Murders on Main Street Kentucky Re-release

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Marcy (00:00):
Welcome to Crime Raven; true crimes, real life stories
from law enforcement and issuescrime fighters face.
This podcast highlights crimesresearched by retired Detective
Sergeant Mark Rein, usingpublicly available information,
court records and personalrecollections.
Content may be graphic,disturbing, or violent.
Listener discretion is advised.

(00:22):
Suspects are considered innocentuntil found guilty in a court of
law.
One of the ways that you cansupport Crime Raven is to use
our link to shop on Amazon.
We know you already shop there.
When you use our link, itdoesn't cost you anything extra.
It just tells Amazon to send usa few pennies of your purchase.

(00:44):
Doesn't matter what you buy.
Big or small, it all helps uscover our podcast costs.
So next time you need to buy onAmazon, use our link.
You can find our Amazon link inthe show notes or at
crimeraven.com/resources.
Bookmark that Amazon link so youdon't lose it and use it every
time you shop at Amazon.

(01:17):
Pembroke, Kentucky is a tinysuburb of the Clarksville,
Tennessee Metropolitan Region.
The area is home to Army BaseFort Campbell, which sits
astride the western end of theTennessee- Kentucky border.
The base is home to the renowned101st Airborne, whose current
mission is air assault or highlymobile light infantry
transported to and around thebattlefield by helicopter.

(01:41):
The population of the metro areais just over 300,000 with
Pembroke claiming only 700 ofthat.
The town is 20 minutes of gentlyrolling farmland northwest of
Fort Campbell.
It's barely a bedroom community.
A wide spot split by KentuckyState Route 41, marked by a
Marathon station, a DollarGeneral, and not much else.

(02:04):
Pembroke's appeal is its ruralsensibility.
Farmland surroundings, but nevertoo distant from the services
and civilization offered inClarksville to the south or
Hopkinsville to the north.
Main Street Pembroke is linednot with businesses, but with
single family houses, some quitelarge and well over a hundred
years old.

(02:25):
It was in one of these homes, 443 South Main Street, on a cold
and rainy November 18th 2015,that the unthinkable happened.

Mark (02:36):
The stately 4,000 square foot home loomed in the dim
morning light as the manapproached.
The side entrance, the oneeverybody used was toward the
rear, just off the driveway andparking area.
The door itself was obscured bya lattice enclosed porch and
walkway.
He moved quickly nervous thathis prey would be standing in

(02:57):
the darkness behind the trellis.
The man was familiar with thehouse and its residents.
Familiar enough to know thatonly Calvin should be there
because his wife always leftearly for work.
He hit the threshold, the screendoor, the point of no return.
The back of his mind screamingthat here was the moment of
greatest danger.

(03:18):
Cal like to shoot guns.
He could have one readilyavailable.
But the man was banking onsurprise.
A Blitzkrieg attack.
He swept up through thethreshold, and luck was on his
side.
Calvin had just put on hisraincoat and was stepping out
onto the enclosed porch.
For an instant, the two menlooked at each other across the
narrow room.

(03:39):
Calvin recognized the threat,his face opening up in waves of
shock and surprise that quicklyturned to fear.
The intruder brought the Glockpistol up and fired.
Bullets punched through Calvin'schest and neck.
He crumpled.
Mortally wounded, but the attackhad just begun.
The man, consumed with anger,fueled by adrenaline surged

(03:59):
forward.
He viciously beat Calvin's headwith powerful blows, shattering
nose and jaw.
When the attack was complete andCalvin lay on the floor enduring
the last spasms of life, the manwas a statue above him.
The pause was not a moment ofreflection.
The 45 in that enclosed spacehad been a cannon blast,

(04:22):
shatteringly loud for the ruralKentucky morning.
He listened for sounds of alarmin the surrounding neighborhood.
Hearing nothing, his mindpivoted to the plan.
He picked up the 45 shellcasings.
He dragged Calvin out onto theporch, opened the cellar hatch
and dropped the body down.
He wiped blood stains from thefloor with the towels and

(04:43):
clothing that were close athand.
With the most obvious evidencegone from the first floor, he
descended into the cellar.
The man gathered a small pile ofwood and cardboard around
Calvin's body, and he lit it.
As the conflagration grew andthe cellar filled with smoke,
the man retreated back up to theporch.

(05:04):
He closed the hatch behind him.
And trusted that the fire belowwould cleanse his sin.
Hours after setting the fire,the man returned to inspect his
handiwork.
As he drove by, he was surprisedto see the house on 4 43 South
Main Street was still standing.
In fact, he could see no changeto the house.

(05:24):
He considered what must be doneto salvage the plan.
Just before 5:30 PM the manreturned to the Phillips house.
As he approached, he was shockedto see Pamela Phillips' car
already parked in its usual spotnear the door.
She was early.
He also noted the neighbor, EdDansereau's car parked off to

(05:45):
the side of the shared driveway.
Ed's kitchen lights were on, andfrom those windows, it could be
possible for Ed to observe theentire side of Calvin and Pam
Phillips' house.
Ed worked out of town for muchof the week and had returned at
a time that was inconvenient.
For the second time that day,the man moved up to the house

(06:06):
with cautious haste.
From that morning's shooting,the echoes of the 45 still
reverberating in its mind.
The man had changed things up.
He now carried a smaller andhopefully quieter 22 caliber
weapon.
The man paused upon reaching thethreshold.
He got lucky again.
From behind the screen door, hecould see Pam toward the middle
of the house in the hallway,just beyond the kitchen.

(06:28):
She was pacing back and forthlike she was on a tether,
talking into a landline, handsetattached to a vintage phone.
She seemed a little upset.
The man looked to his right.
The cellar hatch was stillhidden under the dog bed.
Even better, Calvin's ancientmutt was laying on it.
The body remained hidden and theplan could still work.

(06:52):
The intruder timed his entry forwhen Pam shifted away.
He crept across the deck,increasing speed as he smoothly
opened the door to the kitchen.
He closed the distance in aninstant.
Pam turned, gasping, droppingthe phone as she saw the man.
He grabbed Pam by the hair asshe tried to turn and flee.
The first shot penetrated herchest as he brought the gun up.
The next three went into herskull at almost point blank

(07:14):
range.
Pam collapsed, dead before shehit the floor.
The sharp crack of the 22 wasnot as quiet as he would've
liked.
The man paused, standing overPam's body in the dim hallway
just as he had her husband 10hours earlier.
A few seconds later, he heard aman's voice toward the driveway.
"Pam!" There was a pause, andagain, louder,"Pam!" The man

(07:40):
moved across the kitchen.
He recognized Ed Dansereau'svoice.
As he approached the door, theman could see Ed standing at the
end of the fence line thatdivided the parking areas
between the two houses.
Ed had a phone in his hand andwas craning his head from side
to side, as if seeing betterwould allow him to decide what
to do next.
The intruder kicked intosurvival mode.

(08:00):
The only thing to do whencornered is to attack into the
ambush.
He exited the kitchen door andwithout pausing on the porch,
continued outside.
As he opened the screen door, hecalled out to Ed, who recognized
him and was confused.
The man was an express train.
Closing the gap, raising thegun.
Ed simultaneously fumbled onehand in the pocket and his other

(08:22):
hand brought up the phone to hishead.
The man fired three quick shotsinto Ed Dansereaux's face.
The useless phone dropped fromEd's ear and he fell with it
onto the grass.
Ed's other hand was stillgripping the pistol he had only
partially cleared from hispocket.
This had been three more shots,ones the man couldn't afford

(08:43):
echoing through thatneighborhood.
Ed Dansereaux lay on the openground between two houses, only
a hundred feet from Main Street.
They were exposed, obvious toanyone passing on foot, in a
car, or anyone looking for thesource of those shots.
The man made an instantdecision.
Pure adrenaline.
He grabbed Ed by the feet anddragged him 60 yards towards the

(09:05):
back of the Phillips property,away from the road and away from
prying eyes.
He didn't notice the gun in Ed'shand as it slipped from its
pocket where it came to restonly a few feet from where its
owner lay slowly extenuating.
In the dark field behind Calvinand Pam Phillip's house, the man

(09:26):
paused for the third time thatday, listening for anyone who
might have raised.
Hearing nothing, he cautiouslyreturned to Pam's body and began
covering his tracks.
Just a few minutes into thecleanup, the man heard a car
pull into the driveway.
He hid as someone first knocked,then opened the door in the
kitchen.

(09:46):
A woman's voice called loudlyinto the house for Pam or
Calvin.
She repeated the calls severaltimes, but did not venture
inside.
After a few minutes, the soundof the car backing out of the
driveway could be heard from theman's hiding place.
The close calls were taking atoll.
The man decided he would have tocome back later.

(10:08):
He wrapped and hid Pam's body,locked the doors, and quietly
walked away.
In the evening hours of November18th, 2015, the man who had
killed three of the residents ofSouth Main Street in Pembroke,
Kentucky, contemplated his nextsteps.
He considered a bigger fire, onethat would destroy everything,

(10:29):
including evidence he might haveoverlooked.
But it hadn't worked before, anda fire would also serve as a
giant beacon focusing all thescrutiny right there, right
then.
He needed to spread someevidence out, divert attention
away from the crime scene.
He wanted the uncertainty thatelapsed time creates in a murder

(10:50):
investigation.
Fortune favors the bold, so at1: 30 in the morning on the
19th, when there was no policeactivity at the Phillip's house
on South Main Street, theintruder went back to work.
He cleaned up the brass and theobvious blood.
He loaded Pam and Ed's corpsesinto her car.

(11:11):
He went into the cellar andtried to pull Calvin out, but by
that time, the body was in fullrigor and could not easily be
carried up through the hatch.
Much less compressed to fitinside the already crowded
sedan.
The man drove Pam's car to thefar side of Pembroke across
Highway 41 and two miles upRosetown Road.

(11:32):
He turned off onto a dirt paththat bisected, a large pasture
that was owned by the farmernamed Homack.
The field was bounded on eitherside by wooded strips at the
property lines.
The man knew if he had followedthe dirt road far enough, he
could disappear into the treesand there he could quietly
dispose of the bodies.
That was a plan until thespeeding car skidded on the

(11:54):
rain- slick mud, and was drugoff onto the soft shoulder.
The man's frantic attempts toreverse and rock her car from
the mud were in vain.
He got out to inspect and hisfears were realized.
The car was exposed, visible forRosetown Road and stuck fast in
the middle of the field.
Feeling a combination of angerand panic, the man threw the

(12:16):
keys into the darkness, dousedthe car, lit it and fled away
from the road toward thesheltering trees.
When the man made it back toSouth Main Street, he went to Ed
Dansereaux's house.
He came out with Ed's keys andwallet.
He stole Ed's car, driving iteast.
He was sure to bring PamPhillips' cell with him.

(12:37):
He had a trick to play.
A round trip of just over anhour took him to the destination
and back to South Main Street.
He dumped Ed Dansereaux's car inthe parking lot of the
elementary school.
A few blocks away, the Phillipsand Dansereaux houses were dark
and quiet as the sun rose.
To the west tendrils of smokemarred the morning air above the

(12:59):
Homack farm.

Marcy (13:11):
John Homack and Hilbert Jet were neighbors.
Each living and farming onseveral acres of land bordering
Road.
On November 19th, 2015, justafter 2:00 AM.
Both men were separatelyawakened from their beds to
sounds Home-ec thought they wereshotgun blast and figured that

(13:31):
there were people illegallyhunting the woods at

Mark (13:33):
the Southern end of

Marcy (13:34):
his property.
He wasn't about to

Mark (13:36):
go out at that

Marcy (13:37):
hour to confront armed men, even if they were
trespassing.

Mark (13:41):
Just to the

Marcy (13:42):
north.
Hilbert Jet's dog was barking in

Mark (13:44):
response to those noises.
Waking the entire

Marcy (13:47):
house.

Mark (13:48):
Jack calm the dog and

Marcy (13:50):
saw from his bathroom window, a fire burning in the
field at the far side of thehedge row between the
properties.
The flames were in the generaldirection of

Mark (13:59):
Homax burn pit.
Both men comfortable in their

Marcy (14:03):
rationalizations.
Went back

Mark (14:05):
to sleep.

Marcy (14:07):
Then Hilbert

Mark (14:09):
jet left his house to run errands just before 9:00 AM on
November

Marcy (14:13):
19th.
As he

Mark (14:14):
drove south on Rosetown road, he

Marcy (14:17):
saw a burnt up

Mark (14:17):
car.
And Homax field right

Marcy (14:20):
about where he'd seen

Mark (14:21):
those flames seven hours earlier.

Marcy (14:23):
The vehicle, a small sedan was still smoldering.
Jet pulled up to the barn

Mark (14:28):
where home-ec lived and the men

Marcy (14:30):
agreed they should call

Mark (14:31):
9 1 1.

Marcy (14:33):
The first

Mark (14:33):
to arrive were volunteer firefighters who looked

Marcy (14:36):
into the charred

Mark (14:37):
metal shell of a car and saw

Marcy (14:39):
one, maybe two skulls lying

Mark (14:41):
on the floorboards.

Marcy (14:43):
The firefighters were treated to Rosetown road,
blocked access and called forpolice.

Mark (14:48):
A deputy

Marcy (14:49):
from the Christian county Sheriff's office arrived a short
time later.
He verified

Mark (14:53):
the skulls in

Marcy (14:54):
the car.
Which started the chain

Mark (14:56):
of

Marcy (14:56):
detective call-outs.

Mark (14:58):
The Sheriff's department also reached

Marcy (14:59):
out to Kentucky state police

Mark (15:01):
who assigned

Marcy (15:01):
one of their investigator.
Leonard Smith

Mark (15:04):
to the case.

Marcy (15:05):
As

Mark (15:05):
an aside during

Marcy (15:06):
this case, Leonard

Mark (15:07):
Smith

Marcy (15:07):
retired from Kentucky state police.
And was

Mark (15:10):
hired as

Marcy (15:11):
a detective Lieutenant

Mark (15:12):
by the Christian

Marcy (15:13):
county Sheriff's office.
So we'll

Mark (15:15):
refer to him as Lieutenant Smith.
When investigators

Marcy (15:19):
arrived at the scene, they examined the car stuck just

Mark (15:22):
off the dirt

Marcy (15:23):
road.
There were still standingpuddles across the field from
recent heavy rains.

Mark (15:28):
One of the investigators saw the car keys tossed about 40
feet away

Marcy (15:32):
under a couple of inches of water.
The investigators

Mark (15:35):
also matched

Marcy (15:36):
the few tire imprints on the road to responders

Mark (15:39):
and John Homax Toyota

Marcy (15:40):
Tundra.
Lieutenant Smith

Mark (15:43):
noted that the car

Marcy (15:44):
fire had been scorching.
Almost

Mark (15:46):
everything was ashes

Marcy (15:48):
in the

Mark (15:48):
bottom of the car.
The rear window glass had poppedand melted into the back dash.

Marcy (15:53):
And as he looked around the wreckage, he smelled the

Mark (15:55):
distinct odor of kerosene.

Marcy (15:57):
The license plate on the rear of the vehicle was burned
off

Mark (16:00):
onto the ground,

Marcy (16:01):
but the tag was still readable.

Mark (16:03):
The tag came back to Calvin and Pamela Phillips at 4
43 south main

Marcy (16:08):
street in Pembroke.

Mark (16:10):
The vehicle was

Marcy (16:11):
wrapped, put on a slide back tow truck and

Mark (16:13):
take into a storage area for further processing.

Marcy (16:16):
The focus

Mark (16:17):
shifted to the Phillips residence

Marcy (16:19):
On south main street.
The house sits back

Mark (16:23):
off the sidewalk about

Marcy (16:24):
75

Mark (16:25):
From

Marcy (16:26):
the front, it looks like an

Mark (16:27):
average

Marcy (16:27):
size lot for the

Mark (16:28):
size of the house, but the property extends back in a
narrow corridor for

Marcy (16:32):
several acres.
The lot is actually

Mark (16:35):
so large that

Marcy (16:36):
the house

Mark (16:36):
and the front yard sit in city

Marcy (16:38):
limits.

Mark (16:39):
and the rear acreage juts out on the county

Marcy (16:41):
land.
The Phillips and residents onsimilarly situated properties,

Mark (16:46):
shoot firearms on the county land.
and activity that's

Marcy (16:49):
prohibited inside the city

Mark (16:50):
boundary.

Marcy (16:52):
On November 19th,

Mark (16:54):
Christian

Marcy (16:54):
county Sheriff's deputies arrived at the Phillip's house.
Around

Mark (16:57):
noon.
All that they knew was that acar registered to that address
had

Marcy (17:02):
been burned off Rosetown road with

Mark (17:04):
two bodies in it.

Marcy (17:07):
There was no answer at

Mark (17:08):
the door.
As deputy stood in the driveway,one of them noticed drops

Marcy (17:13):
of what looked

Mark (17:13):
like blood on the paper.
Widening their

Marcy (17:17):
focus.
They

Mark (17:18):
could see numerous blood spots

Marcy (17:20):
and the drive

Mark (17:21):
and walkway centered

Marcy (17:22):
around the house aside door.

Mark (17:24):
The deputies entered the

Marcy (17:25):
house, clearing

Mark (17:26):
each room,

Marcy (17:27):
ensuring that no one was hurt or hiding.

Mark (17:29):
On the initial

Marcy (17:30):
sweep, deputies did not find anything alarming.

Mark (17:33):
It was a large old house

Marcy (17:35):
and parts were being remodeled.
there was to construction debristhat had not yet been

Mark (17:39):
cleared.
In addition to the debris, thehouse was cluttered with the
kind of objects amassed

Marcy (17:44):
over decades of lives being

Mark (17:46):
lived.
The only resident

Marcy (17:49):
found in the house was a sickly

Mark (17:50):
German shepherd dog.
Lying on

Marcy (17:52):
a dog bed

Mark (17:53):
inside the enclosed porch.
During the wait for detectives

Marcy (17:57):
deputies did what they could to prepare.

Mark (18:00):
Animal control came and

Marcy (18:01):
took

Mark (18:02):
the

Marcy (18:02):
dog.
The deputies made note ofadditional indication.

Mark (18:06):
that

Marcy (18:06):
something bad had happened.
There were swipes of blood on

Mark (18:09):
the entry door,

Marcy (18:11):
blood on a blue tarp near where the dog had been

Mark (18:13):
lying.
A pool of blood at the end of aprivacy fence that formed the

Marcy (18:17):
border between the Phillip's backyard and ed Dan's
rose.
And next to that,

Mark (18:21):
a cell phone on

Marcy (18:22):
the ground with a swipe of dried blood.
When deputies went to the

Mark (18:26):
side door of Dan's Rose

Marcy (18:27):
House, the one that faced

Mark (18:29):
the Phillips house, they found

Marcy (18:30):
that door open.

Mark (18:31):
No one answered when they

Marcy (18:32):
yelled inside.

Mark (18:35):
By two in the afternoon, detectives were working with a
search

Marcy (18:38):
warrant that allowed a detailed search of the Phillip's
house and property.
Detective shot a videowalkthrough of the entire home.

Mark (18:45):
They

Marcy (18:46):
took photos documenting

Mark (18:47):
the overall scene and

Marcy (18:48):
items of specific

Mark (18:49):
interest, including a Ruger pistol on

Marcy (18:53):
the kitchen table.

Mark (18:54):
Another semiautomatic

Marcy (18:55):
pistol laying

Mark (18:56):
next to the house phone on

Marcy (18:57):
the side table in

Mark (18:59):
the hallway.
A nine millimeter pistol

Marcy (19:01):
next to the bed and the

Mark (19:02):
upstairs master, there was a subpoena

Marcy (19:05):
ordering Calvin Phillips to appear in a military court
martial on a desk upstairs.
They found more

Mark (19:12):
evidence in the grass, in the backyard.
60 yards behind the

Marcy (19:16):
house.

Mark (19:17):
An old looking semi-automatic pistol lay near a
second pool of blood,

Marcy (19:21):
much larger than the pool

Mark (19:23):
of blood at the end of the fence.

Marcy (19:25):
As

Mark (19:25):
detective search, the enclosed porch, one picked

Marcy (19:28):
up a pair of sweat pants.
One leg of the pants was

Mark (19:31):
trapped under what turned out

Marcy (19:33):
to be a hatch.
The door was flush with the

Mark (19:35):
deck surface and had gone a notice because it had been
covered with a large dog

Marcy (19:39):
bed.

Mark (19:40):
The detective

Marcy (19:41):
slid the bed away and pulled the door up.
Below him and the dim light ofthe seller, he could see the
body

Mark (19:48):
of Calvin

Marcy (19:48):
Phillips facing up Calvin was obviously dead, but
investigators called for

Mark (19:54):
a paramedic to assess the body.

Marcy (19:57):
Katie Rogers examined Calvin's

Mark (19:58):
body and noted that

Marcy (19:59):
he was cyanotic because his nail beds were blue.

Mark (20:02):
His pupils were clouded fixed and dilated.

Marcy (20:06):
Lividity, which is the gravitational pooling of blood
within the body.

Mark (20:10):
That happens after death had set in.
Calvin's body was stiff,

Marcy (20:14):
also known

Mark (20:15):
as rigor,

Marcy (20:15):
mortis.
Calvin was on his back with hisarms extended up and his legs

Mark (20:19):
bent.
It was apparent that Calvin wasnot lying in his original
position of

Marcy (20:24):
death.
He had been

Mark (20:26):
moved into this position after rigor had said.
Investigators noted that Calvinhad a bullet wound to

Marcy (20:33):
the chest.
And injuries to

Mark (20:35):
his face.

Marcy (20:36):
he had dried blood on his pants and coat.
Calvin was lying on a pile ofburned wood, cardboard, towels,
and clothing.
He was wearing

Mark (20:45):
a rain coat

Marcy (20:46):
with a hood cinched

Mark (20:47):
down over

Marcy (20:47):
his head.
One

Mark (20:48):
arm of the PVC

Marcy (20:49):
jacket had melted

Mark (20:50):
off during the

Marcy (20:51):
fire.
when Calvin was moved.
Investigators

Mark (20:55):
saw that the debris around and under the body was

Marcy (20:57):
a

Mark (20:57):
Pyre that had only partially burned.
On the ground at the base

Marcy (21:01):
of the stairs,

Mark (21:02):
label at fragment

Marcy (21:04):
and a piece of tooth.
While

Mark (21:07):
the Phillip's house was

Marcy (21:08):
being searched that day.
Word

Mark (21:10):
spread around town and across

Marcy (21:12):
the state.
And people began to call

Mark (21:14):
the police with

Marcy (21:15):
information.
Marlene Larock who was a friendof Calvin's who lived nearby.
They had bonded over theirmutual love of German shepherds.
On the morning of the 18th, the

Mark (21:25):
vet that they shared told Marlene, that

Marcy (21:28):
Calvin's dog was sick and likely to die.

Mark (21:32):
Marlene and her adult daughter, Michelle, who was
visiting from out of state, went

Marcy (21:36):
to see Calvin around 2:00 PM.
She said it was

Mark (21:39):
strange that the door to the house was open, but no one
answered when she

Marcy (21:43):
knocked and yelled inside.
Marlene called Pam on her cellphone and

Mark (21:48):
left a message about

Marcy (21:49):
the visit.
Pam didn't call Marlene back

Mark (21:52):
until about 5:30 PM.

Marcy (21:54):
Pam said that she just arrived home from work and
Calvin was not

Mark (21:58):
around, but his

Marcy (21:59):
wallet and cell phone were there.
Pam said

Mark (22:02):
that she had just

Marcy (22:03):
gotten off the phone with the neighbor ed.
Pam

Mark (22:06):
had asked ed

Marcy (22:07):
to check the

Mark (22:07):
back of the property

Marcy (22:08):
for Calvin.

Mark (22:09):
She was worried.
Maybe Calvin had hurt himself

Marcy (22:11):
somewhere.

Mark (22:12):
Just then Marlene said she heard Pam

Marcy (22:14):
say something like, hold on.

Mark (22:16):
I see

Marcy (22:16):
something.

Mark (22:17):
Marlene heard her friend admit a startle type scream.
And then heard nothing

Marcy (22:21):
more.
Marlene thought the line wasopen.
So she listened and waited forseveral minutes, but Pam never
returned.
Marlene was unsettled by thesituation.
So she asked her daughter,Michelle to go back with her.

Mark (22:36):
Marlene

Marcy (22:37):
said that Pam's car was there parked in its usual
location No's

Mark (22:40):
in by the house.

Marcy (22:42):
And for the second time that

Mark (22:43):
day she found the

Marcy (22:44):
house doors

Mark (22:44):
open

Marcy (22:45):
again.
She called inside,

Mark (22:47):
but no one responded.

Marcy (22:49):
Marlene said that she was

Mark (22:50):
afraid to go in the house.
So after a few minutes,

Marcy (22:52):
they

Mark (22:53):
left.

Marcy (22:54):
When they

Mark (22:55):
arrived back at their house.

Marcy (22:56):
Marlene still felt disturbed.
She really wanted to know thateverything was all

Mark (23:01):
right.

Marcy (23:02):
So at 7:00 PM.
She

Mark (23:04):
and Michelle.
Returned to the Phillips house

Marcy (23:06):
for the third time.
That day.
This time, the

Mark (23:09):
house was closed and dark.
Pam's car had been moved

Marcy (23:12):
now

Mark (23:13):
it was turned around and backed in near the door.

Marcy (23:15):
Marlene thought the car's position was unusual.
But still no answer

Mark (23:19):
at the door.
When

Marcy (23:24):
investigators call the

Mark (23:25):
army criminal investigations division or

Marcy (23:27):
CID.
About the subpoena on Calvin'sdesk,

Mark (23:31):
detectives

Marcy (23:31):
were told that they would get a call back.
Instead that afternoon,

Mark (23:36):
several CID

Marcy (23:37):
officers arrived at

Mark (23:37):
the scene.

Marcy (23:39):
About

Mark (23:40):
the subpoena.
The CID guys literally pointedacross the street to the yellow
house, belonging to Christian

Marcy (23:46):
Martin.
They said that

Mark (23:48):
Calvin Phillips was a key prosecution witness in a court

Marcy (23:51):
martial.

Mark (23:52):
Where Martin was being tried for

Marcy (23:54):
domestic violence

Mark (23:55):
assault.
And mishandling of confidentialinformation.
The charges were severe enoughto end Martin's

Marcy (24:01):
career and could send him to prison.
They also said that CalvinPhillips

Mark (24:05):
was worried that Martin would retaliate.
By the afternoon of

Marcy (24:10):
the 19th.
The Investigators still had alot of

Mark (24:12):
uncertainty as they began to talk to people close to

Marcy (24:15):
the potential

Mark (24:16):
victims.
They knew that Calvin was deadin the cellar and they knew

Marcy (24:20):
they had two

Mark (24:21):
skulls in Pam's car.

Marcy (24:25):
Calvin and Pam's son,

Mark (24:26):
Matt lived two and a half

Marcy (24:28):
hours north Matt was able to give detectives some
background on his parents.

Mark (24:36):
Calvin at 59 was a retired air force and army helicopter

Marcy (24:41):
pilot who had served in Somalia and

Mark (24:43):
the Gulf war.

Marcy (24:45):
As Matt grew up, Pam was a stay-at-home mom.
And

Mark (24:47):
then vice-president at heritage bank in Hopkinsville,
about 30 minutes from

Marcy (24:51):
Penbrook.
The

Mark (24:53):
couple had been

Marcy (24:53):
married for over 30 years.
And had lived in the same

Mark (24:56):
house for most of

Marcy (24:57):
that time.
Matt knew the

Mark (24:59):
neighbor at Dan's row and said he was good friends with
his

Marcy (25:02):
parents.
Matt said his parents wereworried

Mark (25:05):
about the pending court.
martial.

Marcy (25:07):
The trial had been delayed

Mark (25:08):
several times and tensions increased with each

Marcy (25:11):
continuance.
Calvin and Pam

Mark (25:14):
were discouraging people from visiting until the case

Marcy (25:17):
was resolved.

Mark (25:19):
Matt

Marcy (25:19):
didn't know all of the

Mark (25:20):
details of the court martial, but he knew

Marcy (25:22):
it involved his father

Mark (25:23):
turning over items to the FBI.
That he had

Marcy (25:25):
obtained from Martin's

Mark (25:26):
ex wife, Joan

Marcy (25:27):
Hart.
Matt explained that his parentshad helped Joan Harmon

Mark (25:31):
move

Marcy (25:32):
out of the Martin

Mark (25:32):
house when the marriage broke up.

Marcy (25:35):
For a

Mark (25:35):
time after that split Harmon rented a property

Marcy (25:38):
in Pembroke that the Philips owned.
Calvin identify classifiedmaterial among Martins property
during

Mark (25:45):
the move.

Marcy (25:46):
And Calvin took that to the FBI.
That material

Mark (25:50):
and

Marcy (25:50):
photographs of Martin

Mark (25:51):
stepson's injuries were the basis for the court.
Marshall,

Marcy (25:55):
Matt Phillips was asked to identify his father

Mark (25:58):
with a picture of Calvin's head.

Marcy (26:00):
showing only from the

Mark (26:01):
nose up.

Marcy (26:03):
investigators wanted to spare him the

Mark (26:04):
sight

Marcy (26:05):
of his father's mangled lower face.

Mark (26:11):
Penny Casey worked

Marcy (26:12):
with Pam Phillips at the Hopkinsville bank.
When

Mark (26:15):
penny

Marcy (26:16):
talked to investigators, she told them that as recently
as Monday, November 16th,

Mark (26:21):
Pam had voiced concerns about

Marcy (26:23):
the court martial situation.

Mark (26:26):
Pam told

Marcy (26:26):
penny that they were keeping family away during the
holiday season because

Mark (26:30):
of the tension.
Pam was worried that if theyleft Martin would break into
their home

Marcy (26:34):
and might kill them when

Mark (26:35):
they returned.

Marcy (26:36):
On

Mark (26:37):
the 18th of November,

Marcy (26:38):
Pam left work

Mark (26:39):
at 5:00 PM, which was

Marcy (26:40):
a little early.
She had been angry at Calvinbecause they were expecting a
delivery of her birthday

Mark (26:46):
present from her son.

Marcy (26:48):
A new washer

Mark (26:49):
and dryer.

Marcy (26:50):
Calvin knew

Mark (26:50):
this and he was going

Marcy (26:51):
to be there

Mark (26:52):
to receive and set up the

Marcy (26:53):
appliances.
The

Mark (26:55):
delivery people called Pam before

Marcy (26:57):
11 and told her no one was answering the door.

Mark (27:00):
By

Marcy (27:01):
the time Pam left work that evening, she

Mark (27:03):
was worried because

Marcy (27:04):
she'd been unable to reach Calvin all

Mark (27:06):
day.
On

Marcy (27:08):
the 18th and 19th of November, Sally Jackson

Mark (27:12):
had tried

Marcy (27:12):
in vain to reach her longtime

Mark (27:14):
boyfriend at Dan's row.
His house was in Pembroke,

Marcy (27:17):
but he usually spent much

Mark (27:19):
of his time during the

Marcy (27:20):
week with her in

Mark (27:21):
bowling green.
Where he worked as a musicinstructor and

Marcy (27:24):
as a jazz musician.

Mark (27:26):
When the detective finally called her, he had no answers,
only

Marcy (27:29):
questions.
She told them

Mark (27:31):
that ed went to his

Marcy (27:32):
pembro comb on the afternoon of the 18th after
finishing

Mark (27:37):
Ed's car

Marcy (27:37):
should be at his house.

Mark (27:39):
Ed was a gourmet cook

Marcy (27:40):
and he made high

Mark (27:41):
quality meals even

Marcy (27:43):
when he was just cooking for himself.
And his plan was to make fishthat night.

Mark (27:48):
The fact that he hadn't

Marcy (27:48):
called her was very unusual.
She said that ed was goodfriends with the Philips.
And ed

Mark (27:54):
was generally aware that there was some kind of problem
with

Marcy (27:57):
Martin across the street, but ed wasn't involved in that.

Mark (28:01):
Sally was able to identify the pistol lying on the grass.
60 yards behind the Phillipshouse from a photo.
She said the gun was

Marcy (28:09):
an old German pistol that Ed's father had brought back
from world war II.
The

Mark (28:15):
phone smeared

Marcy (28:16):
with blood found lying on the ground at the end of the
fence was also ads.
At Dan's

Mark (28:22):
rose car was eventually

Marcy (28:24):
found at the nearby elementary school.
He's

Mark (28:27):
written the ignition and

Marcy (28:28):
his wallet was in the center

Mark (28:31):
By the

Marcy (28:32):
evening of November 19th.
Christian county Sheriff'soffice knew they had a big case
on their

Mark (28:37):
hands,

Marcy (28:38):
A body and a seller.

Mark (28:40):
two skulls

Marcy (28:40):
and a burned out car.

Mark (28:42):
Two missing people

Marcy (28:43):
and a potential suspect.
The morning of the 20th.
Was a busy

Mark (28:48):
one.
Deputies had secured thePhillips and

Marcy (28:51):
Dan's rose houses overnight.
They'd kept an eye out foractivity across the street at
Martins place.
Deputies added to

Mark (28:58):
their account of search warrants.
One for at Dan's rose car.

Marcy (29:02):
One for a Dan's

Mark (29:03):
Rose House.

Marcy (29:05):
And one

Mark (29:05):
for four 80

Marcy (29:06):
south main street, the Martin residence

Mark (29:10):
Dan's Rose House was

Marcy (29:11):
pretty simple.
The scene

Mark (29:12):
told the tale, the

Marcy (29:13):
investigators expected.
There appeared to be

Mark (29:16):
nothing unusual.

Marcy (29:17):
The inside of the house was tidy.
They could

Mark (29:20):
see signs of

Marcy (29:20):
what

Mark (29:21):
Sally Jackson

Marcy (29:22):
said were Ed's plans for the previous

Mark (29:24):
evening.

Marcy (29:25):
Officially next to the kitchen sink.
near a beer wrapped in a UKhugger sleeve.
The kitchen window offered a

Mark (29:32):
perfect view

Marcy (29:33):
of the Phillips parking area and back door Across

Mark (29:36):
the kitchen in the living room.
Ed's recliner was unoccupiedexcept for a leather holster
with an extra

Marcy (29:41):
magazine pouch that someone had dropped in the seat.

Mark (29:45):
The search warrant

Marcy (29:46):
for Martin's

Mark (29:46):
house was also executed on November 20th.

Marcy (29:50):
Entry

Mark (29:50):
and securing of the house

Marcy (29:51):
were accomplished using the regional SWAT team.

Mark (29:54):
The only

Marcy (29:54):
person home was Laura Martins, girlfriend.

Mark (29:57):
Investigators knew that Martin was at Fort Campbell and

Marcy (30:00):
Laura's kids were in school.
However, this was

Mark (30:04):
a triple murder investigation

Marcy (30:05):
where many facts were unknown, which

Mark (30:07):
called for caution.

Marcy (30:09):
And the SWAT

Mark (30:09):
team.
As the search of Martin's homeprogressed,

Marcy (30:14):
investigators seized

Mark (30:15):
several items.
His pickup

Marcy (30:18):
truck was impounded, where they found a box of PMC 45
rounds.

Mark (30:22):
a rifle magazine

Marcy (30:23):
for a 22.
A box of 22 ammunition.

Mark (30:28):
A five gallon kerosine container

Marcy (30:29):
was seized from a utility room an AR style 22 rifle and
handgun on a closet shelf.
A handgun and a flowered person,

Mark (30:39):
a closet.
a rifle in the crawl space.
A handgun in a nylon case behinda computer Uh, 1911 style

Marcy (30:47):
handgun in the master

Mark (30:48):
bedroom.
a large century gun safe and theupstairs

Marcy (30:51):
den.
And Martins video securitysystem and phone were seized.
Along with

Mark (30:57):
evidence, photos were

Marcy (30:58):
taken of a recently used fire pit in the backyard.

Mark (31:02):
Muck

Marcy (31:02):
boots, caked with

Mark (31:03):
dried mud.
And an inside view of the house,his front

Marcy (31:06):
door showing a newer looking security brace.

Mark (31:11):
Not all

Marcy (31:12):
evidence seized in criminal investigations

Mark (31:14):
as found immediately after the cases

Marcy (31:16):
report.

Mark (31:18):
In

Marcy (31:18):
major cases like this evidence of one kind or another
is found, gathered, or seized.
As the analysis progresses.

Mark (31:25):
For example, months later, a sample of hair was taken

Marcy (31:29):
from Martin by search

Mark (31:30):
warrant, with the Assistance of the North Carolina
bureau of investigations.

Marcy (31:35):
And additional search warrant was required to open
Martin safe.
And century safe companyresponded with a

Mark (31:40):
passcode.

Marcy (31:42):
Inside that safe was a

Mark (31:43):
Glock model, 21 pistol, which fires 45 caliber rounds.
The safe

Marcy (31:48):
also held a power of attorney.
That Martin had granted to hisgirlfriend, Laura Spencer.

Mark (31:54):
It was signed

Marcy (31:54):
on November 16th, 2015.
Some evidence missed in theoriginal

Mark (32:01):
crime scene

Marcy (32:02):
processing was turned in by members of the Phillips
family.

Mark (32:06):
The

Marcy (32:06):
items had been discovered while they were in the process
of cleaning out the

Mark (32:09):
house.

Marcy (32:10):
One was a dog

Mark (32:12):
tag with Martin's name on it, found on a

Marcy (32:14):
high shelf.

Mark (32:14):
off the kitchen.

Marcy (32:16):
The tag

Mark (32:17):
was attached to a simple white cord, similar to a kite
string.
The original crime scene

Marcy (32:22):
photos showed a string on

Mark (32:23):
a shelf still.
It was high enough

Marcy (32:26):
to be overlooked by investigators.

Mark (32:28):
The Phillips family also turned over other items on two
separate occasions that theyfound while

Marcy (32:32):
cleaning.

Mark (32:33):
a

Marcy (32:33):
22 caliber

Mark (32:34):
bullet.
Swept from

Marcy (32:36):
under the kitchen stove.
And a 45

Mark (32:38):
caliber casing from behind

Marcy (32:40):
a pile of wooden construction debris on the
enclosed porch.
On December 23rd, 2015, theKentucky

Mark (32:48):
medical examiner

Marcy (32:49):
officially confirmed.
That the remains from the burned

Mark (32:52):
out car

Marcy (32:52):
on Rosetown road.

Mark (32:53):
Were those

Marcy (32:54):
of Pam Phillips

Mark (32:55):
and ed Dan's

Marcy (32:55):
row

Mark (32:57):
On December 31st, 2015,

Marcy (32:59):
seemingly out of the blue, a woman identified as

Mark (33:02):
Martin's ex wife, Joan Harmon.
brought

Marcy (33:04):
Pam Phillip's cell phone.
The one that Pam used before shewas

Mark (33:07):
killed.
To the at T store in

Marcy (33:09):
Hopkinsville

Mark (33:10):
asking for

Marcy (33:11):
it to be unlocked.
The arrest for the murders ofPam and

Mark (33:25):
Calvin Phillips and ed

Marcy (33:27):
Dan's row came on May 11th, 2019.
By

Mark (33:31):
that time Martin was flying commuter planes for
American airlines.
He was

Marcy (33:36):
arrested just after

Mark (33:37):
passing through

Marcy (33:37):
security at the Hammad Ali international airport and

Mark (33:41):
Martin was

Marcy (33:42):
charged with three counts of first degree murder.
Two

Mark (33:45):
counts of.
Burglary

Marcy (33:46):
in the first

Mark (33:46):
degree,

Marcy (33:47):
two counts of arson.
And

Mark (33:49):
tampering with evidence.

Marcy (33:51):
There's been extensive reporting and publicity about
the crime.

Mark (33:54):
During the intervening

Marcy (33:55):
years, Martins

Mark (33:57):
defense team requested a change of venue and the
proceedings

Marcy (34:00):
were moved to harden county, Kentucky.
Trial began

Mark (34:05):
June 1st, 2021.
The backstory began in

Marcy (34:12):
2011 when Martin was

Mark (34:14):
married to Joan

Marcy (34:15):
Harmon.
They live together

Mark (34:17):
with her

Marcy (34:17):
three kids at four 80 south main in

Mark (34:20):
pembro, Kentucky.
The marriage

Marcy (34:23):
ended after an

Mark (34:24):
argument during which they both called the

Marcy (34:26):
police.
When officers arrived, Martinagreed to leave the

Mark (34:30):
house for them.

Marcy (34:31):
The following day, Joan Harmon

Mark (34:33):
was granted a domestic violence restraining

Marcy (34:35):
order.

Mark (34:36):
Calvin and Pam Phillips had

Marcy (34:38):
helped Joan Harmon

Mark (34:39):
move and allowed her

Marcy (34:40):
to

Mark (34:40):
temporarily rent one of their nearby

Marcy (34:42):
properties.
During

Mark (34:44):
the move, Calvin Phillips had found some

Marcy (34:46):
items.
A disc and a

Mark (34:48):
laptop where classified military

Marcy (34:50):
information was stored.
In addition, Joan Harmon gaveCalvin

Mark (34:53):
photos that she had taken of her son.
Showing

Marcy (34:56):
bruises that they said were caused by Martin.

Mark (35:00):
Calvin turned the laptop and other materials over to the
FBI.

Marcy (35:04):
Which became evidence in a court martial

Mark (35:06):
process.

Marcy (35:07):
Calvin Phillips was a key player in the original charges
against The date of the courtmartial

Mark (35:14):
had been repeatedly delayed for almost a year.
At the time

Marcy (35:18):
of the murders, the trial was scheduled to start

Mark (35:20):
in early December,

Marcy (35:22):
2015.
Calvin Phillips and the otherswere murdered on November 18th.
The court martial finallyproceeded

Mark (35:29):
in may of 2016.
Martin was convicted ofmisdemeanors instead of the
original felony

Marcy (35:35):
charges.

Mark (35:37):
Calvin sister

Marcy (35:38):
Diana

Mark (35:38):
Phillips lives on the east coast.
She was aware that

Marcy (35:42):
Calvin would be

Mark (35:43):
a witness against

Marcy (35:44):
Martin and knew that Calvin had assisted Joan when
she moved out.
Diana was worried that theirinvolvement would

Mark (35:50):
cause problems with the neighbor who

Marcy (35:52):
she'd never After

Mark (35:55):
the murders, Diana returned

Marcy (35:56):
to Pembroke regularly.
Estimating five or six trips tohelp her nephew, Matt Phillips
deal with Calvin

Mark (36:02):
and Pam's property.

Marcy (36:03):
The house was full of

Mark (36:04):
stuff.
They had to sort through

Marcy (36:06):
and clean

Mark (36:07):
everything.

Marcy (36:08):
She said that while they were going through this process,

Mark (36:10):
they also kept an eye out for anything that might be
evidence in the case.

Marcy (36:14):
On November 30th, Dianna

Mark (36:16):
found a dog tag on a white string sitting

Marcy (36:18):
on

Mark (36:18):
a high shelf in

Marcy (36:19):
the foyer next to the kitchen.

Mark (36:21):
The dog tag had the

Marcy (36:22):
name, Christian Martin on it.

Mark (36:24):
A family friend who was helping

Marcy (36:25):
clean brushed uh, 22

Mark (36:27):
from under the stove.

Marcy (36:28):
Both items were bagged and handed over to a Sheriff's

Mark (36:31):
detective.
On April 16th,

Marcy (36:34):
2016 during another trip.
Diana

Mark (36:37):
said that she and her nephew, Matt were making

Marcy (36:38):
progress with the house.
And most of the personalproperty had been removed.
She

Mark (36:42):
cleaned the enclosed

Marcy (36:43):
porch near

Mark (36:44):
the door to

Marcy (36:44):
the house.
She began to move a pile of

Mark (36:47):
construction debris left over from one of

Marcy (36:49):
Calvin's renovation projects.

Mark (36:51):
Diana found a bullet casing in the debris pile.

Marcy (36:54):
During the trial prosecutors play the security
camera footage of Diana findingthat casing.
Diana and her family hadinstalled the security cameras
after the murders to monitor the

Mark (37:04):
often vacant

Marcy (37:05):
home.
In Pam and Calvin

Mark (37:09):
son mats testimony,

Marcy (37:11):
he told how he

Mark (37:12):
Found out about his

Marcy (37:12):
parents'.
Murders.
And the process of sorting outtheir property.
As the holidays that approachedin 2015, Matt said

Mark (37:19):
his parents were discouraging anyone from
visiting them because of the

Marcy (37:22):
friction with the neighbor.
This was unusual because

Mark (37:25):
his parents often

Marcy (37:26):
had people visit Or they would travel to

Mark (37:28):
gatherings at the grandparents' home in Michigan.
That holiday

Marcy (37:31):
season.
They were not going to travel or

Mark (37:33):
have people over.

Marcy (37:34):
Because of the upcoming trial.

Mark (37:37):
During

Marcy (37:37):
cross examination.
Matt said that he

Mark (37:39):
became increasingly frustrated as time passed

Marcy (37:41):
and an arrest had not been made.
His family talked to an

Mark (37:45):
attorney about how they could pressure

Marcy (37:47):
police and prosecutors

Mark (37:48):
to move forward.
They offered a reward

Marcy (37:50):
of a hundred

Mark (37:51):
thousand dollars for

Marcy (37:51):
information leading to

Mark (37:52):
arrest.
And

Marcy (37:54):
they met with attorney general of Kentucky.
Andy

Mark (37:56):
BearShare.
Sally

Marcy (38:00):
Jackson, ed

Mark (38:01):
Dan's rose girlfriend recounted her

Marcy (38:03):
last conversation with him.
And what do you plan for theevening of November 18th

Mark (38:07):
after he departed bowling

Marcy (38:08):
green?

Mark (38:10):
And when asked Sally said that she remembers Martin
drinking a beer with ed on

Marcy (38:13):
his front

Mark (38:14):
porch,

Marcy (38:14):
but that

Mark (38:15):
they weren't good friends.
And she

Marcy (38:16):
doubted ed ever had Martin over for dinner.
Marlene LA rock took the standto talk

Mark (38:22):
about her longtime friendship with the

Marcy (38:23):
Phillips.

Mark (38:24):
To other prosecution

Marcy (38:25):
witnesses, Steve

Mark (38:26):
Durham and Steve

Marcy (38:27):
Ballinger.
were longtime friends ofCalvin's.
They both described separateconversations where Calvin
expressed

Mark (38:34):
concern about his safety and

Marcy (38:36):
thought that

Mark (38:37):
Martin might try to kill

Marcy (38:38):
him.
Penny Casey

Mark (38:40):
worked with Pam Phillips at the Hopkinsville

Marcy (38:42):
bank.
She took the stand to recountwhat she told investigators

Mark (38:46):
about Pam's fear of Martin.
Major

Marcy (38:49):
James Garrett is a us

Mark (38:50):
army JAG officer.
He testified that he was theprosecutor in the court martial
of Martin.

Marcy (38:56):
Garrett said that Calvin Phillips was the key to the
court martial of Martin because

Mark (39:00):
Calvin identified and turned in

Marcy (39:01):
the disc containing classified information and

Mark (39:04):
photos of injuries of

Marcy (39:05):
Martin stepson.

Mark (39:07):
Between January, 2015 and the court

Marcy (39:09):
martial date set for early December, 2015.

Mark (39:12):
There were several

Marcy (39:13):
continuances.

Mark (39:14):
Garrett said

Marcy (39:14):
that Calvin was increasingly

Mark (39:16):
concerned that Martin

Marcy (39:17):
would do something to harm him.

Mark (39:19):
Major Garrett

Marcy (39:20):
said that during the buildup to the court, Marshall
Martin was aggressive andcomplaining about how he was
being treated, which included acongressional complaint,
targeting the governmentprosecutors

Mark (39:30):
and the commanding officers at

Marcy (39:31):
4k.

Mark (39:33):
These complaints were investigated and the end result

Marcy (39:35):
was the

Mark (39:36):
JAG officers

Marcy (39:36):
and the commanders had done nothing wrong.
Major Garrett said that Martinalso spread misinformation that
Joan

Mark (39:42):
Harmon was

Marcy (39:43):
motivated by financial assistance that she expected to

Mark (39:45):
receive from the

Marcy (39:46):
government.
Despite

Mark (39:48):
knowing that

Marcy (39:48):
Harmon was never eligible for any financial assistance.
Because of her lack of legalmarital

Mark (39:53):
status.

Marcy (39:55):
Garrett was clear

Mark (39:56):
that contrary to

Marcy (39:57):
Martins public assertions, the defense and the
court martial

Mark (40:00):
was calling.
Calvin Phillips, not as acooperator, but

Marcy (40:04):
to

Mark (40:04):
discredit him.
After

Marcy (40:07):
the court Marshall, the jury panel issued Martin, a
dismissal from service based onseveral counts.

Mark (40:12):
that They convicted him

Marcy (40:13):
of.
For officer's a dismissaleffects, benefits and retirement
eligibility.
John home-ec and Hilbert jettestified to their home
locations

Mark (40:24):
and observations

Marcy (40:25):
of the burned

Mark (40:25):
vehicle on November 19th.
Mr.
Homax said he had CCTVsurveillance that only showed
north across his parking

Marcy (40:32):
area.
And did not Cover the Rosetown

Mark (40:34):
road or the dirt road.

Marcy (40:37):
The defense showed smoke blowing from

Mark (40:38):
left to

Marcy (40:39):
right or west to east

Mark (40:41):
across the parking lot at around

Marcy (40:42):
11:50 PM.
Home-ec said it was probablyground fog,

Mark (40:46):
which happens on the farm regularly.
James Matlock was a resident of

Marcy (40:52):
Pembroke who worked on John Homax farm.
James was

Mark (40:55):
a reluctant witness.
After the murders.
James mentioned to Bubba, hisemployer

Marcy (40:59):
and John Homax son that he saw Martin walking around on
the farm.

Mark (41:03):
The Saturday before the murders.
Sometime after

Marcy (41:07):
that Bubba reported what James said

Mark (41:09):
to the police.

Marcy (41:10):
During

Mark (41:10):
testimony.
James looked at an aerial photoof the farm.

Marcy (41:14):
He indicated that he saw Martin walking around in a
specific location near

Mark (41:17):
the woods.
The

Marcy (41:19):
encounter happened as James was

Mark (41:21):
driving a three Wheeler and the distance was about 50
feet.

Marcy (41:24):
James said Martin was wearing a yellow shirt and blue
jeans.
And.
May

Mark (41:27):
have been walking a dog.

Marcy (41:29):
In response.
To a question.
James said that he knows Martin

Mark (41:32):
and doesn't

Marcy (41:32):
like him.
Mentioning

Mark (41:33):
that

Marcy (41:33):
there had been problems with Martin on James property in
the

Mark (41:36):
past.

Marcy (41:38):
Lieutenant Smith described finding Calvin
Phillips

Mark (41:41):
and burn debris in

Marcy (41:43):
the cellar.
Some of the less obviousevidence was described.
There was a long

Mark (41:48):
curl of dark hair on the kitchen

Marcy (41:49):
floor.
There was suspected bloodstains

Mark (41:52):
collected from various places

Marcy (41:54):
in the The kitchen and the enclosed porch.
Samples of stains from thecellar stairs,

Mark (42:00):
the sidewalk,

Marcy (42:01):
the blood patches and Phillips grass were all
collected.

Mark (42:04):
Lieutenant Smith presented video

Marcy (42:06):
clips that showed the comings and goings of the
residents from the rear of theMartin home.
The back

Mark (42:12):
was the only

Marcy (42:12):
area covered by video surveillance system.
Still.
It clearly showed when everyonecame and went by car.
Lieutenant Smith also

Mark (42:21):
presented a video from

Marcy (42:22):
the at and T store in

Mark (42:23):
Hopkinsville on new year's Eve.

Marcy (42:26):
A woman identified as Joan Harmon accompanied by her
three children.
Entered the

Mark (42:31):
store and were held by staff

Marcy (42:32):
at the main counter.
In the video,

Mark (42:35):
Harmon is taken aside by an employee and then she

Marcy (42:38):
and the children leave the store.
Detective noise worthy testifiedthat he was called to the
Hopkins at

Mark (42:44):
and T store

Marcy (42:44):
for Pam Phillips Joan Harmon was gone when

Mark (42:49):
he arrived, but he identified her on

Marcy (42:51):
surveillance footage

Mark (42:53):
while detective Norsworthy was at the at and T store, Joan
Harmon

Marcy (42:56):
and William Stokes tried to call him.
noise worthy, left the store

Mark (43:01):
and drove to Joan Harmon's home.
20 minutes

Marcy (43:03):
away.
In response

Mark (43:05):
to a pointed question.
The

Marcy (43:06):
detective stated that Joan Harmon is not a suspect in
this murder

Mark (43:10):
case.

Marcy (43:11):
The Prosecution showed detective Noyes worthy a photo

Mark (43:14):
of Martins front door

Marcy (43:15):
from the inside.

Mark (43:16):
He had described that the door was

Marcy (43:18):
secured by a newer looking brace bar

Mark (43:20):
that was wedged between

Marcy (43:22):
the door and the floor.

Mark (43:26):
The

Marcy (43:26):
most tedious

Mark (43:27):
part of the trial was the

Marcy (43:28):
forensic result analysis.
for the most part, the evidenceresults were ambiguous.

Mark (43:34):
They did not directly point.
to Martin.
Nor did they exclude him?
Dr.
Jeffrey Springer, a statepathologist

Marcy (43:41):
and medical examiner did

Mark (43:42):
a painstaking

Marcy (43:43):
disassembly of the contents of Pam's car.
Dr.
Springer

Mark (43:47):
was able to identify two clear groupings of

Marcy (43:50):
bones.
Both were identified.
Through familial DNA as PamPhillips in the front and ed
Dan's row in

Mark (43:56):
the backseat.
He

Marcy (43:58):
described the bodies

Mark (43:59):
as being burned up almost as much as you

Marcy (44:01):
can be burned up.
The

Mark (44:04):
results had basically compressed into a heap on the
floorboard.

Marcy (44:08):
Still Dr.
Springer was able

Mark (44:10):
to identify

Marcy (44:11):
different organ tissues as strata

Mark (44:13):
in the mass.

Marcy (44:15):
He found three projectile

Mark (44:16):
fragments in Pam's brain tissue.
And one in her heart

Marcy (44:20):
tissue.
Ed Dan's row had threeprojectile

Mark (44:24):
fragments in his brain tissue.

Marcy (44:26):
And a surgical plate and Ed's remains matched an injury.
He'd.
Had early

Mark (44:30):
in life.

Marcy (44:33):
Dr.
Randall falls

Mark (44:34):
also a state pathologist and medical

Marcy (44:36):
examiner performed

Mark (44:37):
the autopsy on Calvin Phillips.
Calvin suffered

Marcy (44:41):
five gunshot wounds to his left

Mark (44:43):
neck collarbone

Marcy (44:44):
left chest, right chest

Mark (44:46):
and lower left

Marcy (44:47):
chest.
Calvin was also beaten severely.

Mark (44:51):
He'd

Marcy (44:52):
suffered multiple head and.
Face blunt

Mark (44:54):
force injuries, including abrasions,

Marcy (44:57):
lacerations, contusions,

Mark (44:59):
a broken nose, a

Marcy (45:00):
broken jaw, and a lacerated

Mark (45:02):
tongue.

Marcy (45:03):
The doctor determined that

Mark (45:04):
the head and

Marcy (45:05):
face injuries.

Mark (45:06):
were anti mortem

Marcy (45:07):
and.
Peri mortem, meaning that

Mark (45:09):
Calvin was assaulted

Marcy (45:10):
with a blunt object or a fist before or during death.
Dr falls

Mark (45:16):
noted.
that Calvin had no injuries tohis hands or

Marcy (45:19):
arms that might indicate defensive positioning.

Mark (45:23):
some hairs and ed Dan's rose car, where microscopic
matches to the sample of Martinshair.

Marcy (45:30):
Still the

Mark (45:31):
FBI could not make

Marcy (45:32):
a definitive match for several reasons.
The hair

Mark (45:35):
collected from the car was not

Marcy (45:36):
long

Mark (45:36):
enough.

Marcy (45:37):
And there wasn't enough of it.
The loose clump of

Mark (45:39):
hair on the kitchen

Marcy (45:41):
was not Martins based on microscopic comparison, probably
it

Mark (45:45):
belonged to Pam Phillips.

Marcy (45:48):
There was no blood found on any of

Mark (45:50):
the items collected from Martin.

Marcy (45:52):
And no DNA on the dog tag found at the murder scene.
There was not enough DNA on thedog text string for analysis.

Mark (46:02):
The blood sample from the kitchen floor

Marcy (46:04):
and the back

Mark (46:04):
porch were Calvins.
The blue tarp

Marcy (46:06):
had Calvin's blood on it.
As did a white tag from the back

Mark (46:10):
porch.
The bloodstains on the drivewayand

Marcy (46:12):
pavement were Pam.

Mark (46:14):
The

Marcy (46:14):
blood taken from a carpet cutting.
And the kitchen was also PAMsThe blood pools in the side and
backyard grass

Mark (46:21):
where at Dan's rose

Marcy (46:23):
and a hair in one of the tape lifts from Ed's

Mark (46:25):
car also belonged

Marcy (46:26):
To ed.
The ignitable liquids

Mark (46:29):
analysis in the car

Marcy (46:30):
fire was a non event.
The experts testified that if.
They were present.
Ignitable liquids would probablybe completely burned off.
In the center

Mark (46:37):
of a fire that was as hot and

Marcy (46:39):
complete as Pam's car was also a

Mark (46:41):
car fire is often

Marcy (46:43):
fueled by the flammable

Mark (46:44):
liquid in.
The

Marcy (46:44):
gas The cell phone data

Mark (46:47):
continued the pattern of indefinite results.

Marcy (46:50):
The location info

Mark (46:52):
was of limited

Marcy (46:53):
use showing

Mark (46:54):
Martin cell phone was in the general area.

Marcy (46:57):
And that included his home, the murder site and the
Rosetown road scene.
As far as usage during thecritical two

Mark (47:04):
days, Martin cell phone had been used

Marcy (47:06):
regularly,

Mark (47:07):
but there were gaps And

Marcy (47:08):
downtimes.
During these periods, like themorning and evening of November
18th.
The prosecution asserted.
He carried out the murders.
There was suspicious activity onMartin's phone.
Usually he had a repeating

Mark (47:24):
alarm at 6:48 AM

Marcy (47:27):
with top gun

Mark (47:28):
ring

Marcy (47:28):
tone.
What was unusual, was it on the18th?

Mark (47:32):
At 11:27 PM.
An

Marcy (47:34):
alarm was set.
For 1:10 AM on the 19th.
And there was no activity on thecell phone until seven thirty

Mark (47:42):
nine.
On the

Marcy (47:43):
ninth.
No activity means no calls,

Mark (47:47):
no texts and

Marcy (47:48):
no data exchanges.
And analysis of Pam's

Mark (47:52):
phone showed

Marcy (47:53):
that it

Mark (47:53):
had been wiped to factory

Marcy (47:54):
restore.
However, the experts said thatthis could have been intentional
or the result of someone

Mark (47:59):
typing in the wrong password more than 10

Marcy (48:01):
times.
As far as Pam Phillip's phonelocation.
At and T gave information

Mark (48:06):
that the location data

Marcy (48:07):
is unreliable.
What can you said is that thephone was hitting on three
towers at once

Mark (48:12):
in the Pembroke

Marcy (48:13):
and Elkton

Mark (48:14):
areas.
It's worth noting that bothprosecution and

Marcy (48:17):
defense experts made errors in cell phone, data

Mark (48:20):
analysis.
That were corrected just

Marcy (48:22):
before the trial.
Each side pointed out theopposing sides, Mr.

Mark (48:28):
Phone records were obtained

Marcy (48:29):
for Calvin

Mark (48:30):
and Pam

Marcy (48:30):
Phillips.
and

Mark (48:31):
ed Dan's rose

Marcy (48:32):
phones, including

Mark (48:33):
the landline and cell.
These

Marcy (48:36):
searches allowed them to verify

Mark (48:37):
the times and lengths of

Marcy (48:38):
phone calls.
At

Mark (48:40):
5:20 PM.
Pam

Marcy (48:42):
Phillips 80 and T cell called

Mark (48:44):
ed Dan's rose landline.
And they talked for.
Five

Marcy (48:47):
minutes.

Mark (48:48):
At 5

Marcy (48:48):
25, pan Phillips 18

Mark (48:50):
T cell called ed Dan's row cell.
The call us at three seconds,

Marcy (48:54):
but they couldn't verify

Mark (48:55):
it actually

Marcy (48:56):
connected.
At

Mark (48:57):
5:30

Marcy (48:58):
PM.
Pam

Mark (48:59):
Phillips

Marcy (48:59):
landline calls,

Mark (49:00):
Marlene

Marcy (49:00):
LA Rox Landline.
And the call last one minute andfour So.

Mark (49:05):
At 5:30 PM.
Marlene Laura calls, Pam

Marcy (49:08):
Phillips cell.
And the connection

Mark (49:10):
last six seconds.
And at 5:31 PM.
Marlene, the rock

Marcy (49:13):
calls, Pam

Mark (49:14):
Phillips landline, and the connection last seven

Marcy (49:17):
minutes.
Lee Collier

Mark (49:21):
is a

Marcy (49:21):
firearms and tool mark expert who testified for the
prosecution.

Mark (49:25):
For the most part, the bullet analysis followed the
trend

Marcy (49:28):
of other trace analysis.
The experts could not

Mark (49:31):
match evidence directly

Marcy (49:32):
to Martin, nor were they able to exclude Martin.
None of the 22 rounds wereusable for matching to guns due
to deformity.
Or fragmentation.
They had

Mark (49:42):
the same rifle and characteristics

Marcy (49:44):
as Martins 22 weapons,

Mark (49:46):
but it's the

Marcy (49:46):
most.
Common rifling used in the

Mark (49:50):
The physical characteristics of spent

Marcy (49:52):
bullets were consistent with the RWS brand.
22 bullets taken from

Mark (49:56):
Martins property.
But that bullets shape is

Marcy (49:59):
also common.

Mark (50:01):
The bullet

Marcy (50:01):
found under the Phillip stove was also consistent with
the RWS rounds taken.

Mark (50:06):
From Martin.

Marcy (50:07):
The bullets and fragments taken from Calvin

Mark (50:10):
Phillips body

Marcy (50:11):
were very

Mark (50:11):
likely fired from a Glock

Marcy (50:13):
pistol based on

Mark (50:13):
that weapons,

Marcy (50:14):
unique rifling.
Pattern.

Mark (50:16):
The bullets were unique and challenging to match because
they were designed to breakapart and form eight

Marcy (50:22):
distinct wound channels.
The butt end of these bulletshad striation marks.
Sufficient to match two of

Mark (50:29):
them to a

Marcy (50:29):
barrel with

Mark (50:30):
a distinct

Marcy (50:31):
polygon UL.
Rifling pattern

Mark (50:33):
almost exclusively used by clock.
The Glock barrel design isnotorious for not leaving
sufficient marking

Marcy (50:39):
as on bullets that were

Mark (50:40):
provide conclusive identification.
The experts agreed

Marcy (50:44):
on one map.

Mark (50:46):
The 45 casing found under the debris pile on the Phillips
porch had ejection

Marcy (50:50):
markings made by

Mark (50:51):
a Glock model 2145 caliber pistol.

Marcy (50:55):
Seized from Martins

Mark (50:56):
gun safe.

Marcy (50:57):
The primer of that casing also.

Mark (50:59):
Had the distinct Glock

Marcy (51:00):
elliptical firing pin

Mark (51:01):
impression.

Marcy (51:05):
Near the end of the prosecution case.
The

Mark (51:07):
court heard emotion From

Marcy (51:09):
attorneys.
for Joan Harmon and her son,Justin

Mark (51:12):
Harmon.

Marcy (51:13):
They

Mark (51:13):
wanted to assert their Rights

Marcy (51:15):
under the fifth

Mark (51:15):
amendment and.
not be required

Marcy (51:17):
to testify in the

Mark (51:18):
Martin trial.
The assertion was that bothHarmons are potential suspects.
And they are choosing not

Marcy (51:25):
to answer any questions.
They're lawyers went further andsaid that it is

Mark (51:29):
clear that the

Marcy (51:29):
Harmons were being set up

Mark (51:31):
as alternate murderers by the Martin defense camp.
The

Marcy (51:34):
unusual bigamy charge pushed by those same people.
Evidence

Mark (51:38):
they say was planted

Marcy (51:39):
by Martin And public releases

Mark (51:42):
by private detective and defense team members

Marcy (51:44):
indicate the Harmon's legal jeopardy.
They argued that Martin's sixth

Mark (51:49):
amendment, right.
Does not Trump, Joan andJustin's fifth amendment, right?
If Martin wanted

Marcy (51:55):
to claim Joan.
Harmon

Mark (51:56):
was the real murderer.

Marcy (51:58):
He wasn't being barred from doing so.
Neither the prosecution.
Nor the defense was in favor ofexcluding the Harmons from
testifying.

Mark (52:06):
The special prosecutor went further and said she had no
intention of charging.

Marcy (52:10):
Joan Harmon with any crime.
The defense wanted the Harmonsto testify because their

Mark (52:15):
defense is that Joan and Justin are the real murderers
that set Martin up.
In the

Marcy (52:20):
end.
the judge

Mark (52:21):
ruled that the Harmons could

Marcy (52:22):
assert their rights and would not be forced to testify.
The jury was not present forthis hearing.
The Martin defense began withtestimony from Laura Spencer's
children who were in high schoolat the time of the murders.
The kids had moved into Martin'sPembroke home with their mother
in late summer of 2013.

(52:42):
They lived with him for justover two years.
Laura's now adult childrentestified that on November 18th,
2015, they were out of the housein school and later
extracurricular activities.
They didn't return home until9:00 PM.
Both Spencer children gave thesame account saying that when
they arrived home on the nightof the 18th, Martin and their

(53:05):
mother were together in theupstairs den, watching TV.
They said that the rest of theirevening was spent on homework
and social media in their roomsbefore sleeping.
Laura's kids noted that thehouse was old and creaky, and if
Martin had left the house duringthe night and he hadn't, they
would have heard him.

(53:28):
When Laura Spencer took thestand, she gave a similar
account of time as her children.
Laura said she didn't knowanything about the murders when
they happened.
Still, Laura said she wascooperative with the police and
gave them codes for phones anddevices.
Laura was asked to go over whatshe recalled from November 18th
through the 20th in 2015.

(53:49):
Some of her recollections wererefreshed by statements she had
given to police on December 3rd,2015.
Laura said that on November18th, the kids went to school in
the morning and were gone until9:00 PM.
Martin came home at 5:30 PM andhe had flowers to celebrate
their anniversary.
She said that they ate dinner,watch TV, and went to sleep

(54:11):
between 10 and 11:00 PM.
She noticed nothing unusualabout the evening.
Laura recalled that thefollowing day, November 19 was
also typical.
She thinks that she spent mostof the day at home alone.
Martin went to work at 9:00 AM.
He probably came home in theafternoon to drive Laura's

(54:32):
daughter to horse ridinginstructions at 4, about 45
minutes away in Tennessee.
On November 20, Laura said shewas hanging around the house
cleaning and doing laundry.
At around 11:00 AM, a Police,SWAT team suddenly entered the
house.
At first, she didn't know whatwas happening.
Laura said she heard a breakingwindow and someone yelling.

(54:54):
She said she ran out of thehouse, traumatized, saying she
was sure that they were there tokill her.
Laura was emotional as sherecounted this story, shaking
with her hands over her face.
The defense attorney asked whoshe thought was there to kill
her, and Laura cried out"JoanHarmon!" When questioning

(55:14):
continued, Laura revealed thatthe family lived in hotels after
the police search warrant for acouple of weeks.
They had a rental inHopkinsville for awhile, and
they later moved to NorthCarolina.
In one of the last questionsLaura was asked, she said that
it was true that Calvin Phillipswas going to be a witness for
Martin in the court martialMartins, adult daughter, Amanda

(55:39):
Flag, lived with Martin in thePembroke house, when the
marriage to Joan Harmon ended.
Amanda told the jury that Joanand her dad had regularly argued
before the breakup.
During the decisive argument in2012, Martin told Joan that he
wanted a divorce.
Amanda said that Joan toldMartin she would ruin him and

(56:00):
his military.
After that Amanda and her fatherleft the house and had to stay
away for three weeks.
They were allowed to go backafter a court hearing.
They arrived at the South MainStreet house to find that Joan
had taken everything personalproperty and animals.
Amanda said for a time afterthat, Joan had regularly

(56:21):
harassed them.
They found tire slashed and deadanimals in the mailbox.
Catherine Foster was fresh outof law school and a newly minted
Commonwealth's Attorney in 2012,when she prosecuted Joan Harmon
for bigamy.
She said that Martin was thevictim in her case against

(56:41):
Harmon.
Harmon had not followed theprocess required to obtain a
legal divorce decree beforemarrying Martin.
US Army JAG Officer MajorGarrett had called Catherine
Foster about the Martincourt-martial.
Catherine said that MajorGarrett pressured her not to
prosecute Joan Harmon becauseshe was a witness in the Army's

(57:02):
case.
Foster asserted that Garretttried to influence the bigamy
case, and that was unusual andunprofessional.
Still, she admitted on crossexamination, the discussion of
defendants and witnesses byprosecutors from different
jurisdictions was common.
Lisa Petrie testified that shewas the manager of LNR soda bar

(57:26):
in the tiny community of Elkton,Kentucky.
She said that most of theworkers at LNR were locals and
she managed around 25 people,seven to eight on each shift.
One of the waitresses she workedwith was Joan Harmon.
Lisa also knew Joan Harmon fromthe local school where Joan's
kids attended and Lisa helpedout part-time as a teacher's

(57:48):
aid.
Lisa was called to testify bythe defense because of a report
that she had filed with thepolice.
In the police statement, Lisasaid that after the Pembroke
murders, Joan Harmon's demeanorhad changed.
She came to work happy andexcited.
Lisa thought it was strange,disturbing behavior.

(58:10):
Ken Buckner is a homeimprovement and remodeling
contractor who lives and worksin the Pembroke area.
He'd done upgrade projects onboth the Martin and Phillips
homes.
Ken testified that he once sawJoan Harmon carrying a concealed
pistol, and that he worked onthe Phillips home in the weeks
after the murders.

(58:30):
Buckner complained that he hadarrived to find the house open
and equipment moved during theproject on some mornings.
He said he didn't feel safeworking there, so he quit.
On cross examination, theprosecutor asked the Ken about
working on Martin's house.
He said that he had done somework on the front of the house,
which included fixing the frontdoor.

(58:54):
Ken Murray's trucking company,employees Williams Stokes, who
was Joan Harmon's boyfriend atthe time of the murders.
Murray testified that based onhis records on November 18th,
2015, William Stokes took atruckload of lumber from Elkton
to Bowling Green.
This trip generally takes twohours plus 30 minutes to unload.

(59:16):
Stokes logged no other work thatday.
Murray said that he gave theChristian County Sheriff's
Office the schedule documentsfor Stokes after they'd served
him with a subpoena.
Doris Stokes is the brother ofWilliam Stokes.
He was a volunteer firefighterin Christian County for about
seven years, and over that timewent on many call-outs.

(59:39):
On November 19 he responded toboth the Rosetown Road car fire,
and later to Phillip'sresidence.
In further questioning, Dorissaid that he has been friends
with Joan Harmon in the past.
Ed Stokes testified that he isthe brother of Doris and
William, but that he doesn'ttalk to any of his brothers
regularly.

(01:00:00):
Ed worked for Christian CountySheriff's Office for 17 years.
On April 17th, 2013, he wasworking in the Sheriff's Office
when Martin came in with a courtorder to release weapons seized
following the disturbance at theMartin's house.
Ed Stokes had the paperwork forthe transaction and item number
three on the form is a Glock 21,the suspected murder weapon in

(01:00:24):
2015.
Several 22 caliber weapons, anda shotgun were also returned to
Martin at that time.
Ed said that in 2015, he wasalso one of the responding
officers for the Rosetown Roadcar fire, and also went to the
Phillips residence to help withthe search warrant service.
While there Ed was asked by acommander to leave the Phillips

(01:00:45):
house to avoid possible familyconflict because his brother,
William, was in a relationshipwith John Harmon.
Katherine Demps is Martin civilattorney who represented him in
the divorce.
She filed for an annulment ofthe marriage because Joan could
not produce any record of adivorce decree from her first

(01:01:06):
marriage.
It turned out that Harmon wasnot married to Martin because
she'd never divorced her lasthusband, which ultimately ended
and Joan's bigamy conviction.
In 2015, Demps said that shedrafted the document, allowing
power of attorney to LauraSpencer on November 16th, 2015.

(01:01:27):
Demps noted that she and Martincommunicated regularly and
exchanged emails on the morningof November 18, starting at 9:00
AM and into the evening around9:00 PM.
On November 19, they emailedeach other in the morning and
periodically throughout the day,starting at 9:00 AM.
Demps also represented Martinfor part of the court-martial.

(01:01:54):
The defense recalled LieutenantSmith from the Christian County
Sheriff's Office.
They showed him clips of theCCTV video for Martin's home,
focusing on specific clips thathe had not shown in his earlier
presentation.
The defense was able to clarifythat the prosecution case left
out some of Martin's movementson the 18th.

(01:02:15):
Some of these omissions couldhave given the false impression
that Martin returned to thehouse when a corresponding
departure was not shown.
This happened because only onechannel of the multiplex system
was shown to the jury during theprosecution's case.
Basically the defense wasshowing that at best, the police
portrayal in the video isincomplete and at worse,

(01:02:38):
deliberately misleading.
As the defense presentation cameto a close Martin, took the
stand.
He immediately denied anyparticipation in the murders.
Martin story started with himenlisting in the Army.
He served from ranks E1 to E5,and then attended college in an

(01:02:58):
ROTC program.
Upon graduation, Martin receiveda commission, the start of three
years of active duty flyinghelicopters.
He then transferred to the ArmyGuard.
After 9-11, Martin's request toreturn to active duty was
granted.
He served three combat tours inIraq as a Battalion Commander.

(01:03:20):
In 2016, after Martin wasdischarged from the Army, he
wanted to continue working inaviation.
So he went through a fixed-wingtransition course and became an
airline pilot.
The defense attorney asked him aseries of questions centered
around when he lived inPembroke.
Martin said that the remodel ofthe house started right away and
was always in progress while heoccupied it.

(01:03:42):
The front door was warped andnever worked correctly.
So he nailed it in place, hopingeventually it would unwarp.
Martin said the front door wasnever used.
Instead, everything was done outthe back door through the screen
porch.
The house was old and it didn'thave adequate insulation.
So it was cold in the winter.

(01:04:03):
He used a kerosene heater as asupplemental heat source and had
just purchased a new one in thefall of 2015.
November 18th, 2015 was thefirst time he used it.
And that is why he set an alarmthat would wake him up in the
middle of the night so he couldcheck on the heater.
Martin met Joan online.
They were together for nineyears and married for eight.

(01:04:26):
Martin said that towards the endof the relationship, Joan began
to act weird.
She became controlling and henoticed that she was lying.
She changed key points instories about her life that she
had told over the years.
He said, Joan didn't work.
She didn't want to work, whichwas part of the problem.
As things went downhill, theytried counseling, but the

(01:04:47):
problems persisted.
Martin said the marriage withJoan ended in 2012.
Martin described that Joan hadtaken everything except the
heaviest furniture.
He added,"which the copseventually smashed".
Joan even took all the animals.
His personal dog, a Germanshepherd named Sarge was brought
back to him from Joan's by KenBuckner.

(01:05:10):
Sarge had a broken leg and wasobviously malnourished.
The vet told him it was theworst case of abuse he'd ever
seen.
The defense attorney askedMartin questions about the
neighborhood and the neighbors.
He said that his relationshipwith Calvin Phillips was
initially cordial.
They socialized shooting guns inthe Phillip's backyard; went to

(01:05:31):
an antique car festival.
Martin said Joan spent more timewith Calvin than he did.
He knew Pam worked long hoursgoing to work very early and
coming home late Martinreasserted the claim that Calvin
would give testimony at thecourt martial favorable to
Martin.
He said that his privateinvestigator had an interview to
that effect that it had beenbroadcast on a local TV news

(01:05:54):
channel.
This testimony was meant toimply that there was a recorded
interview of Calvin by theprivate investigator.
Martin described Ed as a goodguy who had a regular schedule
out of town.
He also knew that Ed was amusician and played piano well.
The defense attorney reviewedsome of the prosecution
evidence, which Martin generallydismissed, saying the expert

(01:06:16):
testimony showed he was notguilty.
Martin said that the timing ofthe power of attorney was not
suspicious.
He wanted Laura to have it incase anything happened to him.
Martin had issued power ofattorney whenever he was on Army
deployment.
When Martin looked at the dogtag that was found in Phillip's
house, he denied it was everhis.

(01:06:37):
He said he'd had numerous dogtags over the years and had
given some to his kids, but noone else.
He pointed to the string andsaid he would never have one on
a string.
Martin talked about his arrestat the Louisville airport.
He would be the pilot on adeparting flight.
And he was arrested just afterpassing through security.
He was incensed, saying theseamless chaotic.

(01:06:59):
Martin was angry that ithappened in public where
passengers could see what washappening.
The cross examination of Martinbegan with a brief recap of
Martin's time in the Army.
Martin had attended RangerSchool and the prosecutor asked
him to give details about thattraining.
Martin said it was a strenuouscourse that lasted three to four

(01:07:21):
months.
It mainly involved training insmall unit tactics and
leadership while navigatingchallenging terrain.
Questioning turned to Martin'stwo marriages.
Martin said that he was marriedto his first wife, Stacy from
1991 to 2004 and they'd hadthree children.
Stacy asked for a divorce inMarch 2004, but their

(01:07:41):
relationship had been goodsince.
The prosecutor challenged Martinon this assertion, presenting a
copy of a letter that he hadwritten to the State of
Tennessee Child SupportEnforcement.
In the letter, he complainedthat Stacy was calling and
emailing repeatedly threateninghim.
Martin was asked to read themost vitriolic parts of the
letter.
During that part of thetestimony, Martin appeared

(01:08:02):
agitated.
He denied remembering anythingabout the situation or writing
the letter.
Martin had met Joan Harmonthrough an online service around
June 2004.
After they separated, Martinsaid he didn't know where Joan
moved to, but he did see heraround Pembroke from time to
time.
He denied knowing that Joanstayed with the Phillips across

(01:08:22):
the street for some time aftershe moved out of the house.
Martin met Laura Spencer onlinein November within two weeks of
Joan leaving.
Laura Spencer had been justwidowed in October 2012.
When the prosecutor asked Martinabout what he knew about Calvin
Phillips and his role in thecourt-marshall, Martin was
evasive denying knowing theextent of Calvin's role.

(01:08:44):
He did assert that Calvin wasgoing to testify for him,
clearly meaning that Calvinwould give testimony favorable
to Martin's case.
The prosecutor challenged him onthis, but Martin was insistent
and denied his defense strategywas to discredit Calvin.
The prosecutor then handedMartin a copy of the defense's
reasoning for calling Phillipssubmitted before the

(01:09:05):
court-marshall.
Martin was asked to read it, andit clearly stated that Calvin
was being summoned to refuteinconsistent statements that he
had made.
The defense alleged that Calvinwas one of the instigators in
the investigation and had amotive to fabricate evidence.
In follow-up questioning Martinadmitted that Calvin was
subpoenaed each time the courtmartial was reset.

(01:09:26):
He also knew that the trial wasgoing to proceed on December
1st.
On November 19th, Martin noticedpolice activity around the
Phillip's house.
He said he talked to his lawyerand his private investigator
that afternoon.
The private investigator askedhim about his weapons.
Usually, Martin kept a Glock 45,his 22 and a 38 in the back
passenger area of his truck.

(01:09:48):
The PI told him to move hisGlock from the truck to the
safe, because Joan Harmon mightstill have a key to the truck.
Martin denied that any of hisguns had been used.
He further disputed that theexperts had left open the
possibility that one of his 22sfired the fatal bullets, but
acknowledged that the casing onthe porch was from his Glock.

(01:10:09):
He insisted that that casing wasplanted evidence.
At the end of the testimony in acriminal trial, each side can
sum up and draw conclusions fromthe body of information
presented.
The defense goes first.
In the Martin trial, the defenseattorney gave a lengthy oration
along a simple theme.
There was no real evidence.

(01:10:30):
And where evidence existed, ithad been planted by Joan Harmon,
or was ordinary behaviorinterpreted to look sinister.
The defense attorneys showedJohn Homack's surveillance video
of his parking area.
The north face and camerasshowed wisps of white smoke from
left to right around 11:50 PM.
The defense asserted that It wasa smoke from the car fire that

(01:10:52):
happened two hours before theprosecution presented.
The defense used the example ofMartin being very organized to
assert that he couldn't havecommitted the crime because
whoever did was sloppy.
They went back to the scenerepeatedly, moving things
around.
Martin wouldn't do those things.
And the final point the defensemade was that it didn't make

(01:11:12):
sense that Martin would committhe crime because he had no
motive.
Calvin wasn't going to testifyagainst him.
Instead, he would flip andtestify in favor of the defense
Prosecution's closing wasfocused on why and how Martin
killed three of his neighbors.
Martin had the means, theopportunity, and the motive.

(01:11:35):
No one else did the crimebecause no one else needed or
wanted to.
For motive, Martin faced a fastapproaching court-martial that
would end his military career.
He had hired two privateinvestigators to dig up dirt to
trash the witnesses and stop thetrial.
And they'd been unsuccessful.
Another motivating factor wasthat Martin wanted revenge.

(01:11:57):
The neighbor, a fellow Army guyliving just across the street
had betrayed him by helping Joanmove out.
The disloyalty was compoundedwhen Calvin turned over evidence
to the FBI.
Calvin sensed this when he toldpeople he knew that he thought
Martin would try to harm him.
Martin had the means to carryout the murders, not only in

(01:12:19):
terms of equipment, but alsoknow-how.
The prosecution presented theMartin defense as a made-up
conspiracy.
Joan Harmon and William Stokesare diversions.
There was no conspiracy by theStokes brothers, no police
conspiracy, no prosecutorialconspiracy, no conspiracy by the
Phillips family against Martin.

(01:12:40):
The crime was all about Martinkilling Calvin as revenge and to
keep him from testifying.
The murders of Pam and Ed werejust collateral damage.
The defense's assertion thatthere's no evidence was wrong.
The prosecutor said that thedefense had manufactured an
answer for every question.

(01:13:10):
mark is here, and we're going todiscuss this case.
And after all of that, what wasthe verdict in the murder trial?

Mark (01:13:17):
Martin was guilty and all charges, including several
aggravators.

Marcy (01:13:22):
And the sentence?

Mark (01:13:24):
He got life without parole on the multiple murder counts
and max sentences on the otherlesser counts.

Marcy (01:13:31):
Talk about why you chose to cover this crime.

Mark (01:13:35):
It pinged my radar for three reasons.
First, the arrest coverage.
Martin was an airline pilotarrested in uniform.
as he was about to board aflight.
I have a bunch of pilots in myfamily.
I've been surrounded by pilotsmy whole life.
My grandfather was an Air Forcepilot who flew in Vietnam and
for an airline.
My dad was in the Air Force.

(01:13:55):
I lived on an Air Force baseshas growing up.
I got a private pilot's licensefrom my grandfather's flight
school before I was 18.
So initially I was like an Armyofficer?
An airline pilot?
A triple murderer?
That doesn't sound right.
Second.
I recently bought a farm inKentucky.
So I'm interested in what lawenforcement is doing here.

(01:14:16):
And third, when I startedreading about the case, the
controversies were like a ripcurrent that pulled me deeper
and deeper in.

Marcy (01:14:24):
Let's talk about those controversies.
Martin got really bent out ofshape about when and where he
was arrested.
And his accusation was that thepolice and politicians made this
arrest for maximum visibility,like political grandstand.

Mark (01:14:38):
Yeah, it might look like that, but here's why I don't
think that criticism islegitimate.
At the time of his arrest.
He was living in North Carolina.
He was arrested when he wasflying out of the airport in
Louisville, Kentucky.
That avoided the necessity of anextradition.
As far as the accusation thatthe arrest was meant to be
public embarrassing or a publicspectacle, I can tell you if I
were making this arrest, I wouldhave done it the same way.

(01:15:01):
Think about it, you know wherehe's going to be, when he's
going to be there.
And he just went through asecurity screening.
The very public arrest isn'toptimum, but it never gets
better than knowing whensomebody's there, and that that
target has been just screened inhis unarmed.

Marcy (01:15:18):
In the months after the murders, the Phillips family
became increasingly concernedthat there was no progress on
the case.
So they began contacting peoplethey thought could help.
What do you think about thatkind of influence in an
investigation?

Mark (01:15:32):
Yeah, I think it's understandable.
Think about it from theirperspective, you know, they're
going through the house,cleaning it out and they're
finding multiple pieces ofevidence just laying around It
had to shake their confidence inthe investigators, particularly
as time pass and nothing washappening.
So I've handled investigationsthat had victim pressure, you
know, almost any majorinvestigation has victim

(01:15:53):
pressure, and some that hadpolitical pressure.
I've also had cases that died onthe vine cases where you're
missing that compelling piece.
The pressure is just part of thejob.
The real problem for aninvestigator is gathering enough
evidence so you can sell aprosecutor on its success.
That's the dying on the vinepart.
A good investigator- prosecutorrelationship is one of mutual

(01:16:15):
trust and respect.
Some cases never get off theground, but for those, where I
was approaching critical mass, Iwould take the file to the DA's
office and make the pitch.
The response was often, youknow, I need you to get this or
go nail down that, make sure thewitnesses are available.
It was always a negotiation.
And you could tell when theprosecutors were getting
excited, the ones that gotexcited were the ones you loved

(01:16:38):
as a investigator.

Marcy (01:16:40):
So the prosecutors in this case couldn't have been
happy about the missed evidence.

Mark (01:16:44):
No, I'm assuming that was part of the delay, trying to
sort all that out, that and thewait for an analysis of all the,
evidence.

Marcy (01:16:53):
You found the victim's family testimony very
sympathetic.
Uh, then the defense attorneymade snide comments about them
hiring a New York city attorneyand talking to politicians.
Do you think that was aneffective ploy for the defense?

Mark (01:17:08):
Yeah.
The political controversy soundsgood if you don't get into the
details.
Matt Phillips met with, who wasthen the Kentucky Attorney
General Andy Beshear, talkedabout the case with him.
By the time of the trial, AndyBeshear became Governor.
The implication for the peoplethat believe in this controversy
was that Democrat, Andy Beshearrode this case into the

(01:17:29):
Governor's mansion.
That sounds good.
But the next Attorney General,Daniel Cameron who's a
Republican, and oversaw theprosecution of this case.
Well, he's definitely not asupporter of Governor Andy
Beshear.
He could have dismissed thecase, but he didn't.
The case continued onPolitically, a case like this
can be a double-edged sword.
Was charging Martin a popularmove?

(01:17:50):
I don't know.
If a case is a rushed piece ofcrap and there's an acquittal,
does a politician look bad?
I don't know.

Marcy (01:17:57):
The defense put forth a theory about a grand conspiracy
by the real murderers.
Can you explain a little bitmore about that?

Mark (01:18:04):
The defense and supporters have run a very public campaign
and the conspiracy goes likethis: Joan Harmon, and her
boyfriend, William Stokes,committed the murders to a) pin
them on Martin in the effort toseek retribution and ruin his
life, or b) silence CalvinPhillips, who is going to change
his testimony in the upcomingcourt-martial.

(01:18:25):
In this scenario, Joan Harmonneeded a successful
court-martial to collectgovernment money.
An essential part of thisconspiracy is that to get away
with the crimes, William Stokesenlisted his brothers both in
the Sheriff's department and thefire department to influence
their respective organizations.
Conspiracy was a key element ofthe defense.
And I'll talk more about itseffects later.

Marcy (01:18:49):
Many of the questions I initially had with this case had
to do with the evidence thateither wasn't found or found in
a wonky way.
So is the evidence a problem inthis case?

Mark (01:18:59):
Yes, it's true there were evidence problems in this
investigation.
Some of the things that aremissing are pretty basic.
So that's true.
There are things that reallydidn't come up in the court that
I was surprised about.
I was surprised that they wereable to get a search warrant for
Martin's house on day two,seemingly without interviewing
him.
He was the obvious suspect, butsuspicion isn't enough.

(01:19:20):
There are a lot of strongsuspects in cases whose homes
are never searched becauseprobable cause does not exist.

Marcy (01:19:28):
The police didn't interview Martin before the
search warrants?

Mark (01:19:32):
I don't think so.
And the day of the searchwarrants day two of the
investigation, they had himdetained on base.
According to Martin, he wastaken to a remote location and
starved.
There were some basic thingsthat procedurally were different
than the way I think mostinvestigations would be run.

Marcy (01:19:47):
Can you give us an example of that?

Mark (01:19:50):
Going through a suspect's house gets their attention.
It's a perfect time to sit themdown and say, Hey, give us your
side of the story.
We might've missed.
You can get a read on thesubject, even if he doesn't give
an interview.
And if he does, you have himpinned to a basic story.
There's no indication that thathappened from the trial
testimony and you should seequestioning that indicates other

(01:20:10):
basic preliminary evidencegathering if that happened.

Marcy (01:20:16):
What else do you think was missing?

Mark (01:20:18):
The other thing that gets a suspect's attention is a body
search warrant.
In a case like this you'd wantto take over all photographs of
the suspect's body and obtainDNA from the get go.
As the detective, you're tryingto say to the suspect, a judge
has found probable cause thatallows us to search your house
and scrutinize your body.
Let's talk.
Keep in mind, Calvin was badlybeaten.

(01:20:39):
We need to know what thedefendant's hands and arms look
like.
If you have a suspect withcorresponding injuries, you
gather that evidence.
He's also more inclined to giveyou a bullshit story about how
suspicious bruises happened.
Bullshit's okay.
Any story pins him in.
If on the other hand, there areno injuries, this is a detailed

(01:21:00):
to be exploited by defense.
In this case, those basic photoswere not used by either side in
the presentation.
I suspect those photos don'texist and that's a problem.

Marcy (01:21:12):
Do you have any idea why those steps weren't taken?

Mark (01:21:16):
I'm not certain, there was some mention of staffing and
support problems early in thetestimony.
It could be as simple as theywere overwhelmed.
In a 36 hour period, adepartment that doesn't handle
many multi-victim, multi-scenecrimes found itself with three
houses, three bodies, two carsto process.
And I'm sure there was a senseof urgency to get to the
suspect's home before theevidence was lost.

(01:21:38):
The problem is with too muchhaste, you miss things like the
dog tag, like the remainingcasing, and like the bullet that
was loose under the stove.
I mean, those things weren't inthe peripheral area of the
house, they were found justwhere you would expect to find
them.
My department, with severalhundred officers to support a
large crime scene team wouldprobably have taken several days
to meticulously sift througheverything.

(01:22:01):
There may not have been thosekinds of resources available
here for that kind of detail.

Marcy (01:22:06):
The defense made an issue of the prosecution's
presentation of video evidence.
What was the big deal there?

Mark (01:22:13):
That was an embarrassment for the prosecution.
It made it look like they wereintentionally excluding details
to mislead the jury, whenprobably it was just a technical
misunderstanding.
Video systems are kind of likecomputer programs, they can all
have the same consistent way ofusing them, and sometimes little
details can be frustratinglydifferent.
I think in the prosecution'scase, Lieutenant Smith, maybe

(01:22:34):
didn't have a completeunderstanding of the system and
miss part of the recordings.
In my cases I would consult withother officers who are experts
in video systems.
Sometimes we'd have to gooutside sometimes even to the
manufacturer.
Over the years, I developedseveral civilian contacts who
I'd consult in different areas.
I had a jeweler, an art expert,a local video and film producer.

(01:22:57):
Those are the ones that come tomind.

Marcy (01:22:59):
So that's like an informant.
Did you have to pay them?

Mark (01:23:03):
Mostly they do it for free.
The jeweler I knew like cops.
He had an uncle from out ofstate who was a Sheriff's
Deputy.
They'd mainly give you anopinion on what you're looking
at for free in exchange for theinteresting story.
And if their testimony is neededby the DA, say for court, they
had a contract procedure forthat

Marcy (01:23:24):
During the closing argument, the defense said that
the trial never should havehappened because of the
indictment was bad.
So can you explain a little bitabout that?

Mark (01:23:33):
Yes.
In the trial, the defense made abig deal about erroneous
technical information, cell datathat was presented to the grand
jury.
The defense's assertion was thatif accurate information had been
given the grand jury neverwould've indicted.
I'm really surprised the judgeallowed them to say that without
a correction.
In reality, a factually flawedindictment, I mean, flawed in a

(01:23:57):
meaningful way, must becorrected either with a
dismissal or a re indictment.

Marcy (01:24:02):
The defense said that the shell casing, a critical piece
of evidence, was planted.
What do you think about that?
And is it tainted?

Mark (01:24:11):
The shellcasing, the defense is not disputing that
the casing was fired fromMartins Glock 21.
The dispute was what that pieceof evidence means.
Here's some, of the problemswith that casing as evidence: It
could have been fired anywhere,at any time, and then planted
the scene.
The defense asserts that JoanHarmon could have accessed the
Glock because it was unsecuredin Martin's truck.

(01:24:33):
The murder scene was accessibleand unattended for most of the
five months between the killingsand the casing's recovery.
In addition, several people hadaccess to the scene: the Durham
family, because they were takingcare of the house, Ken Buckner,
the handyman, he said thathouse, or the porch was not
secure.
Also the casing could have beenthrown through the open lattice
on the porch.

(01:24:53):
In this case, whether evidenceis dismissed or except is
completely up to the jury andhow they feel about it, they
obviously didn't buy that thecasing was planted, but that it
had been there waiting to befound the whole time.
That piece of evidence is alinchpin because most of the gun
forensic testimony was eitherinconclusive or leaned
positively toward the defense.

(01:25:15):
Logically.
If the casing was planted, itprobably would have been soon
after the murders.

Marcy (01:25:20):
Why is that?

Mark (01:25:21):
People who plan evidence want to tell a story that's
different from the one they knowas fact.
You can't just go placing randomevidence around a crime scene.
Early in my career, I was theresponding officer, in a murder
case that involved a stagedscene.
The staged evidence pointed in adirection that was inconsistent
with other in alterableevidence.
In this case, the evidence thatthe defense is saying is staged

(01:25:43):
is ambiguous.
If the scene was staged, thenwhy clean up the casings?
Why burn the bodies?

Marcy (01:25:49):
So do you think the dog tag was planted?

Mark (01:25:53):
If this were a stage piece of evidence, I would think it
would have been planted orplaced differently under, around
the body.
Something more direct, a clearerstatement then way up high on a
shelf in the back.
I suspect this was incidental.
Maybe it was left behind whenJoan Harmon moved across the
street.
The interesting thing.
Is that Martin made a big dealabout how he would have never

(01:26:14):
wear anything on a string, butin post-conviction shots, in an
orange jumpsuit, he's wearing awooden cross and the cheap
looking string.
Big picture in this case, I seean attempt to cover up and
divert.
I don't see the kind of evidenceplacement you might see in a
staged scene.

Marcy (01:26:31):
So you don't think anything in this case was
staged?

Mark (01:26:35):
Oh, I do.
I do think things were stagedand that's the next controversy.
But, let me be clear, thestaging in this case was not
what is billed by the defense.
It's the drawing of attentionaway from the scene that's the
staging.
The killer could have killed thethree victims, left them there,
hidden them from view and walkedaway.
They could have all been in thecellar.
What happens instead wasdiversion, the delay, the

(01:26:57):
attempt to distract away fromthe truth and the location, And
that led to the nextcontroversy.

Marcy (01:27:03):
Ahhh! Joan Harmon!

Mark (01:27:05):
Here's what we know.
The police are satisfied thatJoan Harmon is not a suspect.
The prosecutor wanted to hearher testimony and said she had
no intention of charging theHarmon's.
What Joan Harmon knows is thather ex-husband has repeatedly
and very publicly accused her ofthe murder and that he planted
evidence to frame her.

Marcy (01:27:28):
Yeah, much hay has been made about Joan Harmon taking
Pam's phone to the AT&T store.
And it was a really big questionfor me going into this case.
So how did Joan get the phone?

Mark (01:27:39):
And the trial, there were some mentions of the phone that
are significant.
We know Pam used it immediatelybefore her death.
We know that the phone came intoJoan's possession within a month
of the murders.

Marcy (01:27:52):
We don't know what Joan told the police, but it can be
reasonably sure that she had analibi that satisfied them.
That she's not the murderer.

Mark (01:27:59):
Yes.
And based on what the prosecutorsaid in her closing statement,
the phone was found aroundJoan's property.
Remember what I said aboutstaged evidence?
It is identifiable as theevidence that stands out, that
deflects or contradicts what therest of the evidence is telling
you.
The murderer didn't take thevictim's phone to the apple
store.
She had an alibi.

(01:28:19):
That's why they had to pull inWilliam Stokes and his brothers
to suggest they're all involved.

Marcy (01:28:25):
Can you imagine what that experience was like for her at
the store, with the phone?

Mark (01:28:30):
Like something out of a book.

Imagine this (01:28:32):
a month ago, you suspect that your husband killed
three of your neighbors.
Two of them were the people thathelped you move out.
Horrifying.
Seemingly unrelated, one of yourkids found an iPhone in the
backseat of the car, on yourporch, whatever.
You try to open the phone whosee whose it might be.
No luck, no one reaches outasking if you have their iPhone,

(01:28:56):
if they left it at your house.
So one day you're out runningerrands, you take that pesky
unclaimed iPhone in and boom,the trap is sprung.
So what happened is immediatelyobvious to you, your ex is the
murder and he has set you up.
What'd you do?
Well, you do what she did.
You call the police.
If what Harman is saying istrue, evidence was planted.

(01:29:19):
The case was being made to gether charged with a triple
murder.
She's already been convicted ofbigamy, something that's almost
never charged.
She doesn't want to fall furtherinto Martin's trap.
So she decides to plead thefifth.

Marcy (01:29:33):
The prosecutor wanted their testimony.
Why didn't they just set up animmunity deal?

Mark (01:29:38):
Prosecutors are hesitant to hand out immunity.
It can have the appearance to ajury under questioning of
impropriety.
This is one of the areas I thinkmight be reversed on appeal.
And if that's the case, theprosecutor might have to offer
immunity.
The Harmon's testimony won't bethe boone the defense is
presenting.
When Joan Harmon doesn't turnout to be a fire-breathing

(01:29:59):
dragon.
The second jury would likely befaced with the same basic facts
as the first boat, the addedtestimony that Martin planted
the phone trap.

Marcy (01:30:09):
So what aspects of this case do you think are the
biggest problem for the defense?

Mark (01:30:16):
There's obvious overkill in this case.
I don't think the prosecutionuses this as effectively as they
could have.
I was once a case officer for ashooting where a guy was beaten
badly after he was shot.
It's not common in myexperience.
I mean, most of the time blowingholes in somebody is enough
Calvin's shot five times andthen had his jaw and nose
broken.

(01:30:37):
So the real question is who ismotivated with that much anger?
Just as a side note, theprosecutor opined that Calvin's
facial injuries were from pistolwhipping with the butt of the
Glock.
I agree it was probably hit withsomething, but this is the kind
of lack of evidence detail Imentioned earlier.
A pistol whipping should leavedistinct pattern injuries.

(01:31:00):
There should also be DNA tissueleft on the pistol.
I mean, there are a lot ofplaces that gun might retain
DNA, even after a thoroughcleaning.
But a Glock is a bad gun to do apistol whipping with.
The lower receiver is a plasticpolymer.
It's very durable, but if you gohittin' a guy you're likely to
have a base plate failure.
I've seen it happen.
When it happens, the bottom ofyour magazine falls off and all

(01:31:22):
of your bullets are injecteddown into the ground.
So if I were to guess whatcaused the facial injuries based
on what happened?
I'm thinking a foot.
It makes sense.
After being shot five times,Calvin was likely to be down,
but there again, you're lookingfor pattern injuries and the ME
didn't identify any, so whoknows what caused the damage.

Marcy (01:31:43):
Can you talk a little bit more about pattern injuries?
What would, what kind of thingswould you expect to see?

Mark (01:31:48):
So the case I mentioned is a good example.
The boy was shot multiple times,right on the well-lit street.
The gang bangers who shot himkicked him over and over again.
They knew they were beingwatched because both sides of
the street were lined withmultiple level apartment
buildings.
So they were sending a message.
They were intimidating all thewitnesses.
The pattern injuries you expectto see in something like that,

(01:32:11):
are shoe, shoe impressions, theedge of a soul, a heel.
In some circumstances you mightsee a logo or a shoelace
pattern, based on how the victimwas kicked.
And if the skin was exposed.
You know, in that case it waswitness intimidation.
But in the Martin case, I thinkhe's probably kicked, because
he's on the ground and, abeating with hands on the ground
is probably gonna createinjuries to your hands.

(01:32:34):
It just makes sense that kindof, that extensive amount of
damage is probably a foot.
Unfortunately we don't know.

Marcy (01:32:40):
Are there other aspects of the crime that are a problem
for the defense?

Mark (01:32:45):
Yeah, it was a problem for the defense that none of the
forensics let Martin off thehook.
But there's a reason, like thecar and the bodies were burnt to
a crisp.
Everyone could see that lookedat the photos could see why the
trace evidence was lackingthere.
In other areas, the crime scenehad been cleaned.
So we don't have the evidence.
The jury could see that therewas a lack of evidence in a lot
of respect because it had beencleaned up.

(01:33:09):
At the same time, the cleanuptells you something about that
killer.
That he's organized, meticulous.

Marcy (01:33:15):
What about the defense timeline?
Were they effective and theassertion that he could not have
done the crime?

Mark (01:33:22):
No.
One of the things that makesthis case provable is the tight
timeline.
We know about when Calvin waskilled.
We know exactly when the othertwo were shot.
The problem for the defense isthat Martin was available for
what the prosecution says werethe critical times on November
18th.
The defense timeline weirdlyfocuses on the 19th.

(01:33:44):
I think the defense was relyingon jury confusion between the
18th, 19th, and 20th.
The fact is there's unallocatedtime at critical points.
The defense counter was, he wasapparently busy leading a normal
life.

Marcy (01:33:59):
So they found a power of attorney in Martin's safe.
Why do you think that wassignificant?

Mark (01:34:05):
I know from deploying with the Marines about, you know, you
get personally prepared for thetime you're away.
Martin, during his testimonysaid it himself, he'd gotten the
power of attorney in the past.
When deploying.
To me the power of attorneytiming is telling.
He was preparing for a mission.
He knows he's about to committhe worst crime and he's
planning for contingencies likebeing captured.

Marcy (01:34:26):
Speaking of planning ahead, do you think that the
murders went as Martin expected?

Mark (01:34:30):
I think Calvin's murder went as expected, but Martin
thought the house would burndown.
I think the rest of their crimewas literally shoot on the fly.
The defense attorney said ithimself.
Whoever did this with sloppy,went back to the scene over and
over again.
Things, the car position keepchanging.
The people committing thesecrimes are going in and out
moving things.

(01:34:51):
He's right.
The takeaway from this is thatthe murderer had access over a
long period of time.
Had time to assess and adjust.
Who had that kind of time andaccess?
It was Martin.
He had a front row seat to themurder scene.

Marcy (01:35:06):
And why do you think the bodies were moved away from the
scene and why the car fire?

Mark (01:35:11):
I think Martin attempted to move them all away, but
couldn't.
This is based on the descriptionof Calvin's body upon discovery.
I'm thinking why would anybodyflip and move a body in full
rigor?
Cops aren't going to do that.
Neither are medic.
The original fire, and later themovement of the bodies, serve

three purposes (01:35:27):
to delay discovery, to cast suspicion
away from the immediate area andto destroy evidence that would
link to the killer.
Both cars were moved because ithad to appear no one was at the
houses.
Why weren't the cars dumpedfurther away?
Because the distance to theburns scene is close enough to

(01:35:47):
traverse on foot in a shorttime.

Marcy (01:35:52):
Which brings me to the defense video, where they showed
smoke on Rosetown Road at 11:50PM on the 18th.
And they present that, thatdisputes the prosecution
timeline.
What are your thoughts?

Mark (01:36:04):
John Homac, the farmer, had a video camera that covered
his parking lot.
In cross examination testimony.
He said that he thought thesmoke was ground fog.
Actually, you can figure out thetruth of this by looking at the
map and the video.
The camera's north facing.
The smoke or fog crosses fromleft to right, which is west to

(01:36:24):
east.
The car burning scene would havebeen a fair distance east and a
little south.
So the smoke in the video wasblowing toward the area of the
fire.
Not from it.
It was ground fog, just like thefarmer sai.
I'm surprised the prosecutiondidn't address this more
completely.

Marcy (01:36:44):
What do you think was the biggest defense mistake?

Mark (01:36:48):
Not banging on the cops.
Let me tell you a story about aprosecutor I worked with.
Pam was a good prosecutor frommy city.
I went to trial with her a fewtimes.
She was formidable, aggressive,always prepared, a little
tightly wrapped, but loved bypolice.
The kind of person that takeswork home.

(01:37:09):
One night, Pam calls me wantingto talk about the case.
I'm like Pam, it's 3:00 AM wehave a trial in the morning, go
to bed.
She says,"I can't sleep.
I'm getting ready." Thatenthusiasm was what made her
great to work.
After a couple of years, shewent to private practice,
defense work.

(01:37:29):
Right?
Her powers for good were goingto be twisted to the needs of
the dark side.
Not too long after that, I'msitting in a hallway waiting to
go into a courtroom.
Pam comes out of one of theother rooms.
She looks at me and rushes over.
She says,"Mark, tell Pollockthat he didn't do anything
wrong.
Tell him, I'm sorry.
It's just my job now.
And even if there's nothingwrong with the case, I have to

(01:37:50):
beat on the officer." Pollockwas a friend of mine and academy
mate.
Later, Pollock said that beingin trial against Pam was like
having been eaten by Old Yeller.
The point is a tried and truedefense is to attack the
credibility of theinvestigation.

(01:38:12):
Attack the competence of theofficers.
It's a defense that works.
Just ask OJ Simpson.

Marcy (01:38:19):
You think the defense should have attacked the
officers more?
Why do you think they didn't?

Mark (01:38:23):
The defense had a choice between brutalizing the
investigation, and there's adeep well of flaws to choose
from, or using the approach thepolice did a fine job and missed
nothing because the evidencejust wasn't there to find.
That it was planted after thesearch.
They chose the latter.
And I think it was a mistake.
If the defense had played itright, it is possible that the

(01:38:43):
crime scene officers would denythey missed anything and
therefore support the idea thatevidence had to be planted.
You can imagine that line ofquestioning.
Who searched the kitchen?
Who's responsible for missingthe bullet under the stove?
What?
Nobody missed the bullet underthe stove?
Then it must be planted!

Marcy (01:38:59):
Is there another example of that?

Mark (01:39:02):
Yes.
The prosecution omittingpertinent video evidence was a
problem that was not fullyexploited by the defense.
I thought at the time that thismistake could destroy the trust
between prosecutors and thejury.
The defense pointed this out,but it just wasn't hammered
home.

Marcy (01:39:18):
If the problems with the evidence didn't sink the
prosecution, what do you thinkkept it afloat?

Mark (01:39:22):
I think that this case, the verdict was determined by
the witnesses.
The prosecution witnesses werejust better, more authentic,
more believable.
Take Penny Cayce, the lady whoworked in the bank with Pam
Phillips.
Penny had a long story.
She said that she knows exactlywhen she and Pam talked about
the court martial and Martin.
It was on November 16th becausethat was the anniversary of her

(01:39:45):
father's death.
She said that Pam moved herworkstation into Penny's office
so that Penny wouldn't have tospend the day alone.
When Penny told that story, itwas very credible.
It also humanized the victim.
Same thing for Matt Phillips andDiana Phillips.
They were great witnesses.
They went through their processin a very believable way.

(01:40:07):
If you listen to them, you hadto be thinking, yeah, what would
I do?
That's how it would be if mysibling was killed.
How would I handle that?
And how would I get the answersI needed?
RIght then, the defense attorneyswings in with accusations of
New York attorneys and politicalmotivations.
And talk about being tone deaf.
The least reliable of theprosecution witnesses was James

(01:40:28):
Matlock because his observationsweren't reported until just
before the trial and hisrecollections at the time was
disputed by Martin's phonerecords.
On the other hand, he claimed toknow Martin and the defense made
a big deal about how Martinwalked his dog all over the
place and how the prosecutionwas making that sound sinister.
You know, that assertion fromthe defense kind of sabotaged

(01:40:50):
their own efforts to undermineMatlock's testimony.

Marcy (01:40:55):
Can I just mention that I have really mixed feelings about
Marlene Larock?
On one hand, I feel like she isvery lucky that she wasn't
victim number four.
But on the other hand, I'mhaving trouble understanding why
she was so concerned that shewent back to the house at 7:00
PM.
Never made contact with anybody,but then went home and never
took it any further.

(01:41:16):
She never called the police.
What do you think about that?

Mark (01:41:21):
I think she just rationalized the suspicious
parts away.
There's a famous trainer inpolice and military circles
named Jeff Cooper.
He has a system of situationalawareness based on colors.
The system starts with white,which is low-level awareness of
any threat and progresses isupward to yellow, orange and
red.
Yellow being mildly aware ormonitoring a potential threat

(01:41:42):
and red, being fully aware andengaged in the fight.
I'd say Mrs.
Laura's situational awarenessnever left a white that day.

Marcy (01:41:52):
Okay, so this might be related to that.
The Phillips clearly had a lotof guns in their home and not
just in a safe or in a drawer,but laying out as if they
expected there might be trouble.
Why didn't they use one of them?

Mark (01:42:05):
Yeah.
I was amazed at how all thevictims had ready access to
firearms, but didn't engage withthem.
I think the guns lying aroundthe tables is a clear indication
of the threat that Phillips werefeeling.
Your question is interesting.
I once went to a call of a fightinvolving weapons.
It turned out to be a guy with asteel pipe who had beaten the
crap out of a guy who pulled agun.

(01:42:26):
I interviewed the guy with thepipe.
I pointed out there was prettybrave or stupid.
He said"a gun does you no goodif you don't have the conviction
to use it." Man are those deepwords.
The caveat to that is he couldhave easily been a guy holding a
pipe at a gun fight.
And I'm not trying to castaspersions on the victims here.
These people did not live thelives of gunfighters.

(01:42:46):
Nor should they have to.
I'm saying that being preparedwith the right equipment is not
always enough.

Marcy (01:42:56):
You said the prosecution witnesses were better.
So are you saying that thedefense witnesses were lying?

Mark (01:43:03):
No, not at all.
They just weren't as believablein their assertions or that
their assertions had a vailedmotivation, or they just didn't
provide pertinent testimony.
The Spencer children wereimpeached by the security camera
recordings.
The children said that Martindidn't leave the house all
night.
The video clearly showsotherwise.
This damaged Martin's alibi.

(01:43:23):
The same is true of mark ofLaura Spencer, a professional
woman who should have made afabulous witness and did for
some of her testimony.
Not only was the alibi damage bythe video, but her dramatic
assertion that she thought JoanHarmon was there to kill her
when the SWAT team was coming inwas jarring.
It damaged her credibility.

(01:43:44):
She also testified the CalvinPhillip was going to testify on
Martin's behalf.
Her willingness to go along withthis, obviously misleading
characterization, makes hertestimony suspect.

Marcy (01:43:54):
Can you explain how people living in a house could
not be aware when somebody isleaving the property?

Mark (01:43:59):
Yeah.
This might seem unthinkable ifyou're in an urban environment,
in a smaller house, smallproperty or apartment.
In those situations, you have toknow when somebody leaves, but
it isn't necessarily true.
The distance between Martin andPhillips, houses, isn't huge.
It's like 200 feet.
Martin's property was 2.5 acres.
The CCTV showed he was in andout of the house regularly.

(01:44:23):
I live on a farm now.
The distance between my houseand the barn is about the same
as the distance between thehouses on South Main Street.
I could go to the barn or almostanywhere else on the property
without anyone knowing where Iwas.
That is in fact common.
We use cell phones to find eachother sometimes.

Marcy (01:44:41):
Much has been made of Joan Harmon, being a bigamist.
The defense called theCommonwealth Attorney to talk
about it.

Mark (01:44:48):
And I don't think it went well for her.
The reality is this kind ofbigamy is almost never charged
unless it involves a scam orother illegal act.
It's actually, from what I read,it's not super common, but it's
not uncommon.
People just don't get, the orderof, divorce.
In this case, there was noapparent reason for Joan Harmon
to not have gotten the divorcecertified by the judge.

(01:45:10):
And if she had, she would havebeen due all the benefits from
the marriage to Martin.
If anyone was scammed, she didit to herself by not finalizing
the divorce.
The special prosecutor did agood job of pointing out that
the Commonwealth Attorney hadjust gotten out of law school
when she convicted Joan Harmon.
And the assertion that the JAGMajor acted unprofessionally may
have just been her inexperience.

Marcy (01:45:32):
What about Lisa Petrie?
The manager of the cafe JoanHarmon worked at?

Mark (01:45:36):
I don't know enough about the dynamic there, but one thing
Petrie said rings true.
Most of the people she workswith are locals.
Non-locals being suspect is acultural norm.

Marcy (01:45:48):
And Ken Buckner, the neighborhood contractor?

Mark (01:45:52):
I think it was a big mistake for the defense to call
this guy.
On the cross examination for theprosecutor, Buckner testified
that he worked on the frontdoor, in direct contradiction of
what Martin said.
This testimony, and the photo ofthe lock, destroys the assertion
that the front door wasimpassable.
It was the second stake in theheart of Martin's alibi.
He could and did leave the housewithout others knowing, and he

(01:46:14):
could leave the house without itbeing on video.
Besides the Army Ranger warhero, couldn't have gone through
a front window?
What Ken Buckner didn't testifyabout was whether Joan Harmon
really almost killed Martin'sbeloved dog.
Why was that left out?
In his closing the defenseattorney very dramatically said,
"we know that Joan Harmon is anabuser of animals." Do we?

(01:46:39):
The only one who said that wasMartin.

Marcy (01:46:42):
So then we have the three conspiracy witnesses, William
Stokes' boss, and the two Stokesbrothers.
How do you think those went forthe defense?

Mark (01:46:51):
What Ken Murray's testimony showed was that
William Stokes drove to BowlingGreen on the 18th of November,
2015.
The problem is nothing indicatedhe also murdered anybody that
day.
The same for the Stokesbrothers.
We know they both worked inpublic service for a time.
They didn't sound or lookparticularly evil.
The fact that Ed Stokes wasconflicted off the investigation

(01:47:12):
is a solid indication of adepartment doing the right
thing.
They took action to avoid eventhe appearance of impropriety.
I just want to reiterate, thedefense's murder conspiracy was

based on two motives (01:47:22):
doing Martin's desire for money.
This motive was destroyed asfiction by the Army JAG officer
or to frame Martin for Joan'srevenge.
The defense's murder conspiracyfell apart because there was
absolutely no information aboutwhy or how any of the Stokes
brothers would be involved inthat.

Marcy (01:47:41):
So let's talk about Martin's testimony.
Why do you think he testified?

Mark (01:47:45):
I think he testified for two reasons.
He needed to testify because heneeded to sell the Joan Harmon
conspiracy.
I also think Martin was sure hecould convince a jury of his
innocence by telling his lifestory.
He overestimated his juryappeal.

Marcy (01:48:00):
So you think it went badly for him?

Mark (01:48:02):
Yes.
When I said the defensewitnesses were not as good as
the prosecutions, that was truefor him too.
I think he sealed the verdict hegot.
So I've spent some time incourt, but I didn't learn how to
testify until I started puttingcases in front of the grand
jury.
The grand jury is structuredless rigidly than regular court.
You present your case in shortform and only select witnesses

(01:48:26):
are called.
I got, so I really felt goodabout going.
It was like showing off your newcar.
For me, the most important partwas when the jurors asked
questions.
and if they had been enpaneledfor awhile, they were
comfortable asking a ton ofquestions.
The DA kept the guardrails on,so they didn't go crazy.
But I got to see what they wereinterested in, what they wanted
to see from the case.

(01:48:46):
From that process, I learnedabout effectively presenting my
cases and where the pitfallsmight be.
I also watched other peopletestify.
I learned that the jury knowswhen your shit's weak.
You have to be open and honest.
You have to talk directly tothem.
If you don't have an answer, yousay,"I don't know."

Marcy (01:49:03):
So why do you think Martin's testimony was bad?

Mark (01:49:06):
I don't think you have to be a great public speaker to do
well in front of a jury.
But for a guy who is dependingon selling his honesty, he made
some mistakes.
He spent a lot of time lookingdown or at the defense attorney,
almost never at the jury.
He seemed arrogant, not open andhonest.
He dismissed evidence in thetrial, making sweeping
statements about how experttestimony had proven his

(01:49:27):
innocence.
I mean, the jury is probablythinking isn't that for us to
decide?
I also heard that and thoughtthis guy is high and his own
supply, like at least his PRcampaign worked on him.
Martin appeared agitated andevasive.
When he was questioned overareas like the letter he wrote
to the state of Tennesseecomplaining about his first
wife.

(01:49:47):
His memory was great for otherthings.
He could remember anniversariesand birth dates.
I think that's why theprosecutor asked him specific
questions.
He had sharp memory on a lot ofthings, but in certain critical
areas, his memory fail and itmade him appear to be defensive
and evasive.

Marcy (01:50:05):
Are there other times he seemed defensive?

Mark (01:50:09):
Martin said the forensic evidence exonerates him.
That wasn't true.
When the prosecutor pointed toevidence, he argued about what
the experts had said.
It was like he was trying tospeak for those witnesses,
framing them in a way that wasbetter for him.
He did this with Calvin Phillipstoo.
Martin knew that Calvin Phillipswas the person who turned over
the court, martial material, thelaptop, and photos of bruises-

(01:50:32):
gave them to the FBI.
With the prosecutor, Martindenied knowing this basic
information, instead of beinghonest and admitting that he had
a reason not to like Calvin, hetried in front of a jury to
play, like, everything was fine.
He said, in fact, Calvin hadflipped, despite what everyone
who knew him said that Calvinwas going to testify for Martin.
Like I said, people on the juryknow when your shit is weak.

Marcy (01:50:56):
What struck me was that Calvin talked to many people
about not just being afraid ofwhat Martin might do, but about
a specific fear that Martinwould kill him.
But let's just say that Martinwas right in that Calvin was
going to flip.
What does that even mean?

Mark (01:51:12):
That's a problem with the whole defense.
It sounds good until you thinkabout, examine it.
What would Calvin flipped havemeant that evidence wasn't
evidence?
It just doesn't make sense.

Marcy (01:51:24):
The prosecutor said in her closing statement that
Martin had an answer foreverything.
It seems like if you have a patanswer for everything, you're
trying too hard.

Mark (01:51:36):
An example of this is that he normally kept the Glock 45
and the 22 and 38 in the backpassenger area of his truck.
On the evening of the 19thbefore any of the details were
publicly known, Martin said hisprivate investigator called him
out of the blue and told him tomove his Glock from the truck
and put it in a safe.
This is because Joan Harmonmight still have car keys.

(01:51:56):
This was offered as a reason whyonly the Glock was in the safe.
The PI calling out of the blueabout the murder weapon and just
the Glock?
It's unbelievable.
Notice that the PI didn'ttestify.
There's a reason for that.

Marcy (01:52:12):
You mentioned to me that many of Martin statements show
that he feels like he's beenvictimized.

Mark (01:52:18):
Yeah.
Several things come to mind.
In public statements he'd made,he's made himself out to be a
victim of bigamy.
In reality he benefits greatlyfrom the fact Joan had didn't
have a divorce decree from herfirst marriage.
When he described that Joan tookmost of his belongings except
for the heavy wood furniturethey bought in Germany, he
followed that up with the oddstatement,"which the cops

(01:52:39):
eventually smashed." Really?
The cops smashed all your heavywooden furniture from Germany.
When he was detained at FortCampbell, he complained bitterly
that they detained him in frontof the Army command building,
and they sent him to a barracksin the middle of nowhere with no
food.
His description of arrest theLouisville airport was similar.

(01:52:59):
He was angry that he wasarrested in public.
Whined about it being chaos.
Of course, I've never been to asecurity checkpoint at a busy
airport where it wasn't chaos.
From the way he described it, Isuspect Martin was angry about
the arrest because it was acomplete surprise and it was out
of his control.
It was like they waited for himto come back to Kentucky and
sucker punched him.

Marcy (01:53:20):
You think the victim mentality is key in this crime?

Mark (01:53:24):
Yeah, I think a lot of people who commit crimes, large
and small justify it in that.
It was the JAG Officer MajorJames Garrett, who got me
thinking about this.
His testimony was different thansome of the other investigators.
He seemed angry, pissed off.
Then I realized as I thoughtabout it, why.
Not many cops have hadcooperating witnesses murdered.

(01:53:45):
If I'd ever had an informantmurdered, especially by the
target, I would have been angrytoo.
When he testified by MajorGarrett called out the lies,
told them Martin's PR campaign.
Some of those lies didn't makeit into trial.
Why?
Because in court you have toprove up the basis and you'll be
questioned directly about whatyou said.

(01:54:06):
In media interviews, Martincalled Harmon, the bigamist or
his ex-bigamist.
Martin said Joan was motivatedby money either a) the victim
compensation from the Army, orb) keeping military benefits due
to a spouse.
Major Garrett was angry becausehe knew the truth and he knew
Martin was lying.
Everyone close to thecourt-martial knew Joan was not

(01:54:28):
going to get any money from thegovernment.
Martin said publicly that Joanand Calvin were having an
affair.
This never made it into thetrial, but the labels bigamist,
slut, golddigger and murderesswere broadcast widely.
In reality, a real or concoctedaffair wasn't used by the
defense at trial because itwould have added to Martin's

(01:54:49):
motive.
Martin's PR campaign even triedto speak out of the victim's
mouth.
I find this the most disgustingpart.
Martin asserted that his privatedetective had a tape of Phillips
saying he was going to flip onJoan Harmon.
This isn't true.
I watched the news story.
The private eyes said he thoughtPhillips might flip.
Martin's assertion at trial wasjust another manipulation.

(01:55:14):
In the end, I'm thinking aboutthe defense attorney's closing
argument.
He proclaimed that Martin wasframed with desperately planted
evidence.
It sounded like projection.
I prefer the prosecutionclosing.
Martin conducted a militarystyle execution of the man who
was a witness against him.
He used his expertise andtraining to kill Calvin Phillips
and then adapt the mission asthe situation evolved.

(01:55:37):
He almost got away with it, buthe couldn't clean up everything.

Marcy (01:55:45):
Please rate and review Crime Raven wherever you listen.
It helps us get better and ithelps other listeners find us.
Also, if you email us ascreenshot of your review or
send us a question or a case,we'll send you a promo code for
$10 off our very coolmerchandise.
Send them tocrimeravenpodcast@gmail.com.

(01:56:09):
And if we use your question oryour case in an episode, we'll
send you a free Crime Ravent-shirt.
Remember, email us atcrimeravenpodcast@gmail.com.
Thank you for listening.
If you haven't already, pleasesubscribe to Crime Raven, so you
don't miss an episode Pleaserecommend us to your friends
too.
Check our website atcrimeraven.com crime Raven

(01:56:32):
hosted by Mark Rein and MarcyRein is written and directed by
mark Rein and edited andproduced by Marcy Rein And it's
a 3 Little Birds, LLCproduction.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Crime Junkie

24/7 News: The Latest

Stuff You Should Know

.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;}Murders on Main Street Kentucky Re-release

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;}Crime Junkie

24/7 News: The Latest

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes

Murders on Main Street Kentucky Re-release

Crime Junkie