The Death of Karen Silkwood

In 1974, Karen Silkwood was a technician at a plutonium processing plant near Oklahoma City. In November of that year, she would be killed in a mysterious one-car crash. Prior to her death, Karen Silkwood had been critical of the plant’s health and safety procedures and had files numerous complaints to the Atomic Energy Commission about unsafe conditions at the plant. Was Karen’s death a tragic accident, or was it her status as a whistleblower that lead to her being killed?

Summary
In this episode, Morgan and Cherry discuss the case of Karen Silkwood, a chemical technician and advocate for labor unions who died under suspicious circumstances in 1974. Karen worked at a nuclear facility where she discovered multiple breaches of health and safety protocols. She was contaminated with plutonium and her car crashed shortly after attending a union meeting. The circumstances surrounding her death raise questions about possible foul play and a cover-up by the company. The missing documentation and the presence of sedatives in her system add to the mystery. Karen Silkwood's suspicious death and the subsequent investigation into the nuclear facility she worked at revealed potential foul play and safety concerns. The missing paperwork, threatening phone calls, and exposure to plutonium raised suspicions. Legal battles ensued, with the jury initially awarding Karen's estate $10.5 million, which was later reduced to $5,000. The case led to a federal investigation and the closure of the plant. Karen's story inspired a movie and serves as a reminder of the importance of workplace safety.

Takeaways

• Karen Silkwood's death raised suspicions of foul play and safety concerns at the nuclear facility she worked at.
• The missing paperwork, threatening phone calls, and exposure to plutonium added to the suspicion.
• Legal battles ensued, with the initial jury award being reduced to a mere $5,000.
• The case led to a federal investigation and the closure of the plant, highlighting the importance of workplace safety.

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/crimepedia--5894684/support.

Episode Transcript

(00:36):
Welcome to crime Pedia. I amyour host this week. My name is
Morgan. I hope you are havinga wonderful day, and with me as
always is my very lovely true crimeBFF. It's Cherry. Hello, Cherry,
Hello, Hi everyone. I'm good. Thank you. It's very nice
to be back talking to all newthings true crime this week. Yeah,

(00:57):
we missed you last week because someonewas sick. Yeah from me. Yeah,
though, much better, thank you. Good, much better. There's
so many there's so many bugs andstuff going around, so I'm glad you're
all better. It's all good.It is so Cherry. We have a

(01:19):
new episode this week. But beforewe get to it, is there any
news or any updates you want togive? No, I don't think there
is this week. I don't thinkwe've got anything exciting unless I'm missing something.
But I think all good. Nothingexciting on the horizon for us.
I'm excited about a new episode todaythough, because you've been teasing me with
this one of what's going on,so I'm looking forward to this one.

(01:41):
Yeah. So this one is alittle older. This is from nineteen seventy
four, and it involves involves nuclearcontamination, and it involves potential foul play,
and it involves a death of awoman by the name of Karen Silkwood.

(02:07):
In nineteen seventy four, Karen Silkwoodwas a technician at a plutonium processing
plan near Oklahoma City. In Novemberof that year, she would be killed
in a mysterious one car crash.Prior to her death, Karen Soilkwood had
been critical of the plant's health andsafety procedures and had filed numerous complaints to

(02:30):
the Atomic Energy Commission about unsafe conditionsat the plant. Was Karen's death of
tragic accident or was it her statusas a whistleblower that led to her being
killed? This is crime Pedia,and this is the death of Karen Soilkwood,

(02:53):
all right. Cherry Karen Gay Silkwoodwas born in nineteen forty six and
was raised in Texas. She wasa chemical technician and an advocate for labor
unions, known for her vocal criticismsof health and safety practices in nuclear facilities.
In the wake of her divorce innineteen seventy two, prompted by her

(03:15):
husband's understrained spending and infidelity, thethen twenty six year old Karen Soak would
relocated from Texas to Oklahoma City.Following a short tenure as a hospital clerk,
she would secure employment at the KerrMcGee Semarron fuel fabrication site situated in
Crescent, Oklahoma, where she wasinvolved in the production of plutonium fuels.

(03:38):
Now after securing the disposition at thefacility, Karen would become a member of
the local Oil, Chemical and AtomicWorkers union and she would engage in a
strike at the plant. Now whenthe strike concluded, she broke new ground
as the first woman at the Kermageeplant to be appointed to the union's bargaining
committee. Now entrusted with probing healthand safety matter, Karen identified what she

(04:00):
perceived as multiple breaches of health protocols. These included the exposure of workers they're
harmful contaminants, the use of defectiverespiratory equipment, and the mishandling of sample
sworge. She also expressed concerns aboutthe inadequate shower facilities, fearing they might
contribute to an elevated risk of contaminationamong employees. So there is a lot

(04:28):
of I don't know if we wantto call it corner cutting, right,
I don't know if that's what youwant to call it, but it seems
like this facility was not following protocols, safety protocols very well. Kind of
substandard really, which yeah, Iwould say so. But in this line

(04:49):
of work where you're working with youknow, plutonium and you're making fuel rons,
I think that's something you want totake serious. You want to make
sure that everything's on the up andup. This kind of reminds me of
the you know, the opening scenesof The Simpsons where Homer Simpson has got
you know, the nuclear rod thatcomes at the back of his shirt.

(05:10):
It kind of just straight away makesme think of that. So this is
kind of Homer Simpson kind of stuffwe're talking about. Oh absolutely, no,
absolutely, I wonder if the Iwonder if the safety officer was called
Simpson. That would be wild ifit was. If it was Simpson,
can you imagine absolutely Now we knowwhere they got that kid, yeah,
from now. The Oil Chemical andAtomic Workers Union alleged that the Kermagee plant

(05:36):
produced effective fuel rods. They wouldalso stated that they would manipulate product inspection
records and they would compromise employee safety. Because of this, The union warned
the company of a petrol legal potentiallegal action. Now, in the summer
of nineteen seventy four, Karen wouldtestify before the Atomic Energy Commission about her

(05:59):
contamination experience, claiming that safety protocolshad been compromised due to an increased in
production. So she's saying that theywere forced to increase production at the expense
of safety. Yeah, so thisis not a good situation at all for
any of the employees at the facility. No, not something also in that

(06:20):
sort of you know, all jokingaside, in that kind of environment,
that's not something that you can compromiseon. Is the safety of your staff.
This isn't like they're going to getcold, this is this will potentially
kill them. So not great.And also it would make her very unpopular
I think with the senior you knowseniors, because she's bringing to light the

(06:42):
failings, multiple failings, of thiscompany. So I don't suppose she was
their favorite person either. No,absolutely not. Now in the facility,
like the facility, they would maintainthat that working with plutonium was completely safe
in that that no one should worryabout radiation exposure. They would they would

(07:03):
talk they had like signs up thatwould talk about you know, how safe
you know, nuclear energy was andhow safe you know, what their how
safe their job really really is?They would talk about how I mean this
is true. They were talking abouthow a thin piece of paper could stop
radiation or you know, contamination,and so the clothes that they're wearing is

(07:27):
more than suitable. But what theyfailed to mention was how how these contaminants
can easily get into a body throughyou know, your your your nose,
your mouth, your ears. Soso they were giving their employees half truth,
right, So they they're finding they'refinding these these these studies that were

(07:50):
found, and they're picking and choosingwhat they're telling their employees what how safe
you know, their job really is? Which, let's be completely honest,
it's not safe. You know.I would say even with even with you
know, proper GARB, proper clothing, proper protection, it's still not safe,

(08:11):
right, I mean, you haveto be very very careful when when
you're working in in this environment.Now, what's Karen's job. She was
actually in the fro abrication. Shewas actually doing things like like standing and
and and buffing these fuel rods.So you got to think about then the
number of like small particles that areeverywhere in her work area and workstation.

(08:37):
So any sort of you know,uh, faulty equipment. And if they're
saying that they're having they have faultyrespirators, I mean, how many particles
are getting into their lungs and intotheir bodies if their respirators respiratory systems aren't
working properly. That's scary, isvery scary. Now, on November fifth,

(09:03):
nineteen seventy four, during a routineself scan, Karen would discover that
her body's plutonium contamination levels were nearlyfour hundred times over the permissible limit full
hundred times, one hundred times.Yes, gees, yes, it's absolutely
insane. So with this, shewould then go undergo decontamination at the facility

(09:28):
and was given a kit to collectsamples of her urine and feces for additional
tests. Now, despite the presenceof plutonium on the inside of her gloves,
the absence of holes indicate that thesource of the contamination was external and
not from her direct work environment.So she already had been contaminated before this

(09:54):
contamination. Wow, so so allthen, So she had already been contaminated
and that's how that's how this thisplutonium radiation was found inside of things like
her gloves. Yeah, but fourhundred times, that's that's crazy. Crazy,

(10:15):
Yes, absolutely crazy, Like Idon't know, like I would,
what do you do when you getthose readings right? Four hundred times that,
I mean, you're going to panicquickly. That's that's a lot.
I mean I would be thinking,oh God, the machine is broken,
let's do that again. Four hundredtimes is ridiculous stuff. Yeah, that's

(10:39):
scary. Did you mean but evenafter this, well here, after this,
you know, I don't think thatthe plant really considered it to be
a big deal because she ended uplike going home in and like, there's
no big deal. Okay, bye, go home and get some rest.
Don't worry about your four hundred timescontamination inside your body. Don't worry about
that all the dangerous chemicals and stuffthat you've been contaminated with. Just go

(11:03):
home, be feet up. You'dbe fun tomorrow. Yeah, it's crazy.
Exactly now. The following day afterafter this contamination scare, I don't
even want to call it a contaminationscare, because she was absolutely contaminated at
this point, she would go backto work, and despite only handling paperwork
that day, her contamination levels wouldremain high, necessitating another thorough decontamination process.

(11:30):
So she goes back to work nextday, still contaminated after being decontaminated
day before. Yeah, but it'sit's still at a very high level now
on Yeah, So then now we'reon November seventh. On November November seventh,
after after arriving at the plant,she once again had alarmingly high contamination

(11:52):
levels. Right, and I believeis believed that that some of this contamination
was was also being released from air, coming from her lungs. So she
now has she is fully contaminated.She has these this plutonium two thirty nine
in her lungs, she has iton her bodies everywhere, and so that

(12:15):
cannect I mean if she's in closeproximity with somebody else, so she's in
bed that I'm guessing that that comingout of her lungs that could potentially contaminate
the person she's sleeping next to.Surely, yes, oh wow, and
they just let her, just lether go home, just carry on to
go deconnect, you know, justgo and contaminate your family. That's crazy.
Yeah, absolutely, I can't believethat. That's mad. Yeah,

(12:39):
Now, a specialized health physics teamwould actually escort her home that day,
and they would end up discovering significanttraces of plutonium, particularly in the bathroom
and refrigerator. Okay, wow.Because of this, they would then have
to decontaminate her whole residence. Yeah, which would lead to the disposal of

(13:01):
some of her belongings, which isgood. I mean, if it's better
than death if you have yeah,I mean, you don't want this stuff
around now. But I mean Ithink this is already long enough. I
mean, yeah, maybe this isday three and she's had significant levels and
now you're like, Okay, nowwe need to go ahead and like decontaminate
everything. So think about this,Like, you get decontaminated at work,

(13:22):
they send you home, your homeis contaminated, So you're just picking everything
back up, going back to work. And at this point you got to
start thinking, like, what elsein this facility is contaminated now? Right?
Yeah? And also I would havethought, I don't have any knowledge
of this personally, but I wouldhave thought that in a case of what

(13:45):
I would think in a case ofcontamination would be she would be decontaminated,
then sent off to a segregated unituntil her until there are no more levels.
But then, because her levels wereso high, I would have thought
they would have then had to goto her house, test anyone that lives
in her house, test her housethere, and then before she's allowed to
return back to her residence, becauseotherwise you just go around in circles.

(14:07):
You're just recontaminating her every time shegoes home. I'm not a safety officer,
but that doesn't seem like too farfetched of a safety plan to me.
So why aren't they already doing this? I mean, and think about
it, like, how many otherplaces would be contaminated at this point if
she's out and about, right,So, I mean it would be ad

(14:30):
the ordinary for someone to leave workand you know, go to a store,
go to a grocery store, goout to eat, go visit a
friend, go visit family. Yeah, anything, right? So So why
would you Yes, I understand,you know, you go through a decontamination
process, but wouldn't you then testbefore you actually release her album to the

(14:52):
public one because you wouldn't want arisk of any any like level of any
level of contamination whatsoever, let alonethe fact that her levels are still really
high. You're putting everybody else atrisk. That doesn't make any sense to
me. It does not at all. I mean I've read I've read reports

(15:13):
and statements that talked about the securityat the facility and how absolutely lacks it
was, and how it wouldn't beout of question for someone to simply grab
some fromtonium and walk it out thedoor. Seriously, Yeah, surely this
is a huge It must be lawsagainst this. Surely they're breaking some really

(15:37):
really bad protocols there. That's reallybad. I can't believe it inside something
so serious. How they're allowed tobe laps like that, that's crazy to
me. Yeah, it's it's absolutelyinsane. Now, after being you know,
found to still be contaminated and seeingthat her residence was also contaminated,

(16:00):
Karen, along with her boyfriend DrewStevens and her roommate Dusty Ellis, were
then transported to the Alamos National Laboratoryfor comprehensive tests to determine contamination's full extent
in their bodies. So there wego. Now you're taking it out of
this plant's hands and now you're goingto a natural laboratory. They're going to
figure this out. Okay. Now, During the three day period of Carrion's

(16:23):
contamination, there were uncertainties about itsorigin. Now, Karen would speculate that
the contamination in her bathroom might haveresulted from accidentally spilling her urine sample on
the morning of November seventh. Okay, Now, this theory would align with
the findings that the samples collected ather home showed exceedingly high contamination levels,

(16:45):
whereas those collected in the new containersat the plant as well as at Los
Alamos, indicated significantly lower levels.All right, okay, so they sent
her home to do this, todo these tests, right, So like
here go home, Yeah, hereyou go do a urine test. Here
you go pe in this and thenbring it back to us. And so

(17:06):
when she was there, she didsay that she'd spilt her sample, and
so that was everywhere. I mean, that does make sense, yeah,
exactly. Now, Karen would maintainthat her contamination occurred at the plant,
which I think everyone at this pointknows it absolutely happened. Well yeah,
I don't think. Yeah, Idon't think she'd got at the grocery store.
But listen to this. But despitesaying yeah, this happened at the

(17:30):
plant, the Kerr mcgeese management wouldaccuse her of self contamination as a tactic
to tarnish the company's image. Clever, very clever, that's good tactics.
They would state that she was thatshe was a lunatic. Okay, that
may have smeared purposely smeared plutonium ona Bolognian cheese sandwich which was found in

(17:56):
her refrigerator. I can see whatthey're doing. I can see what I
can see what they're trying to do. They're trying to cover up their huge
failings by you know, blaming herfor doing the sabotage. And so yeah,
I can see that somebody this hasobviously got higher up and somebody's gone,
oh my god, we are insome serious shit. Let's do some

(18:17):
damage limitation, and we'll just blameher for being a nutter. That's just
no, it's clever, but it'snot acceptable, is it. Yeah,
I mean, they wouldn't like Isaid earlier about about the security being laxed,
they would actually admit like, yeah, this time security was really relax
and it'd be very easy for employeesto remove finish plutonium pellets on the facility.

(18:41):
Oh my goodness, that's just crazy. Is very crazy. Now,
this is what's what's crazy too.Okay. Now, the specific type of
the soluble plutonium which was detected inKaren's body was linked to her production area

(19:02):
that she had not accessed for fourmonths, and the pellets from that area
were secured in the plant's vault.Wow, okay, so there's no way
that she is getting into the plant'svault. She's smearing it on a Blowneyan

(19:23):
cheese sandwich and bringing it home.I don't I don't even understand why she
would do that. Why would shepurposely contaminate herself. I don't really understand
that. It's not really doesn't soundto me like a very good master plan.
I can't really see what they thinkshe's trying to achieve. Yeah,

(19:44):
just to get the plant shut down, is that what they're saying? Because
this is her job, I meanexactly. She wants to be able to
work in a safe environment. Shewants her coworkers to work in a safe
environment. So you know, youknow, taking taking a hit and you
know, contaminating yourself. That's thatdoesn't make sense to me. No,

(20:07):
he doesn't mean I could be wrong. I don't know if that's a great
game game player or not. Butto me, that sounds like a terrible
plan. And surely if you weregoing to do that, you would do
it with the stuff that you're readilyyou're readily holding on to the stuff that
you are using in your everyday workplace, because then it's very easy to trace.
If you're going to go and doit from something that's in a volt
that you have no access to,does it really prove your point that your

(20:30):
job is not safe? So Idon't. I don't think that makes that.
Don't think that makes very good sense, to be honest, It doesn't.
No, it does not. No. Now. In November twelfth,
Karen Dusty, Karen Dusty, Ellis, Andrew Stevens made their way back to
Oklahoma City from Los Alamos. Thefollowing day, both Karen and Dusty would

(20:51):
return to work, albeit with restrictionsbarring them from any radiation related tasks.
Okay, that evening after It's afterher shift, Karen would attend a union
gathering at the Hub Cafe in Crescent, Oklahoma. A fellow participant would later
confirm that Karen had brought along withher a binder with documents and photos that

(21:12):
she said would demonstrate the extent ofthe safety problems at the plant. The
meeting concluded around seven PM, afterwhich Karen departed a loan in her Honda
Civic. She would then head onhead out on the thirty mile journey back
to Oklahoma City with plans to meetwith Stephen Wadka, a representative from the

(21:33):
National Office of the Oil, Chemicaland Atomic Workers Union, and David Burnham,
who was a New York Times reporterwho was interested in her case.
Okay, so he was interested.He wanted to find out more information.
He was preparing to write a storyabout Karen in about the issues at the
plant. Okay. At eight ohfive pm, the Oklahoma State Highway Patrol

(21:59):
was notified of a single car accidentseven miles south of Crescent, Oklahoma.
When the responding officer arrived at thescene, they found that Karen's Honda Civic
had run off the road and hita concrete culvert. Karen Silkwood would be
pronounced dead at the scene for multipleinjuries. Now, the car contained none

(22:21):
of the documents or photos that shehad been holding in the union meeting at
the Hub cafe, so those wereall gone. Everything was gone. Very
convenient now, the officer of thescene would claim that he found one or
two tablets of the sedative mesa qualone, which is coelude, in the car.

(22:44):
It would state that he remembered findingcannabis. Police would the police report
would indicate that this was a classicfalling asleep at the wheel situation and that
supplied. Yeah. Now, ablood test performed as part of the autopsy

(23:04):
would show that Karen did have traceof alcohol as well as zero point three
to five milligrams of metho qualone rightper one hundred millimeters of blood at the
time her death. Now, thisamount was almost twice the recommended dosage for
inducing drowsiness. They also found aboutfifty milligrams of undissolved method qualone remaining in

(23:29):
her stomach. So that is awhole lot of load if you're asking me,
Yeah, and would she knowingly takethose before you drive in, you
know, if you're going to meethim, and would you take it right?
Then? Are there there's some prescriptionthe yeah? Oh yeah, Oh,
so that's the thing you'd have toget a prescription for. You couldn't
just go and buy the way Yeah, well but I think so, But

(23:53):
I'm sure that you could also buyit other ways, right, yeah,
non legal way. Yeah, it'llbe interesting to see a medical file see
whether she's ever had that before,you know, whether she's ever had Yeah,
that'll be interesting. I don't yeah, but I mean, like you
said, like, there's two things. Why would you normally take knowingly,

(24:14):
take that before you yeah, aregoing to drive, right, yeah?
And why would you take that knowingthat you're about to meet with a representative
from the National Union's office as wellas a New York Times reporter. Right,
you're not going to me, You'reYou're not. I mean, you're
gonna you'll take it later on whenyou're home, when you want to go

(24:37):
to sleep for you know, butyou don't take it before you drive.
You don't take it before another meetingbecause that quality. That's right, It's
an important meeting that she's been obviouslyfighting for. It's she's going to be
going to finally speaking to a journalistabout what's going on. The last thing
she's going to do is take somethingthat's going to make her drowsy. It
doesn't That doesn't make sense. Yeah, So I mean the thing that that

(25:03):
that that is interesting too is thefact that she did have an undissolved tablet
in her stomach, so I couldsee if it was like if someone had
and I don't know if it's evenpossible, had crushed it up and put
into a drink. Yeah, andthen she crashes. But to have an
undissolved tablet, it's like, okay, so how does that kick? Is

(25:26):
this something she's actually taking? Issomeone else giving her something saying hey,
this is whatever whatever? Yeah,yeah, it's just that tile and all
is just a you know, painreliever. We don't know, we don't
know, but what we do knowis is she ended up crashing and she

(25:47):
went to a concrete wall and mysteriouslyall of the put files and paper that
she was carrying to do with thiscase just spontaneously dissolved. You know.
Yes, that's two which too strange. And this is something that she would
have, especially with this meeting thatshe has with with you know, the

(26:10):
reporter. She's gonna bring this withher so that she can show him,
Hey, this is this is myfunny, this is the information I have.
You know, this can is goingto help you with your story.
But for this, all this documentationjust to disappear, mm hmm, it's
very suspicious, right, very Thisis kind of reminds me of the case
we did about Dorothy Dorothy kill Garan, Right, yeah, yeah, it

(26:33):
does. Really, that does comestraight to mind where she had a bunch
of documentation paperwork in regards to theKenny assassination with her discussion or her interview
with Jack Ruby, and her wasa was I believe it a drug overdose?
Right? It wasn't. Yeah,it was a sedatives I think that
was the same. Yeah, yeah, I agree. Yeah. I don't

(26:59):
know what it is about sedatives anddocument documentation going missing, but that just
seems like a little suspicious to me, right, very I agree. Now,
despite the findings of the police aswell as the autopsy, some have
theorized that Karen's car may have beenrammed from behind before running off the road.
Okay, Now, remember we saidthat she had a Honda Civic.

(27:23):
This was This was a nineteen thirtyfour Honda, brand new car. Okay,
right, So there had been noreported accidents with the car. Her
family friend's boyfriend stated that she hadnot had any sort of damage to it,
that it was brand new, thatit was clean. Investigators would actually

(27:48):
note that that they did find damageon the rear of Karen's car. Okay,
that and like I said, thisdamage was not present before the crash,
And because this crash was entirely afront end collision, there's no explanation
as to why there was damage foundon the rear of the vehicle. Okay.

(28:11):
They would also find that fresh skidmarks found at the scene indicated that
Karen had attempted to get back onthe road before crashing. So if she
had fallen asleep at the wheel,the belief is she fell us with in
the wheel and she hit the maybe, I mean, so that's the only

(28:33):
thing. Like, Okay, didshe wake up before she crashed and she
swerved back onto the road, Yeah, and then hit the culvert. Now,
a microscopic examination of the rear ofKaren's car showed paint chips that could
have only come from a rear impactby another car. Oh okay, interesting,

(28:56):
Yeah, so obviously there had beenthere's paint transfer between yah one car
and her car. And like Isaid, there had been no previous collisions
of any kind that she that Karenhad with the car, that it was
brand new, and that there hadnever been any sort of insurance claims filed

(29:18):
on the vehicle so there's no reasonthat there should be damage and paint transfer
on the back bumper. That's crazy. Is it possible though, here,
let me let me pass this lunge. Is it possible that she did fall
asleep, she tried to sweer backonto the road, another car hit her,

(29:41):
drove her back into the cart concretecolvert, and then that car took
off. So maybe it wasn't necessarilypurposeful. But but whoever did you know,
hit her, you know, freakedout and just took off. I
mean, that's a possibility. Andalso another possibility could be that the accident
happened earlier in the evening and shewas hurt so took something to try and

(30:08):
maybe, you know, maybe feela bit better, and then she's had
an accident because of the kuelutes thatshe's taken. Then she's had an accident
because of that. I mean,it could be that that you'd have to
think of every single, you know, evidential possibility. You'd have to think
of it like that. So youdo have that. Either she fell asleep
completely and then she regained regained consciousnessand then hit the culvert, or somebody

(30:30):
has rear ended her and she's hitthe culvert or the accident happened earlier in
the evening, and because of that, she willingly took some kind of what
she believed to be pain relief,but it's had adverse effect and it's made
her fall asleep or something. Thereisn't Yeah, there's a few possibilities.
There isn't there. But obviously there'sdefinitely evidence that there was some kind of

(30:52):
collision with another vehicle at some pointthat evening, because if her boyfriend is
saying no, the car was finethat when she left, then in between
that that time of her leaving thetime of the police finding her, some
kind of collision has occurred at somepoint. Yes, yep, absolutely,
I think that's yeah, that happened. Something happened. We don't know when,

(31:19):
but it seems like that would haveoccurred on that day. But like
the thing is your suspicious mind,your natural suspicious mind in doing the jobs
that we do, is that youthink that, well, hang on a
minute, you know, the somethingnefarious has happened. Yes, it could
be something completely innocent. But thenwhen you take the paperwork side of things

(31:40):
and you see that everything that shehad on this company and everything she was
taken to a reporter to report thiscompany is now missing. That then brings
up the red flags and the markersfor something isn't quite as as simple as
it seems. This doesn't seem tobe to me as simple as a just
an accident. You know this.You know, obviously we do this,

(32:04):
and we naturally think suspiciously. AndI probably would not think so suspiciously had
all that paperwork not have been missing. That's what makes it suspicious to me.
Yeah, one hundred percent agree withthat. Now. The other thing
that makes it suspicious, and whatmade family members believe that there might have
been foul play was the fact thatthat just prior to her death, Karen

(32:28):
had begun to receive she began receivingseveral threatening phone calls. So someone had
been throwing her with harm prior toher death. Right, So again,
now the evidence is stucking up forsuspicious. You know, now we're starting
to get calls. You know,she dies in mysterious circumstances. The paperwork

(32:50):
seems to be missing. Now Iwould start to be looking at people who
were employed or owned this facility.I think, what what I don't understand
and what I can't figure out iswhy or how we there could be this
conspiracy happening where because you'd have tohave the police involved at this point.

(33:14):
If they're not, if they're notreviewing the all the documentation, if they're
just saying, okay, it shejust fell asleep. It was a single
car accident. There's no reason forthe police to be covering up anything,
any wrongdoing or covering up any foulplay. I don't believe so. No,

(33:34):
I agree, I don't think soeither. So is it the fact
that there's just not enough evidence togo down the path of potential foul play?
That is that why it's just ruleda you know, a single car
accident. I don't know. That'sthe problem is I suppose it's proven.

(33:55):
Suspicion is one thing, but unfortunateevidence is another. And you can't you
can't push a case through the courtsunless you've got sufficient evidence to do so.
And that's the issue, is thatwhat evidence have they got that this
was foul play? They don't.I mean, it's suspicious, Yeah,
it's suspicious that that she's having thesekind of things, But at the same

(34:20):
time, how can we prove that, How can we prove that she was
having malicious phone calls. How canwe prove that she had that paperwork with
her at the time she had itat the meet at the first you know,
the first place. They've already saidthat she had the paperwork with her,
But how do we know she didn'tleave it somewhere by accident, you
know, because she's not feeling great, she's had a bump in her car
earlier, She's doing something and sheforgets the paperwork. It could be as

(34:43):
simple as that. It could notbe nefarious at all. It could be
something really simple, and those documentsare sitting on a shelf somewhere, you
know, it could It could justbe that simple. But I mean,
is it possible too. Here's thething, like, without seeing the the
crash scene photos, you know howthe car was, is it possible that

(35:05):
that the documents had been thrown fromthe car and they were just had been
collected and thrown away? Yeah,I mean, yeah, there's numerous things
that could have happened. I thinkmyself, I think she would have one
hundred percent had those documents on herbecause of how important it was to her.
I couldn't imagine her just like forgettingit back at the cafe heading them

(35:30):
off to someone else, you know, just a misplace in them. I
think she would have had them inthe car. But the question is what
would have happened to them after theaccident. Were they gathered up inside the
car and and and you know placewith other personal items that were never picked
up, were like I said,were they thrown from the car? You

(35:51):
know, it's it's hard to say, of course. And I mean if
you look, and if you're inEngland, there's a television documentary series called
Crashed Detectives and you can watch thecollision unit actually in their job, and
they the way the technology that they'vegot, I mean even in the seventies,
the expert knowledge that the people thatinvestigate crashes have is mind blowing.

(36:16):
The way that they can determine directionof travel, speed, time, acceleration,
all that kind of thing. Theyare very, very highly skilled at
their jobs. And so I wouldsay that they very rarely get it wrong.
I would very rarely get it wrong. They are highly skilled individuals.
And so there's going to be evidencethat she breaked at a certain time,

(36:38):
she didn't break at a certain time, she was going at a certain speed.
This will all be synonymous with say, falling asleep or this would be
the kind of thing that they wouldexpect to find when somebody loses consciousness and
wakes up again. It is science. You can't argue with the science.
That's the problem for us. We'relike, yeah, something's going on.

(36:59):
Her family. They're going to wantthey want to know why, they want
to know what happened. They wantto know why. And if you think
even the tiniest bit that there's beensome kind of foul play, you're not
going to let that go until youhave got hard evidence to prove otherwise.
And so I don't blame them forfighting for everything, because that's the one

(37:22):
thing in this case. I couldbe persuaded that it was just an accident,
But the fact that those paperwork aremissing, that's the bit that makes
me think something something's not quite righthere. At their request of the Atomic
Energy Commission in the Oklahoma State MedicalExaminer, who at the time was doctor
A. J. Chapman, whowas concerned about performing in the houtopsy on

(37:44):
someone reportedly contaminated with plutonium, ateam from Los Alamos Laboratory was sent to
make radiation measurements and assists in theautopsy. Now because Karen's death was an
accident. The corner did not legallyhave to have to get consent from the
next of kin to perform the autopsy. However, Karen's father was contacted and

(38:06):
he did give permission for the autopsyor the phone. So, if anything,
the least, there is one nicething that happened that they actually called
called dad and said, hey,is it okay if we do this?
And he gave the okay. Nowthe autopsy, I know exactly right,
Like, hey, we want todo an autopsy, even if you know
they don't legally have to do it, do it right, just hey,

(38:29):
we want to do this, okay, the science, Yeah, that's right,
yep. Now. The autopsy wasperformed on November fourteenth, nineteen seventy
four, at the University Hospital inOklahoma City. Now findings would find significant
distribution of plutonium two thirty nine inher lungs as well as her tracheo bronchidal
lymph nodes. The findings would indicatethat Karen had been exposed within thirty days

(38:54):
prior to her death. Part ofthis was because six times more plutonium were
found in Karen's lung than in thelymph nodes. So if you know about
an anatomy, it's not it's gonnaend up in the lymph nodes. But
yeah, so if you find morein the lungs in the lymph nods,

(39:14):
that mean that that whatever is inthe lungs have not made its way to
lymph lymph notes yet. So thisis interesting once again, right because they
said that she was exposed within thirtydays of her death, but the the
plutonium samples that they found in her, like like I said before, she
had no access to that for thepast four months. So yeah, that's

(39:38):
interesting. She had no access tovan still yet she's still got And the
thing that meant he would go againanother rabbit hole is the fact that if
the staff can come out of therewith the plutonium rods, what's to say
that somebody isn't constantly feeding her alittle bit of plutonium at home or some

(40:00):
a little bit of time car.Yeah, could it be that they leave
it, leave bits of it inher car or you know, I don't
know. It makes you think allof a sudden, now this isn't as
straightforward as it first may have seemed. Yeah, and I don't you know,
I don't want to make a joke, but it is someone putting stuff

(40:20):
in her bolodn Tea sandwiches because thisis what she's bringing for lunch, right,
lunch. Yeah, that makes sense. It's an easy way to get
it to her in a drink thatshe has every day, or in a
in food that she has every day. It's on left unattended in the fridge.
How hard would it be for somebodyjust to slip a bit of something
in that? Yeah, Because here'sthe thing, Like, it'd be very

(40:46):
easy for Karen to prove that thatthat the facility lacks safety missures by simply
taking plutonium pellets and walking out thefront door. Yeah. Right, so
she could prove it a lot easy. She doesn't contaminate in herself, cotaminating
herself exactly, So why would shepurposely contaminate herself if she can just say,

(41:09):
here's some posts, I'm gonna takethem out, and I'm going to
take them to show this New YorkTimes reporter. Hey, here it is
hit plutonium. I just walked outthe front door. Yeah, that would
make a lot more sense. Yeah, it's absolutely insane. What's even crazier
is because of public suspicion in thedeath of Karen Silkwood. This would result

(41:34):
in a federal investigation of plant securityand safety good. This investigation would find
that twenty to thirty kilograms, whichis forty four to sixty six pounds a
plutonium, had been misplaced at theplant. Twenty pounds twenty to thirty kilograms

(41:58):
forty four to sixty six pounds ofplutonium, wow, had been misplaced just
misplaced? Oop. Wow, thatis a lot. I mean you could
you could say, like a smallamount is misplaced, but forty four to
sixty pounds of it? Yeah,I mean that's how how do you even

(42:22):
do that? No idea? Imean, it could be simply like they're
just not there's no controls over thefacility. Yeah, that's right. It
certainly sounds like that. So onceagain, you know, when we started

(42:43):
this, I said I wouldn't wantto work in plutonium, right, especially
like the manufacturing of plutonium pellets orfuel. This clearly clearly prove my point.
Stay away, I don't want anythingto do with that. No,
I agree me too. Yeah.Now, Karen's estate would file a civil

(43:06):
suit against KERR McGee for alleged inadequatehealth and safety programs that led to Karen's
exposure. The first trial would beginin nineteen seventy nine, where lawyers for
kermcgee would claim that Karen had purposelycontaminated herself. This is and I'm just
gonna, I'm gonna this is horrificfor what they did or said about her.

(43:30):
The defense attorney for Kermagee William Paul, would argue that Karen was emotionally
unstable and possibly had been affected bythe use of tranquilizers. He would further
state that Karen had become deeply involvedin a bitter fight between her union and
the company, and charged that shehad set out to prove that the plant

(43:52):
was dangerous by making herself seriously ill. She was, as he suggested,
kinky, God, that's really clutchingat straws. That's that's really not That's
not an adequate difference, is itat all? No, No, you're

(44:14):
disparaging a woman who you contaminated becauseyour health and safety protocols are garbage.
Yeah, and then you're going totry to disparage her name in court.
Even even that, I mean,the audacity of doing that in court,
that the likelihood of that being truesounds ridiculous to me. I don't know

(44:36):
Karen. But even if even ifI didn't know everything else that had happened,
the likelihood of her being kinky,and that's the reason that sounds like
I don't know who came up withthat. It sounds absolutely ridiculous. Look,
I don't know, I don't know, Like we have listener, we
have listeners out there that that mightbe kinky, right, I don't know

(44:58):
if like, purposely contaminating your withradiation plutonium is a king that anybody has
no exactly, I don't think soeither. That's I mean, stupid,
it's insane. It's insane. Well, you'll be happy to hear that the
that the jury would ultimately award thestate of Karen Silke would ten point five

(45:22):
million dollars for personal injury and punitivedamages. However, this would later be
reversed by the Federal Court Appeals inDenver, Colorado, which would then award
a measly five thousand dollars for personalproperty she lost during the cleanup of her
apartment. That's insulting, isn't it. That is really that very insulting.

(45:47):
Yes, it's horrific, Like that'sjust that's just sorry, you got contaminated.
Here's five thousand dollars that even themillions, you know, even the
millions is not going to not goingto bring her back. It's not gonna
it's not going to make up forthe fact that, you know, she's
lost her life. But then totake that away and to say, oh,

(46:07):
well, we'll give you five thousanddollars for the personal items that you've
lost, never mind your life.That's just insulting. That's that's terrible.
Shame on them. Now, innineteen six, this was twelve years after
Karen's death, the civil suit washeading back to retrial when it would be
finally settled out of court for onepoint three million dollars. I'm glad that

(46:31):
family got some compensation, but there'snot enough. It's not for the loss
of her life and the fact thatthe truth hasn't come out. Everybody there's
still they're still tried to disparage herin court. I think I'd be plowing
that one point whatever million dollars totry and find the truth because that just
doesn't sit well, it doesn't makeany sense. It doesn't, it doesn't.

(46:54):
Now in nineteen seventy six, itwas fourteen months after Karen's and I
guess this sort of kind of vindicateswhat Karen was doing the whole time.
Yeah, the Kermagee plant would closewhen Westinghouse, which had been buying its

(47:14):
fuel rods, complained of their poorquality and refused to renew its contract with
that good. So once Westinghouse pulledout, Kermagee would completely shut down.
So, I mean, unfortunately ittook another fourteen months, So we don't
know how many other people when that'sfourteen months ended up contaminated and don't know

(47:36):
what happened to him, but atleast they did shut down, because there
is no place in this world forany sort of you know, plant guys
working with such dangerous materials to beyet to be shoddy. Yeah, we
don't need that som so, Imean, Karen was completely right and everything

(47:58):
she was saying, yeah she was, and it's really annoying that, you
know, she lost her life,but they still didn't they still didn't admit
that, you know, they werefailing. There was no you know,
there was no admitting that, yeah, we've done things wrong and you know,
we need to clean up our actbecause fourteen months later, their work
is still being described as poor sothey didn't learn a thing, No,

(48:27):
one hundred, No, they learnednothing, learn absolutely nothing. Karen Silkwood
would become a posthumous celebrity, okay, and she would inspire in nineteen eighty
three movie called silk Woold, inwhich she was played by Meryl Streep.
And so the movie actually would garner. I believe it was five nominations in

(48:52):
total for the Academy Awards that year. They wouldn't win, but I mean
be nominated as huge anyways. Butthis, I mean the movie was star
study. You have Meryl Streep asKaren Silkwood, Kurt Russell played Karen's boyfriend
Drew, which we mentioned, Cherwas in it, Craig T. Nelson,

(49:15):
So yeah, there's a lot ofpeople that were in this movie.
Did they dedicate the movie to her? I hope they did. Yeah.
Good, I'm good. So let'sknow it was Yeah, so it was
about her. Yeah, So onceagain, nineteen eighty three silk Wood.
I'm going to go watch that reallygood. Yeah, it's a really good
movie. So yeah, if youif you haven't heard of it, or

(49:37):
maybe you have seen it before butyou may forgot about it, go back
and watch it again. You watchit with a different you'll now watch it
with a completely different, you know, a completely different insight to it now.
So it'll be quite interesting to goback and watch it. Yeah,
I'm gonna look for that. Ithink I'm glad that I'm glad that there
is some kind of legacy for Karen. I'm glad that there's somebody that,

(49:58):
you know, someone out there isa more this story so that everybody's you
know, people can hear about itfor generations to come because she stood up
for what was right and ultimately losther life. And yeah, well well
we all know the phrase see something, say something, and she did and
look what happened. And she was, you know, a good person.
So I mean, this may havebeen foul play, it may not have

(50:21):
been foul play, but regardless,this is the story that people. Yeah,
it's suspicious, but it is astory that people need to know,
and they need to know about Karen, and they need to know what she
did. And I mean, ifit wasn't for Karen, you know,
it's possible that the facility could havecontinued, you know, going on and

(50:43):
on and on, and who knowswhat would have happened, right, how
many other people would have been exposedto dangerous levels of plutonium to radiation.
Yeah. See, you need totake safety serious. I mean in any
anything you do, safety is important, and especially in that line of work.
And they obviously they obviously didn't.I think what they were doing was

(51:07):
was wrong. They think that theyprobably thought that what they were doing was
enough, but it wasn't. Weneed more Karens in the world. Good
Karens. That's what we need.More good Karens. Yes, I agree,
that is our case. I don'tknow, I mean really interesting.

(51:29):
Thank you. I don't know,you know, I don't know if this
even needs to be one was like, let's find out what happened to Karen
because regardless, I think a goodoutcome came from it in one way or
the other. I think that she, you know, like I said,
she did amazing work and she broughtbrought forth, you know, serious issues

(51:49):
that needed to be addressed. Andand if you've seen the film, I'd
love to hear. We'd love tohear what you thought about it. We'd
like to we'd like to know.You can send us a message on our
socials, so you can email us, and we'd like to know what you
think of this story. Do youthink that it was an accident or do
you think that there was more toit than this. Somebody who this week
has sent us an email is aKaren, actually Karen Malick, who is

(52:09):
from Saint Louis. So hello you, Hello Karen and her husband, and
she emailed to say that she lovesthe podcast and that we are new they
are newly addicted. Her husband andher I love that, Thank you guys
for listening. Now. Karen hasbeen a nurse for twenty five years.
She worked in the Burns ICU andshe's now a school nurse. And she

(52:32):
has just emailed to say that peopledo some awful things to children, and
she's given us a case to lookinto. So I will give you those
details because it's American one, andthen you can look and see what you
think. So Hello to Karen,Hello to her husband. Listening Instant Louis.
Thank you guys so much for findingour whole bank. Thank you and

(52:52):
listening. We really really appreciate it. We've got a little bit of business
to do before we go to whatwe always do it the end of our
shows and we go to our dumbcriminal. This week, I've got something
to quickly tell you, guys aboutI read, recently read a really good
book from a debut author and itwas called Blood on the Broadcast and it's

(53:15):
about it's kind of like a lockedroom mystery set in Belfast, and it's
written by somebody called sd W.Hamilton. And I was sent an advanced
reader copy of this to read andit was brilliant. It was absolutely brilliant.
It is a really good book andit was about a podcast and it
was very very cleverly written. I'venever been to Belfast, but I feel

(53:38):
like I have now. It's sodescriptive and it's very cleverly written in that
like, once I started, Icouldn't put it down. So if you're
looking for a new book, becausepeople do often message me and say,
you guys know and I read loadsand they message and say, have you
got any recommendations? So yes,I've got a recommendation for you. It's
called Blood on the Broadcast. Youcan find it on Amazon, you can

(53:58):
find it on good Reads, youcan find it everywhere. And it's really
good. So I highly recommend areally good crime thriller for you. Oh
excellent, thank you, thank youvery Okay, So we do you want
to do dumb Criminal first? Ordo you want to talk about our show
news? First of all, whatdo you want to do? Let's talk

(54:22):
about our show news real quick.Okay. So, as you guys know,
we have been going through some differentchanges for the two of us,
and as obviously as you know,Morgan is in America, I'm in England,
so we have a big time differenceto contend with when we are researching
and writing our show. So whilstI am currently in training until around the

(54:45):
end of May, we are goingto be moving our show to once a
fortnight because time constraints for us andthe physicality that I'm not actually physically here
to do it at the moment ismaking things a little bit difficult for us
to be able to to record everyweek. So we are now going to
be moving to a two week scheduleuntil I've finished the training that I'm currently

(55:06):
doing to make sure that we canstill bring you a show that is properly
researched and we can do the victimsof crime the justice that they deserve when
we're telling their story. You know, if you've in a long term listening
to us, that we do spenda lot of time on our research,
and we put one hundred and tenpercent into that and we would never bring
you a case that we don't feelthat we're comfortable in sharing with you because

(55:31):
we haven't done the research on it. So for a while, it's not
forever, it's just for a fewmonths whilst I am away because I'm away
all week. Just for now,we're we're going to go to two weekly
and then we'll be back to normalas soon as I've finished. Yeah,
it's just three months, that's it. Yeah, just for a while.

(55:51):
We love to do it. Yeah, we love to continue doing it every
week, but you know, it'soh god, we'd like to do it
every day if we could, Yeah, it would be it would be good
to bring you. There's so manycases that we want to talk to you
about, and there's so many casesthat need bring into the to bring into
the spotlight that you know, ifwe could do it every single day,
then we would. But unfortunately weare across a nocean. We do not

(56:14):
have we do not have a teambehind us. We don't have writers,
researchers. We have us just us. Yeah. So yeah, so we
write, we research, we record, we edit, we do all of
it ourselves, and you know,sometimes being a parent and sometimes, you
know, general normal jobs do takeup a bit more time than they usually

(56:36):
do. So unfortunately, we're goingto do it. But we still want
to bring you guys great content andwe still want to tell stories from people
that deserve to have their stories heard. So with that in mind, let's
get to this week's dumb criminal tocheer you all up. Hey, criminal,
use a drummy. This week isbrilliant, right, this week's dumb

(56:59):
criminal, I think is probably oneof my favorites in a long time.
Okay, So, a Colorado crookcarrying thousands of dollars of stolen merchandise walked
straight into the hands of the policeafter he was caught trying to use an
uber as a getaway car. Ohno, seriously, I watched the video.

(57:22):
There's a video to this, right. So, he was ransacking a
plumbing store in Denver, Okay,I think this is like last week or
the week before. The store ownercalled nine one one after noticing that there
was a hole cut in the fenceat the business. Okay. He then
was looking at the surveillance footage andfound this guy inside his plumbing facility,

(57:42):
so he called the cops. Thelocal police turned up. They are wheat
Reach, wheat Ridge Police. Theyarrived on the scene and discovered an uber
driver parked just around the corner ofthe plumbing store. So the uber driver
told his told the cops that hispassenger, Jose or Jose, was headed

(58:07):
right towards the car. So thepolice officer says, Hi, this is
on bodycam footage. He says tothe guy, are you looking for an
Uber? And the man right,who's got his hood, his hood is
pulled up. He's got this blacksweatshirt on and he's got a balaklava pulled
down under his chin, right,looks sideway and puts his hands in his

(58:28):
pockets and he's like, I mean, there's a whole video of this on
the internet. You can find it. And he says like, oh no,
no, I'm not looking for anuber. So the officers ask him,
like what's your name, and hesays, oh, my name's Raoul,
and he like starts going backwards,like like just walk him backwards,
and then the officers grab you,grab hold of him. And then when

(58:50):
they spoke to the guy inside thestore, he described what this man was
wearing, and there it was.It was actually Raoul who had done it.
The contents of the backpack, eventhough he was saying he hadn't done
anything, was full of Milwaukee tools, so that he had more than eight
thousand, six hundred dollars worth ofelectric tools in his backpack. Yeah.

(59:15):
Oh, one idiot, you phonean uber to be your getaway driver,
and then the uber, the uberdriver gives him your real name. It
doesn't like, don't uber drivers likewhen when Uber drivers are picking someone up,
don't they actually like have like anindicator where the person is exactly Oh

(59:35):
yeah, there is right there,just robbing the plumbing store. Ah,
it's crazy. And he comes outand pretends that it's not him. We'll
hang on a minute, mate.You've got all the tools that are missing
from inside the plumbing store in mybackpack, som Raoul. My name is
Raoul Milwaukee. I own Milwaukee Tools. That's right. So I just thought
I would bring you a little bitof cheer with some of the dumbest criminals

(59:59):
this world has ever seen. Andthis is happening as close as last week,
So it's still going on, people, It's still going on. If
you want to submit to us adumb criminal. We gladly received them because
they literally make our week. Soyou can send them over to us.
Lots of people send us videos ofstuff. It's been brilliant. So if
you want to find that, allyou need to do is just go onto

(01:00:19):
Google, another search engine that youmight you might need, and just put
in Colorado, Colorado, plumbase andburglary and it will come up and you
can see Raoul in action. Hisname's Jose but but he called himself.
He's actually called is. These aremy tools. So yes, thank you

(01:00:50):
so much for listening to us.Our next episode will be me in two
weeks time and I will be bringingyou another case from the UK. And
so for now in the break,look after your said ells and be nice
and bye m