Rollins was a bigsupporter.
I think.
I think you have a HenryRollins story.
I do have a.
Tony (09:54):
Henry Rollins story.
Rachael (09:55):
I'll share it later Later okay, and obviously Pearl
Jam was a big supporter.
Tony (10:01):
I've got a Pearl Jam story too, but I'll share that later.
Rachael (10:03):
Johnny Zepp.
I mean we've seen all thesepeople you know talk about the
West Memphis Three.
And then Fran wanted to getinvolved.
Fran and Peter and they it wasmy understanding.
What I was told is that theywanted to fund the investigation
, help fund the investigation,and they wanted Ron to do it.
(10:24):
They had seen, I guess, thedocumentaries or read the book
and just really felt like Ronwould be the best person.
And I know I don't disagreewith that whatsoever.
I think that the originalinvestigator on a case, if it
was investigated, we know, knowthe case, you know, and it's
(10:44):
really good to have our input.
It might not be good to be toalways have us be the lead.
I will say that there are timesthat I think it's great to have
other investigators look at it,because you do need other
people's input.
I mean you, you might have yourown tunnel vision, so but it is
really, it's a good resource tohave that old, the older
investigator involved in someway, because they have that
(11:07):
background with the case.
Tony (11:08):
Yeah, not everything is in the files right.
There's a lot of tribalknowledge, we call that.
Rachael (11:13):
Yeah, well, you know, and then Ron had interviewed all
the people as well, so he hadrelationships.
He had relationships.
If you were to go and ask him,you know, can you tell me about
Gnarly and Hollingsworth?
Or, you know, lg or whoever Imean he could tell you about the
Hollingsworths, right?
I mean, he lived it, he saw it,he was there and so that is.
You know, there's a hugeadvantage to having that.
(11:36):
So they wanted Ron back on thecase.
But Ron took me into theconference room and said you
know, I've had this case foryears now.
It definitely needs fresh eyesand I want you to be involved in
this and help me with this.
So I did, and the first thing Idid was obviously review all the
(11:59):
materials.
So this would have beenNovember of 2005 2005 and it was
a great bit of material.
As you can imagine, this caseis huge.
I mean, back then it was huge.
I mean everyone sees what'seven published online.
There's the catlion site, whichhas a lot of the discovery
material.
I wouldn't even say thatprobably has everything.
I have no idea anymore what'sin the discovery material.
(12:21):
I left Inquisitor in 2008.
And all those files, I imagine,are still there.
So I don't have access to theoriginal discovery anymore.
So I go to Calhoun quite a bitwhen I want to see something,
but I would not say thateverything is there.
So I went through all thematerials.
(12:43):
Well, first he told me I neededto.
He wanted me to read Blood ofInnocence, he wanted me to read
Devil's Knot and he wanted me towatch the documentaries.
So I did that and then wentthrough the discovery material.
By January of 2006, I had puttogether a list of tasks on the
case and then began working it.
(13:05):
So when?
So the task list?
I want to talk a little bitabout that.
So when I started, aninquisitor, ron was doing
something called discoveryreviews.
So at that time this would havebeen when I started.
It was, you know, 1999.
He would get all this paperback then, really just mostly
(13:28):
paper discovery all these policereports, witness statements,
but it was all paper.
So he would literally bait,stamp all of it and then kind of
go through it and do adiscovery review which I thought
honestly was not that and thenkind of go through it and do a
discovery review which I thoughthonestly was not that and then
put this document together andthen go into the field and work
it.
I thought that that was notreally a good working document,
(13:51):
right.
So I changed, because you'rereally just taking out with you
a document that is a review aregurgitation of another
document, right.
So I started changing that intoa task list.
So I would go through thediscovery material and put
together, I would review it, andI still, to this day, do it
this way.
I review all the material,paper material first, and then
(14:17):
it type nothing.
I just read through it and thengo back.
So at this point I've got in mymind an idea of what the issues
are with the case and so I'llput together a list, I'll do a
summary of what the fact, whatthe state says, the facts are
first specific actionable itemsright and then a list of people
(14:38):
to interview where they might be, a summary of what they've said
and then a whole section onthings I immediately notice we
don't have.
So if it's a shooting case,there should be a ballistics
report of how many casings werefound Were they all similar
casings?
And if we don't have theballistics report, well, are the
(14:59):
casings being tested?
So it's like we don't have this, we don't have this.
So I put that all in onedocument and that is my working
document for the case, so thatwhen I go into the field to try
to talk to people or to eventalk to the attorneys later
about the case and meetings, Ihave that and I can refer to it
(15:21):
and be knowledgeable about whatI'm talking about and work it.
So I did that on Damien's case,right, and that was in January
of 2006.
And I remember actually notlong after I did that initial
task list, I went to aconference in San Antonio, texas
(15:42):
.
Tony (15:42):
You traveled a lot back then I did.
Rachael (15:45):
I did when I worked for Inquisitor.
I traveled quite a bit.
I went to a conference and Iran into one of Jason's
attorneys, jason Baldwin, and hewas at the conference and I was
approaching him.
Let him know who I am.
I'd heard about him, I had notmet him yet and wanted to talk
to him a little bit about thetask list, and he was not at all
(16:08):
complimentary about my tasklist.
Um he, was um, um, I think hemade I don't remember what the
actual comment was but basicallyhe essentially said that it was
not thinking out of the boxenough.
Right, and I walked away fromthat meeting feeling obviously
(16:32):
deflated and embarrassed.
But also what I learned, and hewas 100% right.
Was he.
This case was not.
So when you typically work apost-conviction case, you will
approach it from looking at thetrial and what was done at the
trial and trying to attack eachof those things.
Is there a way to attack orshow what happened at the trials
(16:54):
wasn't correct or the witnesseswere faulty, or you know,
whatever happened at trial isyour main focus.
But this case was not yourtypical post-conviction case.
I mean, this case was waybeyond that and I needed to
start thinking outside the box,and that is something that I
mean it took.
I learned that lesson fromtalking to him that I needed to
(17:17):
do that more and that it wasokay to do that more.
Tony (17:20):
So what does that mean for a criminal defense
investigation to think outsidethe box?
Rachael (17:25):
To consider all options right.
Don't just think about you know.
Well, let's say, take, forinstance, at Damien's case at
trial, you know there werecertain people testified.
You had the Hollingsworths, soyou had people testified, you
had the Hollingsworth's you had,so you had these whole sections
of the Hollingsworthinvestigation.
The softball girls um,obviously, jesse, miss Kelly's
(17:46):
confession wasn't supposed to beconsidered, although we know
that there were.
There was consideration of itin jury deliberations that alone
should have been enough right,you had the alibis right.
So there's all these sections ofinvestigation that you go into,
but also you have what else washappening.
(18:07):
Who, obviously, who else couldhave done it?
Bojangles well, yeah, I mean,he was an obvious, I think he
was definitely in the originaltask list.
So, but no, I really just neededto think outside the box and be
bigger in my thinking period.
So I kind of take that lesson.
I've taken that lesson with mesince that day in all of the
(18:30):
things that I do.
So I thank you.
You know, mr Phillips Warren,for criticizing my original task
list.
Yeah, he's still one of themain attorneys for Jason.
Tony (18:43):
Oh nice.
Rachael (18:44):
So thanks.
Tony (18:46):
So you made a task list, I did yes, and now you're
thinking outside the box whatcomes next?
Rachael (18:52):
Well, you know, you have this task list and then we
have meetings about the tasklist too.
I mean, I had his input, butthen also I had the attorneys I
was working for input and franand peter fran was very, very
involved to.
I mean, I feel like that isminimizing fran, the movie
producer statement yes, franwalsh interesting.
Tony (19:10):
So is fran any good at leading a criminal defense
investigation?
Oh my god, she's, brilliantreally it was amazing talk about
someone who's constantlythinking outside the box.
Rachael (19:20):
She was.
Tony (19:20):
Tell me about that.
Rachael (19:22):
Well, she was intimately involved in what we
were doing, and so every andshe's in New Zealand at this
time.
She's in New Zealand, so adifferent time zone, obviously.
So I would come in to my officealmost daily and have emails
from Fran about what about this,what about this?
You know, and just it wasamazing really to have that kind
(19:46):
of, and they were good emails.
Yeah, up to that point really,the only collaboration that I
was having with people ever onany of my investigations would
be with Ron and the attorneys Iwas working with locally or on
whatever other cases I wasworking on in the office at
Inquisitor.
At that time it was Glory andshe was our mitigation
(20:08):
specialist, and Glory Shuttlesalso worked on Damien's case
pre-trial and there might havebeen one other.
Kelly might have been one other.
Kelly might have been working.
You remember Kelly?
I remember her name.
Yeah, she might have beenworking there then as well.
Yeah, so really there wasn'treally anyone else to
(20:29):
collaborate with and just tohave someone as brilliant as
Fran was, and then Lori as well,you know, was this very team
approach it was a good team.
Yes, and that was refreshingand awesome.
Tony (20:44):
Yeah, yeah, good teams are amazing.
Rachael (20:47):
Yes, because I've been on some not-so-good teams over
the years too, so it is good.
I mean, I've actually had theprivilege of working with some
really awesome people.
You know when I so when I leftthis is off West Memphis three
case, but when I left, ron, thatdidn't end well initially.
Tony (21:10):
We'll talk about that later.
Rachael (21:11):
Yeah, yeah and I don't really want to go into it that
much, but I there were, it waswas.
It's a small world.
Tony (21:22):
private investigation in memphis in particular, and how
many people do this work?
Rachael (21:26):
well, at that time it was really, you know, ron, and
there's a man named clarkchapman who I great friends with
.
Love, clark, um, I think yeah,he was definitely doing it.
Back then there was maybe oneother that was doing criminal
defense work you know, there areinvestigators.
That do you know othersubrogation and surveillance,
(21:47):
things like that.
Right, no, doing criminaldefense.
It's a very small world.
So when I left, you know, I hadno idea if anyone was going to
want to use me, you know.
So I mean, who is is everyone?
Is anyone going to be braveenough really to say, because
everyone loved Ron, you know, Ididn't know anyone who didn't
(22:07):
like Ron.
So, you know, is anyone goingto try to want to use me as an
investigator?
And they were.
Tony (22:15):
Spoiler alert they did, they did.
Rachael (22:17):
Right, yes, they did, which I was grateful for.
Tony (22:21):
Let's talk about how useful I was to you in those
very early days.
Rachael (22:27):
Oh God.
Tony (22:29):
I mean, we had two kids Sometimes.
Rachael (22:30):
I actually this is a really really good conversation
to have, uh-oh, no, I mean,there is no way I would have
been able to do any of this,tony, without you.
I mean, we were young, we hadtwo young kids and I traveled
quite a bit.
There's no way I wouldn't havebeen able to have this job with
(22:51):
children.
Tony (22:52):
I was pretty much a single father.
Rachael (22:55):
No, I remember I would, uh remember I would go out of
town, sometimes working, and Iwould come back and the house
would be like completelyrearranged, like you would move
furniture and try to make itnicer, and I really appreciated
that.
I probably didn't tell you that.
Tony (23:09):
You were a pretty bad wife to me.
I was, you were, but you'remuch better now.
I'm so sorry you weren'tthinking outside the box.
Rachael (23:17):
I was thinking too much outside.
I was too my brain hurt.
Tony (23:20):
You know I'm kidding.
You're a wonderful wife andmother.
You always have been.
Rachael (23:22):
Yeah, but it was.
It was.
I remember I would go out oftown on trips for work and I
would buy the boys littlematchbox cars and so they had
all these matchbox cars and fromall the different little towns
I was in and uh, I remember Idid that.
I wonder if they remember that.
(23:42):
We have to ask.
I doubt it.
Yeah, and where are thosematchbox cars?
Oh, we threw, those youprobably threw those out when we
moved.
Tony (23:47):
Yes, yeah, Do you remember Legos oh?
Rachael (23:52):
Legos Stepping on the Legos.
One day you got so mad One dayI stepped on my last Lego.
Tony (23:59):
You did and I'm like not anymore, sir.
Rachael (24:03):
Right, but yeah, no, back to your original question.
You were amazing.
You were my equal partner inthis.
You were going through your ownstuff.
I mean you were in school, Imean you left the day I gave
birth to Jacob.
I was kind of a late bloomer.
You had a final exam or somekind of exam.
It wouldn't have been final.
It was October midterm probably, and you left to go take this
(24:27):
exam while I'm in labor and yourmom was so mad.
Tony (24:30):
You weren't in labor.
Rachael (24:31):
I was in labor.
I was in the hospital.
Tony (24:33):
You were in the hospital, but you weren't like you know.
No, because well?
Rachael (24:39):
you got back just in time.
You got back just in time.
Tony (24:42):
Right, like I planned it.
Rachael (24:43):
Your mom was so mad, but you took that exam.
What did you get on that exam?
Tony (24:46):
I aced it.
Rachael (24:47):
You did a good job.
Yeah, yeah, well worth it.
Tony (24:50):
Thank you.
You didn't miss his birth, sothat's good.
I pretty much saved the day.
Rachael (24:57):
You definitely saved the day.
So that was my introductioninto the West Memphis 3 case.
Tony (25:05):
Okay, that's a hell of an introduction, and then that was
the beginning of the rest ofyour life, basically.
Rachael (25:13):
Yeah, I mean it's definitely been the most high
profile case I will probablyever work.
Yeah, I do want to talk aboutthere is a certain time period
in my career, my life, like 2010to 2012.
That a lot of things are goingon between Damien's case,
(25:37):
jesse's case had the Ricky Bellcase.
You know I've had in my careerI have three clients who have
received the death penalty ofcases that I worked and.
I alone worked Right, and thatwould be Jesse Dotson, ricky
Bell and Michael Rimmer JesseDotson, ricky Bell and Michael
(25:59):
Rimmer and Jesse's case is onfederal habeas petition right
now, so I'll talk about what Ican and he went to death row in
2010.
And then Ricky Bell in TiptonCounty.
He was sentenced to death in2012.
(26:21):
And then Michael Rumer I thinkit was like 2014.
Tony (26:23):
Okay, yeah, we got a lot to talk about.
26 years worth of cases,countless murder cases.
Rachael (26:28):
Well, I mean, that is just a really strange time
period for me, Right.
So around Damien's release, youknow there is new DNA testing
being done, there's newtechnology that's happening and
some of this is happening rightnow, as we speak.
Right now, the ligatures inparticular that tied up the
(26:50):
Stevie, michael and Chris havebeen sent off to Bodie and they
are using this new technology,dna technology, to test those.
I'm really hopeful that thisnew DNA technology is going to.
Tony (27:20):
Identify somebody.
Rachael (27:21):
Give us who it is.
Mm-hmm.
Because I've said from the Imean I knew, looking at this
case and as I know with most ofmy cases, like science is the
answer here right, interestingScience is going to be the
answer.
It is Witnesses are unreliable.
Right, Interesting Science isgoing to be the answer.
(27:42):
It is Witnesses are unreliable.
I can't say that enough.
Can we actually?
Can we talk about that a littlebit in the next episode?
Tony (27:47):
Sure, unreliable witnesses .
Rachael (27:49):
Witnesses' unreliability is actually, I
think, a bigger point to be made.
A podcast on empty nesting,right.
I think we kind of work that ina little bit and solving crimes
.
Tony (28:00):
I know that I'm hungry and I'm going to go make something
to eat for dinner.
Rachael (28:03):
All right, well, this has been fun it has been good.
All right.
Tony (28:07):
See you next time.
Love you, Maynett.
Rachael (28:09):
Bye, love you, maynett.
Popular Podcasts
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
Iām Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and Iām so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood youāre able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and lifeās ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them weāve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I donāt take it for granted ā click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I canāt wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com