Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
As we know, a fresh reward of five hundred thousand
dollars is on offer for information that leads police to
discover the body of Peter Falconio. It comes as his
convicted killer, Bradley John Murdock, is reportedly near death, having
been transferred out of prison and into Alice Springs Hospital
(00:20):
for palliative care. Police say the reward was announced to
coincide with the twenty fourth anniversary of mister Falconio's disappearance
in the hope of giving his family closure. Now joining
us on the line is former Northern Territory Police officer
Colleen Gwynn, who led the investigation over two decades ago.
(00:40):
Good morning, Colleen, how are you, Katie. You're really good,
so good to speak to you this morning. I'll tell
you what you know. It must have been quite an
unbelievable case to work on.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Oh yeah. You have those defining moments or times in
your life, and I've had a few, but this is
one that it was kind of an honor to work
on it, to be honest, because it was such a challenge.
But it is a defining moment because you kind of
take on a lot of the emotions of the family,
(01:15):
and a lot of that stress and anxiety that's caused
by the fact that, you know, the family lost their
son Joe and lost their partner and under circumstances, which
is pretty significant because it's in the middle of the
some of the remotest parts of the world, in a
country that is far far away. So that's why I
(01:35):
guess it's attracted so much interest for people all over
the world. So yeah, absolutely significant part of my life.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Tell me, at what point did you sort of take
over the investigation?
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Yeah, it was about it was a few months old
by then, probably within five months, I think I took over.
They made some changes. I came in, and then you know,
we realized that we were weren't progressing as quickly as
we wanted to, so we had to change a few
things up, and then you know, started on a new
strategy and how we could try and identify who was
(02:12):
responsible for these amongst what was meons of pieces of
information that we were struggling to manage at the time.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
So five months in, I mean at that point there
was no was there any persons of interest that had
been identified?
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Look, there was, but I think what the biggest challenge
at that time was is the length of that list,
It just wasn't manageable. So we certainly had persons of interest,
but I think we had to think about how do
we reduce that, what criteria can we use to really
get to those that were genuine persons of interest? And
(02:51):
that was kind of part of the work that I did,
was trying to work out how we can get some
order to this investigation.
Speaker 1 (02:59):
Yeah, and so there obviously got that order to the investigation,
and then I'm assuming you started to put things together
and then reached a point where you know where you
got this person of interest Bradley John Murdoch.
Speaker 2 (03:15):
Yeah. Well, the team that was there already had Bradley
John Murdock as one of their persons of interest. But
what's difficult when you get information that comes on from
everywhere is trying to find a priority with who do
you prioritize And that's part of the problem. But he
was there from the start. We had calls about Bradley
Murdock very early on in the piece.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
And so then was there ever, like, was there you
know in terms of the evidence, how compelling was the
evidence against him?
Speaker 2 (03:47):
You can't argue with DNA, and once you coupled with
a whole range of circumstantial evidence where he was at
the time. The description the the DNA both in the
Kombe on Joanne, it's it's pretty compelling and you just
(04:07):
cannot argue with that. And that's the beauty of having
DNA and the technology and a national database that was
in its infancy at the time. It's really critical in
these matters.
Speaker 1 (04:19):
Now in terms of this reward that's now been announced,
what's your reaction to that. Do you think it's going
to make a difference.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
Look, it's a great strategy. There's no doubt about that rewards.
There's no guarantee with a reward, so you're damned if
you do it. You're damned if you don't. But there's
nothing to be lost by doing it. And what it
does is so with any investigation, you really want to
kind of I always say you want to close that
kind of justice loop, and part of it is identifying
(04:49):
the offender, having them convicted by a jury, and then
you want to get some closure for the family, particularly
with them being able to bury their their son, their partner,
and in this case we've never had that, so that
part of it is so the loop is not closed,
and the value of life is so significant that police
(05:11):
have to try everything to get not only Brad Murdoch
but any of his associates to give some information about
where Peter is, what he did with Peter. It's really important.
So I really do congratulate police for taking this and
keeping this alive.
Speaker 1 (05:31):
I mean, do you think like he's remained tight lipped
about what happened. He's always maintained that he's innocent, hasn't.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
He Yeah, look, absolutely he has. So if you take
that stance and you're not going to suddenly say, well
I'm innocent, but I know where the body is, it
sort of doesn't add up and Katie, if you think
about it. So he got life imprisonment in the territory
twenty eight year non parole period, then Northern Territory government
(05:59):
bring in the nobody no parole in twenty sixteen, and
he's still stay steadfast. We enticed him with an offer
to move to Western Australia to be closer to family.
You tell us where the body is, wouldn't tell us.
So I've got my theories about why I don't think
he wants to cooperate. He's just refused to cooperate at
(06:23):
any stage and has completely denied his involvement. And you
know this is really prolonged, the terrible ordeal for the
Falcaneo families and Joanne Colleen.
Speaker 1 (06:34):
Are you prepared to reveal what those theories are? Oh?
Speaker 2 (06:38):
Look, I think he sees this as an element of control.
He still has control of something. So Joanne escaped, he
never thought that he would have a witness who is
who could then provide evidence of who committed the crime.
So he lost control of this. If you think about
(07:00):
the crime itself, it was premeditated, it was organized. Then
he became very disorganized and control. He still has control
because he is not willing to disclose the whereabouts of Peter.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
And you look, do you think it is about control now?
Like keeping that control even as he is reportedly on
his deathbed or is there? I know there's been some
suggestion that he that he may not even remember where
where Falconio is.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
Look, that's another theory is he may not He just
may not know. I think that when Joanne escaped, then
that through his plan out the door, and that would
have brought an element of panic, stress, anxiety, and his
disposal of Peter might have been done in such haste
(07:55):
that he may not exactly remember where it was, and
I think we have to be open to that, considering
the enormous pressure he would have been under.
Speaker 1 (08:06):
It's Look, it's such a you know, it's it's a story,
it's a situation. You know, the story is not the
right word, I guess, because it's it's impacted you know,
the Falconios and Joe Ane Leigh's life in the way
that it has in an unimaginable way. So I don't
know that story is the right word. It's a situation
that captivated the world. Colleen, Why do you think that
(08:29):
it really did captivate the world in the way in
which it did.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Look, I think it's got a lot of mystique with it.
So there's so many people that if you have a look,
people that, well, he's not guilty of this. He didn't
do it. The reason why he's not telling you where
the body is because he didn't do it. Now we
all know that a jury convicted him in unanimous decision.
He's convicted. I know the evidence intimately, and I know
(08:54):
that this is the person that did this. So the
thing about this case is there is interest in Joanne
as an individual. There are things that happen at the
time that people weren't comfortable with. They thought her reaction
should be different aka Lindy Chambers. So she's not reacting,
(09:18):
she's not doing how I think a victim should react,
how I would react in this situation. So you have
that coupled with the fact that we have Bradley Murdoch.
His profile in itself is of interest to people because
it's very similar to other I guess psychopathic offenders, his description, everything,
(09:42):
and the fact that it happened where it did. It's
so remote and people are interested in Australia, particularly those
that have never been here. They have this theory about
Australia that it's just full of out back salt bush
and snakes. So it has everything. It ticks all these boxes.
People are interested.
Speaker 1 (10:02):
Yeah, it truly does. And I you know, I reckon
I moved here just after it had happened maybe, And
I actually think I was working for the Northern Territory
Police as a media adviser when yeah, in the media units,
so I remember as in when the certainly when the
case was in court, and I know even for me,
I was like I was really fascinated by it as
a very young woman, and I know that everybody around
(10:27):
the Northern Territory. But even now, Colin, we still yesterday
we were still getting messages people saying, you know, Katie,
maybe he doesn't know where the body is because he
didn't do it. I mean, for you, after dedicating your
life to this investigation for a long period of time,
you touched on it before the evidence, do you have
any doubt in your mind whether this man murdered Peter Falconio.
Speaker 2 (10:51):
None whatsoever. Absolutely he did this. If you sat there
and looked at every detail of the evidence, it is
incredible and it's very rare that you get a jury
convict and offender of a homicide when there is no body,
and to do that you have to have very good,
(11:13):
compelling evidence, and that's what we did. Look and again
that's the team that undertook this investigation, where they spent
four years of their life on this. Every day was
on this case, and if they weren't there working on it,
they were thinking about it. And we absolutely prevented a
(11:37):
remarkable case. It's a circumstantial case because you don't have
a body, but there is no doubt that Bradley Murdock
committed this this crime, and I've always said it, I
knowing how organized and how cunning and premeditated it was,
I've always wondered, what are the ones he's responsible?
Speaker 1 (11:58):
Right, So we seem to have lost Colleen Gwin there
somehow the phones are dropped out. Hopefully were able to
get her back because I reckon she was about to
say She's always wondered what else he may have been
responsible for. So we're able to get that phone line
to work again. I'm not too sure what has gone
on there, but as I said, yeah, even yesterday we
(12:18):
were still getting messages people sort of saying to me, Wilfi,
you know, I'm not sure whether you know whether he
did it. That's why he doesn't know where the body is.
But it's interesting, isn't it? Then to hear from Colleen Gwynn, who,
as I seid, dedicated her life to this investigation for
a very long time and has no doubt in her
mind that he is absolutely the person who committed this crime. Colleen,
(12:43):
I think I've got you back.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
I don't know what happened, don't know.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
But I reckon you were maybe about to say, there's
not only any doubt in your mind that he did that,
but you wonder what else?
Speaker 2 (12:53):
Absolutely, Yeah, I think his profile and the fact that
he was a drug runner at the time he did
these drives through some of the remotest parts. He's got
a really interesting history. I know there was a lot
of investigative teams across Australia that were also interested in
(13:13):
Bradley Murdoch for some unsolved matters, so come that. I
think that it would be really interesting if he did
decide to start talking, because I wonder what else is there?
Speaker 1 (13:26):
Yeah, I'd be fascinated to know more, Colleen before I
let you go this morning. You know, it's I know
that it must be a really difficult job working on
a case like this, not only because you are obviously
trying to you know, to catch a murderer, but also
dealing with, you know, a distraught family and grieving family
(13:47):
and joe Anne Lees. Have you had much contact with
the Falconio family or Joe Anne Lee's over the last
twenty years.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Yeah, I have. It's sporadic, like, it's not like you
want to be contacting them regularly. I give them the
respect of if they want to chat to me if
there's anything on their minds, by all means, give me
a call. Yeah. I feel their pain every time I
speak to them, and I know now they are also
(14:17):
still holding hope that perhaps that as a parting, a
parting I guess, not a gift, but an act of
good faith, that he will disclose what he knows. And
as I said, maybe he doesn't know, but he must
(14:39):
be able to give us some information that may assist
please to define Peter's remains.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
Well. Colin Gwin, it is always great to talk to you.
I tell you what people are messaging in. You know,
can you ask col Angwin what she thinks about the
Aaron Patterson case. They're asking all sorts of things. It
sounds like they want you to be a regular, you know,
crime comment for.
Speaker 2 (15:00):
Yeah, I've actually been working down in that area and
I do. I have a fascination with the mushroom case too,
So tell your callers. Yeah, it's a rific case that one. Yeah, wait,
wait for the movie I reckon.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
I was going to say, we'll keep an eye on that. Colleen.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
Good for what mushrooms you?
Speaker 1 (15:18):
That's exactly right, Colleen, good to speak to you this morning.
Thanks so much for your time, Thank you
As we know, a fresh reward of five hundred thousand
dollars is on offer for information that leads police to
discover the body of Peter Falconio. It comes as his
convicted killer, Bradley John Murdock, is reportedly near death, having
been transferred out of prison and into Alice Springs Hospital
(00:20):
for palliative care. Police say the reward was announced to
coincide with the twenty fourth anniversary of mister Falconio's disappearance
in the hope of giving his family closure. Now joining
us on the line is former Northern Territory Police officer
Colleen Gwynn, who led the investigation over two decades ago.
(00:40):
Good morning, Colleen, how are you, Katie. You're really good,
so good to speak to you this morning. I'll tell
you what you know. It must have been quite an
unbelievable case to work on.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Oh yeah. You have those defining moments or times in
your life, and I've had a few, but this is
one that it was kind of an honor to work
on it, to be honest, because it was such a challenge.
But it is a defining moment because you kind of
take on a lot of the emotions of the family,
(01:15):
and a lot of that stress and anxiety that's caused
by the fact that, you know, the family lost their
son Joe and lost their partner and under circumstances, which
is pretty significant because it's in the middle of the
some of the remotest parts of the world, in a
country that is far far away. So that's why I
(01:35):
guess it's attracted so much interest for people all over
the world. So yeah, absolutely significant part of my life.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Tell me, at what point did you sort of take
over the investigation?
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Yeah, it was about it was a few months old
by then, probably within five months, I think I took over.
They made some changes. I came in, and then you know,
we realized that we were weren't progressing as quickly as
we wanted to, so we had to change a few
things up, and then you know, started on a new
strategy and how we could try and identify who was
(02:12):
responsible for these amongst what was meons of pieces of
information that we were struggling to manage at the time.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
So five months in, I mean at that point there
was no was there any persons of interest that had
been identified?
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Look, there was, but I think what the biggest challenge
at that time was is the length of that list,
It just wasn't manageable. So we certainly had persons of interest,
but I think we had to think about how do
we reduce that, what criteria can we use to really
get to those that were genuine persons of interest? And
(02:51):
that was kind of part of the work that I did,
was trying to work out how we can get some
order to this investigation.
Speaker 1 (02:59):
Yeah, and so there obviously got that order to the investigation,
and then I'm assuming you started to put things together
and then reached a point where you know where you
got this person of interest Bradley John Murdoch.
Speaker 2 (03:15):
Yeah. Well, the team that was there already had Bradley
John Murdock as one of their persons of interest. But
what's difficult when you get information that comes on from
everywhere is trying to find a priority with who do
you prioritize And that's part of the problem. But he
was there from the start. We had calls about Bradley
Murdock very early on in the piece.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
And so then was there ever, like, was there you
know in terms of the evidence, how compelling was the
evidence against him?
Speaker 2 (03:47):
You can't argue with DNA, and once you coupled with
a whole range of circumstantial evidence where he was at
the time. The description the the DNA both in the
Kombe on Joanne, it's it's pretty compelling and you just
(04:07):
cannot argue with that. And that's the beauty of having
DNA and the technology and a national database that was
in its infancy at the time. It's really critical in
these matters.
Speaker 1 (04:19):
Now in terms of this reward that's now been announced,
what's your reaction to that. Do you think it's going
to make a difference.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
Look, it's a great strategy. There's no doubt about that rewards.
There's no guarantee with a reward, so you're damned if
you do it. You're damned if you don't. But there's
nothing to be lost by doing it. And what it
does is so with any investigation, you really want to
kind of I always say you want to close that
kind of justice loop, and part of it is identifying
(04:49):
the offender, having them convicted by a jury, and then
you want to get some closure for the family, particularly
with them being able to bury their their son, their partner,
and in this case we've never had that, so that
part of it is so the loop is not closed,
and the value of life is so significant that police
(05:11):
have to try everything to get not only Brad Murdoch
but any of his associates to give some information about
where Peter is, what he did with Peter. It's really important.
So I really do congratulate police for taking this and
keeping this alive.
Speaker 1 (05:31):
I mean, do you think like he's remained tight lipped
about what happened. He's always maintained that he's innocent, hasn't.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
He Yeah, look, absolutely he has. So if you take
that stance and you're not going to suddenly say, well
I'm innocent, but I know where the body is, it
sort of doesn't add up and Katie, if you think
about it. So he got life imprisonment in the territory
twenty eight year non parole period, then Northern Territory government
(05:59):
bring in the nobody no parole in twenty sixteen, and
he's still stay steadfast. We enticed him with an offer
to move to Western Australia to be closer to family.
You tell us where the body is, wouldn't tell us.
So I've got my theories about why I don't think
he wants to cooperate. He's just refused to cooperate at
(06:23):
any stage and has completely denied his involvement. And you
know this is really prolonged, the terrible ordeal for the
Falcaneo families and Joanne Colleen.
Speaker 1 (06:34):
Are you prepared to reveal what those theories are? Oh?
Speaker 2 (06:38):
Look, I think he sees this as an element of control.
He still has control of something. So Joanne escaped, he
never thought that he would have a witness who is
who could then provide evidence of who committed the crime.
So he lost control of this. If you think about
(07:00):
the crime itself, it was premeditated, it was organized. Then
he became very disorganized and control. He still has control
because he is not willing to disclose the whereabouts of Peter.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
And you look, do you think it is about control now?
Like keeping that control even as he is reportedly on
his deathbed or is there? I know there's been some
suggestion that he that he may not even remember where
where Falconio is.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
Look, that's another theory is he may not He just
may not know. I think that when Joanne escaped, then
that through his plan out the door, and that would
have brought an element of panic, stress, anxiety, and his
disposal of Peter might have been done in such haste
(07:55):
that he may not exactly remember where it was, and
I think we have to be open to that, considering
the enormous pressure he would have been under.
Speaker 1 (08:06):
It's Look, it's such a you know, it's it's a story,
it's a situation. You know, the story is not the
right word, I guess, because it's it's impacted you know,
the Falconios and Joe Ane Leigh's life in the way
that it has in an unimaginable way. So I don't
know that story is the right word. It's a situation
that captivated the world. Colleen, Why do you think that
(08:29):
it really did captivate the world in the way in
which it did.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Look, I think it's got a lot of mystique with it.
So there's so many people that if you have a look,
people that, well, he's not guilty of this. He didn't
do it. The reason why he's not telling you where
the body is because he didn't do it. Now we
all know that a jury convicted him in unanimous decision.
He's convicted. I know the evidence intimately, and I know
(08:54):
that this is the person that did this. So the
thing about this case is there is interest in Joanne
as an individual. There are things that happen at the
time that people weren't comfortable with. They thought her reaction
should be different aka Lindy Chambers. So she's not reacting,
(09:18):
she's not doing how I think a victim should react,
how I would react in this situation. So you have
that coupled with the fact that we have Bradley Murdoch.
His profile in itself is of interest to people because
it's very similar to other I guess psychopathic offenders, his description, everything,
(09:42):
and the fact that it happened where it did. It's
so remote and people are interested in Australia, particularly those
that have never been here. They have this theory about
Australia that it's just full of out back salt bush
and snakes. So it has everything. It ticks all these boxes.
People are interested.
Speaker 1 (10:02):
Yeah, it truly does. And I you know, I reckon
I moved here just after it had happened maybe, And
I actually think I was working for the Northern Territory
Police as a media adviser when yeah, in the media units,
so I remember as in when the certainly when the
case was in court, and I know even for me,
I was like I was really fascinated by it as
a very young woman, and I know that everybody around
(10:27):
the Northern Territory. But even now, Colin, we still yesterday
we were still getting messages people saying, you know, Katie,
maybe he doesn't know where the body is because he
didn't do it. I mean, for you, after dedicating your
life to this investigation for a long period of time,
you touched on it before the evidence, do you have
any doubt in your mind whether this man murdered Peter Falconio.
Speaker 2 (10:51):
None whatsoever. Absolutely he did this. If you sat there
and looked at every detail of the evidence, it is
incredible and it's very rare that you get a jury
convict and offender of a homicide when there is no body,
and to do that you have to have very good,
(11:13):
compelling evidence, and that's what we did. Look and again
that's the team that undertook this investigation, where they spent
four years of their life on this. Every day was
on this case, and if they weren't there working on it,
they were thinking about it. And we absolutely prevented a
(11:37):
remarkable case. It's a circumstantial case because you don't have
a body, but there is no doubt that Bradley Murdock
committed this this crime, and I've always said it, I
knowing how organized and how cunning and premeditated it was,
I've always wondered, what are the ones he's responsible?
Speaker 1 (11:58):
Right, So we seem to have lost Colleen Gwin there
somehow the phones are dropped out. Hopefully were able to
get her back because I reckon she was about to
say She's always wondered what else he may have been
responsible for. So we're able to get that phone line
to work again. I'm not too sure what has gone
on there, but as I said, yeah, even yesterday we
(12:18):
were still getting messages people sort of saying to me, Wilfi,
you know, I'm not sure whether you know whether he
did it. That's why he doesn't know where the body is.
But it's interesting, isn't it? Then to hear from Colleen Gwynn, who,
as I seid, dedicated her life to this investigation for
a very long time and has no doubt in her
mind that he is absolutely the person who committed this crime. Colleen,
(12:43):
I think I've got you back.
Speaker 2 (12:44):
I don't know what happened, don't know.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
But I reckon you were maybe about to say, there's
not only any doubt in your mind that he did that,
but you wonder what else?
Speaker 2 (12:53):
Absolutely, Yeah, I think his profile and the fact that
he was a drug runner at the time he did
these drives through some of the remotest parts. He's got
a really interesting history. I know there was a lot
of investigative teams across Australia that were also interested in
(13:13):
Bradley Murdoch for some unsolved matters, so come that. I
think that it would be really interesting if he did
decide to start talking, because I wonder what else is there?
Speaker 1 (13:26):
Yeah, I'd be fascinated to know more, Colleen before I
let you go this morning. You know, it's I know
that it must be a really difficult job working on
a case like this, not only because you are obviously
trying to you know, to catch a murderer, but also
dealing with, you know, a distraught family and grieving family
(13:47):
and joe Anne Lees. Have you had much contact with
the Falconio family or Joe Anne Lee's over the last
twenty years.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Yeah, I have. It's sporadic, like, it's not like you
want to be contacting them regularly. I give them the
respect of if they want to chat to me if
there's anything on their minds, by all means, give me
a call. Yeah. I feel their pain every time I
speak to them, and I know now they are also
(14:17):
still holding hope that perhaps that as a parting, a
parting I guess, not a gift, but an act of
good faith, that he will disclose what he knows. And
as I said, maybe he doesn't know, but he must
(14:39):
be able to give us some information that may assist
please to define Peter's remains.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
Well. Colin Gwin, it is always great to talk to you.
I tell you what people are messaging in. You know,
can you ask col Angwin what she thinks about the
Aaron Patterson case. They're asking all sorts of things. It
sounds like they want you to be a regular, you know,
crime comment for.
Speaker 2 (15:00):
Yeah, I've actually been working down in that area and
I do. I have a fascination with the mushroom case too,
So tell your callers. Yeah, it's a rific case that one. Yeah, wait,
wait for the movie I reckon.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
I was going to say, we'll keep an eye on that. Colleen.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
Good for what mushrooms you?
Speaker 1 (15:18):
That's exactly right, Colleen, good to speak to you this morning.
Thanks so much for your time, Thank you
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
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