December 9, 2024 • 46 mins
Los Angeles, CA | Elizabeth Short’s 1947 murder (also known as the Black Dahlia) still haunts Los Angeles. We press closer to the truth, tearing into the most gripping theories about who claimed Elizabeth Short’s life.
*Note: Since the troubled teen industry came up at the beginning of the episode, we wanted to take the opportunity to share a few links on how you can help stop the abuses in this system: stopinstitutionalchildabuse.com and unsilenced.org. It's a cause we are passionate about and we will continue to bring awareness and advocate for change wherever we can!
Follow us for episode photos and more at:
📷 Instagram: instagram.com/darkcity.podcast
🪡 Threads: threads.net/@darkcity.podcast
👤 Facebook: facebook.com/darkcitypod
🦋 Bluesky: darkcitypodcast.bsky.social
🎥 TikTok: tiktok.com/@darkcitypod
🌎 Website: www.darkcitypodcast.com
✉️ Email: info@darkcitypodcast.com
📚 In a world of viral history clips and quick hot takes, we do right by the many historians, journalists, and researchers who made this episode possible by citing their work. Our key references for this episode are below. For a full list of sources, visit us at www.darkcitypodcast.com.
-Eatwell, Piu. Black Dahlia, Red Rose: The Crime, Corruption, and Cover-Up of America's Greatest Unsolved Murder. Liveright. Kindle Edition. Publication Date: 2017
-Hodel, Steve. Black Dahlia Avenger: A Genius for Murder: The True Story. Arcade. Kindle Edition. Publication Date: 2012
-Hodel, Steve. Black Dahlia Avenger II: Presenting the Follow-Up Investigation and Further Evidence Linking Dr. George Hill Hodel to Los Angeles' s Black Dahlia and other 1940s Lone Woman Murders. Thoughtprint Press. Kindle Edition. Publication Date: 2014
-https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/the-black-dahlia
Have ideas or suggestion? We would love to hear from you! Send us a text via this link.
👏 Special thanks to our talented partners:
Paolo Sbrighi for Musical Composition (instagram.com/paulosbrighi/)
Mario Cintra for Logo Design (instagram.com/alacarala/)
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hi there, this is Leah and this is April, and this
is Dark City Season 1, LosAngeles so I know that.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
I told you, leah, that I was reading the Paris
Hilton book.
There's lots in there about thetroubled teen industry and her
experiences when she's there atthese places.
She mentions Synanon and thegame and where she went it was
called Rap and it's the game.
(01:06):
It's the game and everybody'stearing you down and telling you
you're a POS and nobody lovesyou and just all kinds of stuff.
And she said you know,obviously everybody's expected
to participate.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
That is so messed up.
Who are the people who thoughtthat was just even remotely I
know?
Speaker 2 (01:26):
Where is the evidence-based practice?
Or even intuitive, that oursociety is built on.
To validate any of thesemeasures that you're doing, you
got this from a cult.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
You got this from people who are incredibly cruel
and angry and probablyborderline, if not completely,
psychopathic, and they enjoymaking people feel terrible, and
I feel like a lot of the peoplewho run the troubled teen
industry are just so angrythemselves.
It's like they.
They, I imagine a lot.
It's control as well, and Ithink honestly there's a lot
(02:01):
that enjoy it, which is horrific, and yeah I hope karma is the
thing I really do.
I said that in part one when thereporters told elizabeth
short's mom that she'd want tobe a contest, just to extract
information oh my god, so manyterrible people out there but
I'm not through all of that yet.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
um, I think so far I've counted five escapes.
She escaped five times so fargosh, I didn't know that.
And each time they like somehowfind her and take her back and
she went to like multiplefacilities because once you
(02:43):
escaped, then you got taken tolike this worst place.
Yeah, there are no words.
I just.
It's obviously like her parentsdidn't know the full scope of
things and she's very forgivingand she's like my parents love
me and I know that they feltlike this was the only thing
that they could do and theydidn't know.
(03:05):
Like the places that she goesto, they give a script to the
parents.
They're like don't believeanything that they say, and so
they you know, they didn't know,they didn't know and so it's
just, it was.
The whole thing is like veryheartbreaking, very sad.
I highly recommend this bookit's.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
You know what we're going to.
I'll link in the show notesagain the advocacy groups for
the troubled teen industry thatthere is legislation and things
to do, and I think also to whatin the program kathleen kubler,
when she made that documentary,the program program, she had
said right now we're focusing onat least basic awareness, which
(03:51):
I do think will help a lot too.
But I also feel like some peoplewill just continue to put their
kids in any way and some maymiss the memo.
Their kids in any way and somemay miss the memo.
And there has to be aregulatory component.
I think, if anything, there hasto be repercussions, for if you
(04:12):
have underage kids that are putin your care and treat them
this poorly and cause even moredamage coming out, there has to
be some sort of punishment forthem.
It's, it's so horrible.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
I think on a long enough timeline there will be
enough awareness and probablyreform, but I think it's going
to take time, just like anythingelse.
You know, there's no governingbody, there's no.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
Right, we'll keep talking about it every season
too.
We can do a new troubled teenindustry.
It's like yeah, I thinkkatherine had said it too.
It's like, um, likewhack-a-mole too with these guys
, or there was some comparableanalogy, where you you get one
knocked down and then anotherone pops up at least one of the
(05:01):
places maybe she said that shewas at doesn't exist anymore and
but thank god.
So in part one of the story ofelizabeth short, we learned
elizabeth was no stranger totragedy throughout her life and
died in the most horrific way.
(05:23):
Possible.
Early into the investigation ofher murder, a man named Robert
Manley nickname Red for shortbecame the top suspect.
Remember, this is the pipeclamp salesman.
It's not a laughing matter,though.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
April Pipe clamps are extremely important.
I bet they were.
That's probably why the jobexisted.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
Well, I mean you still.
I mean.
So a pipe clamp holds pipes inplace, preventing them from
sagging, sliding or collidingwith other surfaces.
Wow, you did your homework onthis one take very seriously the
(06:08):
integrity of plumbing, heatingand other piping systems by for
which red was selling these pipeclamps, for I'm sure they're
probably like ordered online orsold your education to me.
Leah has made me change my waysyou will never take your
plumbing for granted again.
He was a bad guy, but he alsoalso did not get off the hook
either, metaphorically speaking.
So, plot spoiler Red is not thekiller, that would be too easy.
(06:31):
But he of course became a topsuspect because he was one of
the last people to see Elizabethalive.
Now, the way Red was found wasthrough the Los Angeles Examiner
.
Now, remember, the newspapersare cutthroat at this time.
They're trying to find all theleads as early as possible, and
(06:53):
this particular publicationlearns of his existence from a
woman named Dorothy and hermother, elvira French.
That was the family she hadbeen staying with in San Diego
before she went back up to theLos Angeles area and you know
the rest.
So Red first met her on a streetcorner when he was on a
(07:13):
business trip in San Diego abouta month before her death.
He said nothing much happenedwith her.
They went dancing and to dinner.
He kissed her.
That was pretty much it and hetold her I'll let you know next
time I am in town.
When she wore out her welcomewith the Frenches, she called
(07:33):
Red and asked him to come andpick her up.
He lived in Los Angeles and shewanted him to drive her there,
where she claimed that she wouldmeet her sister Betty, and they
would go to Berkeley from there.
When the paper and policetalked to Red, he confirmed yep,
I did take her to LA.
Then he helped her check in hersuitcase at the bus station.
(07:55):
Then he took her to theglamorous Biltmore Hotel in
downtown LA, which is where shewas supposed to meet her sister.
That was pretty much it.
He never saw her again.
Now Red was booked as a suspectbut ultimately he passed a
polygraph test and oh, rememberhis wife and his four-month-old
(08:16):
baby.
Yeah, he's got those.
He's got them sitting at home.
His wife stood by him and gavehim an alibi.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
But it doesn't end up turning out well for him.
I believe this is probablylinked to I mean, how upsetting
must it be, regardless of thecircumstance and how right or
wrong you were to be going outwith her but then to find out
later that Elizabeth was killedso horrifically and you were the
one who was questioned forpolice that is.
(08:49):
It's incredibly upsetting foranyone, regardless of their life
circumstance.
His wife ended up committinghim in 1954 into a hospital
after he reported hearing voices.
According to an LA Timesarticle, the hospital
administered sodium pentothal toget him to tell the truth about
(09:09):
Elizabeth.
I do not think that's anaccepted practice today.
He had nothing to share.
He didn't do it.
He's truly innocent, guilty ofother things for sure but not
this crime.
There is a myth that the lastsighting of Elizabeth is of her
(09:30):
leaving the Biltmore Hotel onJanuary 9th.
She is seen exiting the hoteland is never seen again until
she is found on January 15th,and you know the rest.
She's rumored to haunt thebiltmore and I came across this
really disturbing photo of whatcould be her ghost reflected in
(09:52):
a mirror.
I got really to use.
Yeah, so I'll post that on oursocial media and let oh, I think
you told me about that okay Ithink I told you about this a
really long time ago, yeah, whenwe were probably in the early
phases of creating the podcast,and then this was one of the
episodes we knew we were goingto do later, just because it's
(10:13):
so complicated and so muchinformation.
But yes, you'll recognize itwhen I show it to you again.
Speaker 2 (10:21):
The Los Angeles Examiner was able to extract
another key piece of informationfrom the French's and again
that's the family that Elizabethstayed with in San Diego the
month before she was murdered.
Elizabeth had a trunk stored inthe American Railway Express
office.
This could be a goldmine ofinformation and potentially
(10:42):
contain clues as to who herkiller might be, but the company
would not allow the examiner totake a look at the contents
unless the police were present.
The examiner, city's editor,jimmy Richardson, has a plan
Remember, this is the same guywho was the mastermind behind
(11:02):
the strategy to tell Elizabeth'smom that she'd won the beauty
contest in order to extract asmuch information as possible,
before telling her that herdaughter had actually been
murdered.
And, you know, maybe her momwould be too hysterical to talk.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
It's so horrible Every time I come across that
detail.
It never gets better.
I cringe every single time.
Oh, it's awful.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
Disgusting.
Jimmy calls the chief of thehomicide squad, jack Donahoe,
and tells him that he will sharethe location of the trunk, but
only if they open it at theexaminer's office.
Jack, of course, cannot pass upan opportunity to get a hold of
this key piece of evidence thatyou know what if this broke the
(11:46):
case.
So he agrees to the deal.
Speaker 1 (11:50):
Okay, this is.
Is this what you call I don'tknow obstruction of justice?
Much oh probably.
Speaker 2 (12:00):
I have this huge piece of evidence, but I can
only share it with you if youlet me get the initial scoop on
it.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
I hate that they can do this.
I hate it.
We talked about this in theCecil Hotel too.
The reporter I think her namewas Laurel Erickson how she
withheld the information about,or no, she threatened she was
going to share the type of shoeand size of Richard Ramirez.
if the police did not get her aninterview which is so
(12:32):
disgusting considering then hecould have destroyed the shoe
and then those families wouldnever get justice because it'd
be one where people would getmurdered.
Yeah, because it's one thing.
It was the only thing linkinghim to those crime scenes.
The press can be so amazing andso helpful and there's so many
amazing journalists.
I think that these individualsare just an insult to the
(12:55):
profession and basic decency.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
When they opened the trunk they found typical
contents Clothes, for example.
Trunk.
They found typical contentsclothes, for example.
They also found photos, albums,letters to and from different
men that she'd been inrelationships with and it gave
kind of general insight into herlife.
But there's a little bit morerevealing evidence coming up
(13:19):
later.
What happened on the morning ofJanuary 23rd, eight days after
Elizabeth's body was found, islike a scene from a movie.
Jimmy would later describe itin detail in his autobiography
that he wrote.
He took a call that afternoonand the sly, soft voice on the
other end asked is this the cityeditor?
(13:41):
The city editor?
He confirms and the person onthe other end says well, mr
Richardson, I must congratulateyou on what the examiner has
done in the Black Dahlia case.
After Jimmy thanks him, he saysyou seem to have run out of
material.
This is like a movie, I know.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
Poorly written.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
The caller proceeds to offer some help.
He says I'll send you some ofthe things she had with her when
she, shall we say, disappeared.
Dun dun dun.
Speaker 1 (14:14):
Meanwhile, yeah, right I can't help it.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Jimmy is frantically sending a note to his assistant
trying to trace the call, butunfortunately he wasn't able to
keep that caller on long enoughfor them to trace the call, but
unfortunately he wasn't able tokeep that collar on long enough
for them to trace.
When he gets the promisedmaterials two days later in the
mail, he is convinced thatwhoever he spoke to was the
killer.
So the package included a notethat said in newspaper cutouts,
(14:40):
which is interesting also, but Iguess there's a reason for that
stereotype.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
That's something that doesn't happen anymore.
Newspaper cutouts that is likea thing of the past.
Speaker 2 (14:52):
So it says here is Dahlia's belongings Letter to
follow.
Did it really say here is andnot here?
Speaker 1 (15:03):
are it did?
Yes, it's a point of contention.
Speaker 2 (15:07):
Later I feel like it's such bad grammar I know I
like have a hard time reading itbecause I was like I can't hear
, Anyways.
Speaker 1 (15:16):
Yeah, it's a point of contention.
It's so bad that it's like butwas the person who was sending
these things?
Were they doing that on purpose?
Speaker 2 (15:30):
Purpose, or do they really have bad grammar?
The actual contents includedElizabeth's identification
address book, her birthcertificate and social security
card, and the package smelledlike gasoline, so the reason for
that was to remove fingerprints.
I'm going to confess that IGoogled how does gasoline remove
(15:53):
fingerprints and also why doesgasoline remove fingerprints and
some other questions thatGoogle suggested.
So God forbid, should anythinghappen in the future.
This is me like saying today, IGoogled this and that's why
it's for this case.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
Oh, trust me, and not anything else, the research I
have done on this case and youhave done on this case, or just
in general for Dark City, we areon probably multiple lists at
this point I was like.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
I sat in front of it and I was like, should I
actually Google this?
Speaker 1 (16:29):
I've asked questions to chat GPT and they've come
back to tell me howinappropriate the question was,
and I always write back just soyou know.
Here's the address of thepodcast oh my gosh.
So basically, if you or I wereto commit a crime, it would be
really dumb and I hope we'renever framed for one.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Oh, I would have to do it in a hazmat suit.
I don't feel like I don't know.
Anyways, I don't think thisperson I feel like I'm shedding
my hair is going to beeverywhere.
Oh yeah, it's not going to work.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
I don't know how anyone gets away with stuff
today just with the cameras thatare everywhere, like the park,
the site where she was foundlike somebody now would probably
have a camera.
You have like all kinds ofadvances where fiber analysis
and fingerprint analysis can bedone like DNA testing, and it's
amazing to me that stuff doesn'tstill get solved.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
But Right, yeah, yeah , yeah.
Well, in case anybody'swondering, it has to do with,
like, the stuff that's in ourfingerprints.
Some is polar and some isnonpolar, and I think the
gasoline works on both types ofsubstances.
I'm pretty sure that's how soapworks also, anyways.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
So that's as scientific as I'll get, but yeah
, but still, and I feel likethat lends to like this person
is like reasonably intelligentto know that Right.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
To do that?
I mean back then you can'tGoogle it.
Who do you ask?
I don't know.
Maybe you just run in thosecircles that you would know this
information, somebody with ascience background would know.
I don't know.
Yeah, that you would know thisinformation.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Somebody with a science background would know.
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
Yeah, yeah, possibly there were fingerprints found,
but not positively ID'd, andprobably because they were too
smudged, which I did see.
Like gasoline can take off someof it but not all of it, but I
don't know if that's because ofour technology today, which is
quite different than you knowwhat it was.
What is particularlyinteresting among these contents
(18:27):
is the address book.
It included over 75 names andembossed on the cover of the
book was a different name.
That name would become theprime suspect in the case.
In fact, an entire book waswritten on this case, in which
he was one of several peoplethat the author concluded was
(18:49):
likely responsible for herkilling, and we're going to
leave you hanging on to that forright now.
Don't worry, we'll come back toit.
Speaker 1 (18:58):
As for the note to follow, the following weeks
brought a flood of furtherletters and postcards addressed
to the LAPD and variousnewspapers.
It was a lot to sift through,but the police believe that the
first package and note were fromthe real killer, along with a
few others.
There was one handwrittenpostcard that is believed to be
(19:20):
that quote note to follow and itsays says here it is turning.
In wednesday, january 29th, 10am, had my fun at police, signed
the black dahlia avenger I feellike that's weird that they
signed it, the black dahliaavenger it might have implied
(19:42):
that maybe they murdered her forsome avenged wrong.
But okay, so there's another fewclippings that come through.
These, the rest of these thiswas the only hand written note.
The rest of these were all cutfrom news clippings.
On january 30th they gotanother note that said have
(20:02):
changed my mind.
You would not give me a squaredeal.
Dahlia killing was justified.
And then they get another onefrom pasted letters from
newspapers.
It says Dahlia's killer,cracking, wants terms.
But then they had another onethat says I will give up in
Dahlia killing if I get 10 years.
Don't try to find me.
All of these are considered,among all of the muck, to be
(20:25):
legitimate.
It seems like again he's sort ofteasing them and then
indicating he wants to turnhimself in.
I think this sounds like, if itis the killer, it just sounds
like they're having fun after,right, if it is the killer, it
just sounds like they're havingfun after and clearly, just
given the staged presentation ofElizabeth's body, they're doing
(20:48):
all this to get noticed in acertain way.
There were fingerprints found,I believe, throughout, but there
was never a match made and,honestly, because a lot of
evidence that they had at onepoint got lost.
I don't even know if you couldtest them from now, and there's
certainly a lot of people whohave been following this case so
(21:09):
closely which we'll talk aboutvery soon here that if they
could test and do a match, Ihave a feeling they would have
done it already.
Yeah, so with that, let's getinto the theories as to who
killed Elizabeth.
So there are so many of them.
We're just going to talk to youabout the ones that are most
(21:30):
discussed and researched, andall of these have corresponding
books indicating the depth ofresearch and thought that was
put into each of them into eachof them.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
One theory for who murdered Elizabeth Short was put
forward by Janice Knowlton inher 1995 book.
Daddy Was the Black DahliaKiller.
Janice claimed she uncovered aseries of repressed memories
involving her father.
Those memories included thatGeorge Knowlton, her father,
having sexually molested her asa child, that he threatened to
kill her mother and committedmultiple violent acts.
(22:09):
Among these memories was agraphic account of him murdering
Elizabeth Short.
According to Janice, shewitnessed her father beat
Elizabeth to death with a clawhammer in the family's garage
where Short had been stayingafter an alleged affair and
miscarriage.
Janice said she was forced toaccompany her father when he
(22:31):
disposed of Elizabeth's body,describing how he first
attempted to dump the corpse atthe Seal Beach Pier before
ultimately getting rid of it inLos Angeles.
She even claimed to have calledshort Aunt Betty and was
frequently taken to herapartment in Hollywood which I'm
assuming is slightly on adifferent timeline when she
(22:54):
wasn't living in their garage.
Speaker 1 (22:56):
This is interesting too, because she said that he
tried to dump the corpse at theSeal Beach Pier.
How clean the body was.
It just seemed like it wouldhave been a very careful.
You would have to be verycareful to move it from wherever
they did what they did to thenew location.
(23:16):
It doesn't feel like there's alot of room to put it other
places.
Speaker 2 (23:25):
Her story did gain some initial traction.
In 1991, she convincedWestminster police to excavate
her former home's vacant lot,searching for evidence, but they
didn't find anything.
Speaker 1 (23:33):
That's also really interesting too, that she was
able to produce enough doubtthat they went excavating a lot
Like right, that's not somethingthat is not exactly not
resource intensive becausedidn't she think her father had
buried other like stuff and orpeople or something?
Speaker 2 (23:52):
yeah, there was enough at least for them to go
put manpower into thatpsychiatrist specializing in
post-traumatic stress disorderfound her accounts potentially
plausible and she appeared onnational talk shows to tell her
story and published her book in1995 with all of her allegations
(24:13):
.
She went on Larry King Live anddo you remember Sally Jessie
Raphael?
Speaker 1 (24:17):
Oh gosh yes, I feel With the big glasses.
Oh gosh, those shows are soexploitive, but yes, Her family,
however, vehemently rejectedher claims.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
Her stepsister, jolaine Emerson, insisted quote
her book was trash and it wasn'teven true.
She felt like she had a goodassessment of the situation
because she had stayed with thefamily for over a decade, so it
kind of lent a littlecredibility.
Not that people can't hidethings in a household, though.
Speaker 1 (24:50):
Oh for sure.
Yes, I know I mean.
How many times do people getsurprised when it turns out
so-and-so member of the familydid A, b or C?
Speaker 2 (24:59):
Janice died in 2003.
Her death ruled a suicide bydrug overdose.
Speaker 1 (25:04):
Her stepsister believed it was accidental, a
final chapter in a life consumedby what she saw as a
devastating psychologicalfantasy I think suffice to say
that she was a very deeplytroubled person at a minimum,
and that's a sad story,regardless of what the truth
(25:25):
actually is.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
If it was true or not .
Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 1 (25:30):
The next theory was also covered extensively in a
book we've already cited by PewEatwell, called Black Dahlia Red
Rose.
Remember how I said we wouldcome back to the name on the
address book that was includedin Elizabeth's possessions?
That name was Mark Hansen, andhe is a character.
(25:52):
So Mark Hansen, at the time ofher death, was 55 years old,
originally from Denmark, butmoved to the US at age 19 and
became very wealthy, verypowerful.
He owned about a dozen theaters.
He part-owned a nightclubcalled the Florentine Gardens on
Hollywood Boulevard and that isknown for its shows with
(26:15):
scantily clad girls and a hiddencasino.
He might have been part also,too, of an illegal abortion
racket, among so many otherthings.
He had his hands in a lot, alot of shady stuff.
So not a good guy.
Also, remember how I mentionedin part one in the summer of
(26:36):
1946, after Elizabeth'srelationship with Gordon
Fickling came to an end, shemoved to LA from where she was
staying in Long Beach.
There were problems with herroommates and ultimately she had
to leave because of thoseissues and she couldn't make the
rent, and that's where.
From there she went to SanDiego.
(26:56):
That she was living during thattime was one of Mark Hansen's
rooming houses behind theFlorentine Gardens which he
rented to Hollywood hopefuls andapparently this was a thing too
, where some of these nightclubowners would also own housing
that they would rent or letwomen stay in.
(27:19):
It was such a manipulative, itsounds shady, so shady, it's
like the fox running the henhouse.
That's what I think readingthat.
Oh God.
Now Mark Hansen took quite aliking to Elizabeth reported
confirmed by other girls thatshe was living with at the time
and he was noticeably differentwith her than he was with anyone
(27:42):
else.
But it wasn't reciprocated, shewas not interested in him.
He was in fact so jealous ofall the men coming in and out of
her life he would forbid themfrom coming, like they had to
park a few blocks away just todrop her off, so he wouldn't see
them off.
(28:06):
So he wouldn't see them.
And she was kicked out of theapartment when she got into a
fist fight with another girlthat Mark brought home because
she was worried like this girlwas going to try to break into
her suitcase.
But there was a lot of dramabefore that, like she'd been
kicked out before and then cameback under different
circumstances.
So this was just not a good,easy time and there was a lot of
(28:29):
resentment and a lot of badwillbetween her and Mark.
Pugh-eat-wall's theory is thatMark was so angry because he was
constantly getting rejected byElizabeth, and also, potentially
, she knew too much about someof his illicit dealings, that he
asked a man named Leslie Dillon, who was like a low-level
(28:51):
associate she believed, orpotentially a pimp, for him to,
you know, quote unquote takecare of her.
You know, not realizing thatwhat he would translate that to
be would be something morehorrific than anybody could
imagine.
Fbi documents revealed thatLeslie was, at one point, the
(29:12):
top suspect in the case, and howhe got on their radar is an
insane, deeply disturbing story.
On October 28th 1948, almosttwo years after Elizabeth's body
was found, lapd psychiatrist DrPaul DeRiver received a letter
from a man named Jack Sands witha return address of a PO box in
(29:38):
Miami Beach.
This Jack Sands said he knewsomeone who was present a man
that he would later identify asJeff at the killing, and knew a
lot of the people involved,though Jeff claimed he was not
the actual murderer.
Now the man, jack Sands said hewanted to get in touch with the
(30:01):
psychiatrist to help assist andtrack down the person.
So Dr DeRiver plays along.
They correspond for a few months.
You know they talk about thetypical stuff like Jack's
interest in sexual sadism andwhat the psych profile is of the
dolly or killer.
Yeah, I know this will bereally shocking but it turns out
(30:25):
the author of the letters wasnot actually Jack Sands, it
turned out to be Leslie Dillon.
Oh gosh, this reminds me thisletter writing between the two.
It kind of reminds me of in theJohn Benny Ramsey case.
There was a schoolteacherhorrifying named John Mark Carr
(30:45):
that started corresponding withan investigator.
Like there was a ton ofcorrespondence before they
finally found him working as ateacher abroad.
I remember that name.
John Mark Carr might soundfamiliar because he's probably
come up a lot in the news nowbecause the new JonBenet Ramsey
series talks about him.
It's that weirdness of a persongoing and contacting
(31:09):
authorities and correspondingand inserting themselves in
these crimes.
Speaker 2 (31:14):
Yeah, that's so strange, it's just it gives me
the heebie-jeebies.
Speaker 1 (31:19):
Also too, when I looked up Leslie Dillon and John
Mark Carr, they kind of lookthe same.
They're both lanky, I can'ttell.
It said Leslie Dillon was tallbut John Mark Carr might've been
.
They have like those likedownward sloping shoulders and
like the vacant eyes that likejust don't connect with any
other human.
It's very, very weird.
(31:40):
Let me give you a littlebackground on Leslie Dillon.
So he's originally fromOklahoma and eventually ended up
in LA.
He's one of those people who'sjust.
He's been around so manydifferent places, a lot of
geographic instability.
He had a lot of different jobs.
He was dishonorably dischargedfrom the military for stealing
(32:03):
watches of all things.
He was later arrested andcharged for being a pimp.
Other not as bad types ofoccupations that he had included
.
He was a bellhop, a danceinstructor, a taxi driver and
get this he even had a daughterhe ended up naming Elizabeth.
Speaker 2 (32:24):
Oh yeah, come on man, oh yeah come on man.
Speaker 1 (32:26):
So obviously so, at a minimum.
This guy is a complete basketcase creep and he's obsessed
with this case.
When law enforcement initiallytracks leslie down in person,
he's really reluctant to talkand he insists he will not come
to los angeles.
So they end up meeting.
(32:47):
There's a whole circuitousroute that ends up being
followed.
I'm not going to get into it,but basically he, dr DeRiver and
I believe a few detectives likeat least one end up in Banning,
near Palm Springs, at a healthresort and hotel and they stay
there for a few days, duringwhich Dr DeRiver and Leslie
(33:08):
would meet in the hotel room anddiscuss the case and Leslie
would talk about it in a lot ofgraphic detail.
And then at one point DrDeRiver asked Leslie if he would
take off his shirt and thenalso his trousers so he could
physically inspect him.
Oh my gosh, yeah.
So like reading that, I thoughtI am extremely uncomfortable.
(33:29):
This is so psychotic.
I know this is the 40s and it'snot exactly like you have
professional standards in place,but this is sketchy af okay.
So if this isn't insanityenough, then dr de river and
detectives um end upaccompanying leslie for like
more than a week.
They move around variouslocations in Southern California
(33:51):
, and then, in January 1949,they ended up at this hotel in
LA it's downtown called theStrand Hotel, where Leslie drops
a handwritten note out of thehotel window asking for someone
to notify his defense attorneybecause he's being unlawfully
held by police this wholesituation is so bizarre.
(34:14):
It is so bizarre this whole bookwas like.
It was like it was like a feverdream this part.
Yeah, so belly pd getscontacted and they officially
book leslie.
Now dr de river's theory waswas that Jeff was an alter ego
for Leslie, but then theyactually found the real Jeff
Connors who, enough about him,matched the description that
(34:38):
Leslie had shared.
He was from San Francisco.
So this guy, the real JeffConnors, comes in for
questioning Both of them, areinvestigated and ultimately
neither one of them gets chargedand released and in fact Leslie
would later sue the LAPD and DrDeRiver for unlawful detention
and false arrest and it's myunderstanding I think he might
(35:00):
have even gotten a settlementout of it.
So so sketchy.
Now in Puyat-Well's book.
It's very well researched.
She went to a lot of legaldocuments.
She talked to people alivetoday that were close to the
case or would know a lot aboutit.
So it's very deep in terms ofresearch.
(35:20):
It paints a really good pictureof the era and also goes into
like the shenanigans of thepress and all of the characters
in this drama.
But the main theory that sheputs forward is that she thought
she put together evidence thatshe thought Mark and Leslie were
involved at least the two ofthem, and possibly Jeff Connors,
(35:42):
were involved in Elizabeth'sdeath and the reason why she
fought this.
One of the reasons why shethought this is that she found
when she was going in herin-depth research, there was
like missing documents, pagesremoved, and it seemed like they
always related to Mark andLeslie.
Digging further into this, shefound that one of the detectives
(36:03):
leading the investigation was aman named.
Of the detectives leading theinvestigation was a man named
Finnis Brown.
According to further research,she found that it's possible
that Brown was like mixed upwith Hansen, as in there was
probably like underhanded stuffgoing on where he would cover
(36:23):
for him, and then, to furthercomplicate this, finnis Brown
had an older brother named ThadBrown, who was also a powerful
commander on the LAPD.
He could basically protect hisbrother, who could then do
things that looked reallysketchy when they went back into
the files.
Okay, here's what I think aboutthis.
(36:43):
I think that Mark Hansen had alot of reasons to not want to
get on the police's radar forany reason whatsoever.
So even if that's true, thatFinnis and Mark were too close
for comfort and then Finnis'sbrother, thad, would help
anytime he wanted to cover upthings or not play fair and
(37:06):
square.
I don't think that means he's akiller.
I think it just means he Idon't know maybe he doesn't want
to get called in and questionedfor Elizabeth's murder.
And then they start talkingabout maybe the casino, other
things or the abortion racket.
So I can explain that away andsay like that has nothing to do
with Elizabeth and everything todo with this.
Guy had his hands in like awhole hodgepodge of different
illegal things that he did notwant to be.
Speaker 2 (37:27):
Like it was self-preservation.
Speaker 1 (37:30):
So I don't buy that.
Here's something, though.
I can't exactly explain awaythe scene of the crime, so we
don't know exactly.
We know she was transported.
Elizabeth was transported, butwe don't really know from where.
But we don't really know fromwhere.
(38:12):
Well, it turned out when she,when P Wheatwell was doing her
research, that there is a motelwhere they found it was drenched
in blood, like carpet, all thelinens, and there were feces on
the wall, which is an importantdetail in addition to being
incredibly gut-wrenching,because from the autopsy it
found that Elizabeth had beenforced to eat fecal matter.
So this is sounding really,really sketchy.
(38:33):
And, to make things even morecomplicated, there were multiple
people, including the Hoffmans,that said, yeah, I think Leslie
was staying here around thattime and we think we saw her as
well, and not just the Hoffmans,but other people.
Now we do know at least LeslieDillon stayed there in April, so
(38:54):
that's a few months later, andthere aren't like hardcore
records.
In January, because it turnedout the daughter had taken them,
she had taken them home andthey were running out of space,
so she burned them, which in andof itself sounds so sketchy.
So, all right.
Another question you might haveis like okay, so if you open up
(39:16):
a room and you find this is thesite of a horrifying crime,
obviously why are you notcalling the police?
Well, it turns out Right.
Yeah, well it turns out the.
Hoffmans also didn't want to beon the police's radar because
Henry Hoffman had, just daysbefore, been booked for a
domestic incident and spent thenight, and there was a lot of
(39:36):
stuff going on, that you know.
Again, I think it's like withMark Hansen, just because they
didn't commit this crime doesn'tmean they don't, it doesn't
mean that they're in a goodplace for the police coming and
sniffing around, right so, butit is all these shady people.
(39:57):
It is strange.
I will give it that it is.
It is strange.
It is a very, very, veryuncanny coincidence.
You know, then again, losangeles had a lot of crazy stuff
going on.
I mean, like Cecil Hotel, likewe've seen horrible stuff happen
there, but like the timing, theday, the timing with her body
being found, it's very hard toyou know square with.
But it's also described as amotel too, where it's the type
(40:18):
of place where men in dark suitspay cash for rooms.
So this, is you know, this is aplace you do not who knows.
It could have been anything.
It could, yeah, it could havebeen anything.
It could yeah, it could havebeen anything.
There's another compellingdetail too, for also why Pew
thinks Leslie Dillon committedthe murder.
In those really sketchy hotelroom conversations over days
(40:41):
with Dr DeRiver, she said it wasrevealed that he knew a couple
of details about her mutilationthat the police never released.
Only a very small number ofpeople knew about these.
But here's the thing though thethe transcripts from those
conversations they're not.
If they're, they're out there.
(41:02):
I would like to see how thatconversation transpired, because
the way she put it in her bookwas he knew the answer to two
questions that had not beenreleased.
These are there.
If you really want to know them, you could probably go digging.
They're extremely graphic andviolent things that were there,
just horribly disturbing thingsthat happened to her body.
(41:22):
But I could see how you couldask the question and how he
could get.
He could potentially guesscorrectly.
Also, dr de river, we're notgoing to get into all of the
things around him, but there wasa lot of sketchy stuff, you
know.
In addition to the fact that Idon't know he's like asking this
guy to undress in a hotel roomso he can inspect him, so a lot
(41:44):
of stuff like that, where it'slike I'm not saying he was lying
, I'm just saying I don't knowif I I would side-eye everything
this guy says.
He doesn't sound like a credible, a credible person.
So whole side story.
You can read the book and itwill go into that.
Another.
Another detail too is thatLeslie Dillon there were a
(42:06):
couple of people that put him inthe San Francisco area the day
before and after the crime, Idon't know.
You know, it's kind of likewith these people being
questioned.
It's the same with, like thepeople who said, like the
Hoffmans, who said they sawLeslie and they saw Elizabeth at
the motel.
They were getting questionedlike up to like anywhere from a
(42:27):
year and a half to a coupleyears later that they were
getting this stuff on record.
Speaker 2 (42:31):
So it's like you know how reliable is the memory?
Speaker 1 (42:35):
So maybe you know, maybe he could have driven back
to LA, maybe he wasn't really inSan Francisco, maybe dates were
mixed up and all of that.
Maybe there's credibilityissues.
Okay, here's the big issue Ihave with this theory the person
who committed this murder hadto have some sort of medical
knowledge or training.
For sure.
Yeah, and I came across thismultiple, multiple places that a
(42:59):
lot of different types ofexperts said this.
Steve Hodel notes this in BlackDahlia, avenger 2.
Steve Hodel notes this in BlackDahlia, avenger 2, and I also
noted this in other places thatthere's a lot of professionals
who studied this crime veryclosely Law enforcement officers
, district attorneys, coronerexperts, fbi and they all
generally agree that this had tobe someone who was skilled.
(43:21):
Some go so far as to say it hadto be a surgeon, but basically
they had to be skilled.
Pew will say well, leslieDillon was a mortician's
assistant.
Here's the thing he was amortician's assistant for three
weeks.
So, like you're hardly throughthe training manual, you're an
assistant, so that means you'reprobably not hands-on doing
anything with the corpses.
And last I checked whatmorticians do is they embalm
(43:45):
bodies.
And when they do that, whenthey drain the body of blood,
it's like a very precise, cleanprocedure, that massacre that
they saw in the hotel room.
If Leslie really knew how todrain a body, he went into
detail about how it would bedone or how it would work with
Dr DeRiver.
(44:06):
So he's obviously interested.
But then why in the world wouldyou have such a messy crime
scene and then be able to cleanthe body so it's so immaculate?
Also a hysterectomy and theorgans that were removed that
like.
I think you have to be morethan a butcher, for example, to
know that.
But that requires a lot ofknowledge about anatomy and
(44:34):
there is nothing in Leslie'sbackground that indicates that.
Okay.
So, with that said, now thatwe're talking about, this person
had to be pretty highly trained, know the body really really
well.
Well, that's going to limit oursuspect pool dramatically.
That gets us to the lastsuspect.
Dramatically, that gets us tothe last suspect, the one I
personally think committed themurder.
But I'm not going to tell youabout that directly Steve Hodel,
(44:55):
who I just cited his work.
He is a homicide detectivewho's done a lot of work
examining the evidence aroundthis.
He can tell the story farbetter than we ever could.
So we are going to go into apart three, have Steve speak for
himself and the evidence thathe found around this case and
(45:17):
also, to throw another twist init the killer he suspects is his
dad.
Speaker 2 (45:22):
So while we get that episode ready for you, we have a
special bonus episode withjournalist and author James
Bartlett.
He's the author of GourmetGhosts and has done a lot of
research around true crime andhauntings tied to various places
around LA.
Speaker 1 (45:38):
So that episode with James will drop next week, and
then in two weeks the episodewith Steve Hodel will drop, but
we might be able to drop itsooner.
So follow us at Dark City Podon all of our social media
Instagram, Facebook threads andTikTok.
We'll post when it's ready.
Also, follow us wherever you'relistening, because then it will
(46:01):
be available for you in yourmost updated episode stream.
Until then, bye, Thank you.
Hi there, this is Leah and this is April, and this
is Dark City Season 1, LosAngeles so I know that.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
I told you, leah, that I was reading the Paris
Hilton book.
There's lots in there about thetroubled teen industry and her
experiences when she's there atthese places.
She mentions Synanon and thegame and where she went it was
called Rap and it's the game.
(01:06):
It's the game and everybody'stearing you down and telling you
you're a POS and nobody lovesyou and just all kinds of stuff.
And she said you know,obviously everybody's expected
to participate.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
That is so messed up.
Who are the people who thoughtthat was just even remotely I
know?
Speaker 2 (01:26):
Where is the evidence-based practice?
Or even intuitive, that oursociety is built on.
To validate any of thesemeasures that you're doing, you
got this from a cult.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
You got this from people who are incredibly cruel
and angry and probablyborderline, if not completely,
psychopathic, and they enjoymaking people feel terrible, and
I feel like a lot of the peoplewho run the troubled teen
industry are just so angrythemselves.
It's like they.
They, I imagine a lot.
It's control as well, and Ithink honestly there's a lot
(02:01):
that enjoy it, which is horrific, and yeah I hope karma is the
thing I really do.
I said that in part one when thereporters told elizabeth
short's mom that she'd want tobe a contest, just to extract
information oh my god, so manyterrible people out there but
I'm not through all of that yet.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
um, I think so far I've counted five escapes.
She escaped five times so fargosh, I didn't know that.
And each time they like somehowfind her and take her back and
she went to like multiplefacilities because once you
(02:43):
escaped, then you got taken tolike this worst place.
Yeah, there are no words.
I just.
It's obviously like her parentsdidn't know the full scope of
things and she's very forgivingand she's like my parents love
me and I know that they feltlike this was the only thing
that they could do and theydidn't know.
(03:05):
Like the places that she goesto, they give a script to the
parents.
They're like don't believeanything that they say, and so
they you know, they didn't know,they didn't know and so it's
just, it was.
The whole thing is like veryheartbreaking, very sad.
I highly recommend this bookit's.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
You know what we're going to.
I'll link in the show notesagain the advocacy groups for
the troubled teen industry thatthere is legislation and things
to do, and I think also to whatin the program kathleen kubler,
when she made that documentary,the program program, she had
said right now we're focusing onat least basic awareness, which
(03:51):
I do think will help a lot too.
But I also feel like some peoplewill just continue to put their
kids in any way and some maymiss the memo.
Their kids in any way and somemay miss the memo.
And there has to be aregulatory component.
I think, if anything, there hasto be repercussions, for if you
(04:12):
have underage kids that are putin your care and treat them
this poorly and cause even moredamage coming out, there has to
be some sort of punishment forthem.
It's, it's so horrible.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
I think on a long enough timeline there will be
enough awareness and probablyreform, but I think it's going
to take time, just like anythingelse.
You know, there's no governingbody, there's no.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
Right, we'll keep talking about it every season
too.
We can do a new troubled teenindustry.
It's like yeah, I thinkkatherine had said it too.
It's like, um, likewhack-a-mole too with these guys
, or there was some comparableanalogy, where you you get one
knocked down and then anotherone pops up at least one of the
(05:01):
places maybe she said that shewas at doesn't exist anymore and
but thank god.
So in part one of the story ofelizabeth short, we learned
elizabeth was no stranger totragedy throughout her life and
died in the most horrific way.
(05:23):
Possible.
Early into the investigation ofher murder, a man named Robert
Manley nickname Red for shortbecame the top suspect.
Remember, this is the pipeclamp salesman.
It's not a laughing matter,though.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
April Pipe clamps are extremely important.
I bet they were.
That's probably why the jobexisted.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
Well, I mean you still.
I mean.
So a pipe clamp holds pipes inplace, preventing them from
sagging, sliding or collidingwith other surfaces.
Wow, you did your homework onthis one take very seriously the
(06:08):
integrity of plumbing, heatingand other piping systems by for
which red was selling these pipeclamps, for I'm sure they're
probably like ordered online orsold your education to me.
Leah has made me change my waysyou will never take your
plumbing for granted again.
He was a bad guy, but he alsoalso did not get off the hook
either, metaphorically speaking.
So, plot spoiler Red is not thekiller, that would be too easy.
(06:31):
But he of course became a topsuspect because he was one of
the last people to see Elizabethalive.
Now, the way Red was found wasthrough the Los Angeles Examiner
.
Now, remember, the newspapersare cutthroat at this time.
They're trying to find all theleads as early as possible, and
(06:53):
this particular publicationlearns of his existence from a
woman named Dorothy and hermother, elvira French.
That was the family she hadbeen staying with in San Diego
before she went back up to theLos Angeles area and you know
the rest.
So Red first met her on a streetcorner when he was on a
(07:13):
business trip in San Diego abouta month before her death.
He said nothing much happenedwith her.
They went dancing and to dinner.
He kissed her.
That was pretty much it and hetold her I'll let you know next
time I am in town.
When she wore out her welcomewith the Frenches, she called
(07:33):
Red and asked him to come andpick her up.
He lived in Los Angeles and shewanted him to drive her there,
where she claimed that she wouldmeet her sister Betty, and they
would go to Berkeley from there.
When the paper and policetalked to Red, he confirmed yep,
I did take her to LA.
Then he helped her check in hersuitcase at the bus station.
(07:55):
Then he took her to theglamorous Biltmore Hotel in
downtown LA, which is where shewas supposed to meet her sister.
That was pretty much it.
He never saw her again.
Now Red was booked as a suspectbut ultimately he passed a
polygraph test and oh, rememberhis wife and his four-month-old
(08:16):
baby.
Yeah, he's got those.
He's got them sitting at home.
His wife stood by him and gavehim an alibi.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
But it doesn't end up turning out well for him.
I believe this is probablylinked to I mean, how upsetting
must it be, regardless of thecircumstance and how right or
wrong you were to be going outwith her but then to find out
later that Elizabeth was killedso horrifically and you were the
one who was questioned forpolice that is.
(08:49):
It's incredibly upsetting foranyone, regardless of their life
circumstance.
His wife ended up committinghim in 1954 into a hospital
after he reported hearing voices.
According to an LA Timesarticle, the hospital
administered sodium pentothal toget him to tell the truth about
(09:09):
Elizabeth.
I do not think that's anaccepted practice today.
He had nothing to share.
He didn't do it.
He's truly innocent, guilty ofother things for sure but not
this crime.
There is a myth that the lastsighting of Elizabeth is of her
(09:30):
leaving the Biltmore Hotel onJanuary 9th.
She is seen exiting the hoteland is never seen again until
she is found on January 15th,and you know the rest.
She's rumored to haunt thebiltmore and I came across this
really disturbing photo of whatcould be her ghost reflected in
(09:52):
a mirror.
I got really to use.
Yeah, so I'll post that on oursocial media and let oh, I think
you told me about that okay Ithink I told you about this a
really long time ago, yeah, whenwe were probably in the early
phases of creating the podcast,and then this was one of the
episodes we knew we were goingto do later, just because it's
(10:13):
so complicated and so muchinformation.
But yes, you'll recognize itwhen I show it to you again.
Speaker 2 (10:21):
The Los Angeles Examiner was able to extract
another key piece of informationfrom the French's and again
that's the family that Elizabethstayed with in San Diego the
month before she was murdered.
Elizabeth had a trunk stored inthe American Railway Express
office.
This could be a goldmine ofinformation and potentially
(10:42):
contain clues as to who herkiller might be, but the company
would not allow the examiner totake a look at the contents
unless the police were present.
The examiner, city's editor,jimmy Richardson, has a plan
Remember, this is the same guywho was the mastermind behind
(11:02):
the strategy to tell Elizabeth'smom that she'd won the beauty
contest in order to extract asmuch information as possible,
before telling her that herdaughter had actually been
murdered.
And, you know, maybe her momwould be too hysterical to talk.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
It's so horrible Every time I come across that
detail.
It never gets better.
I cringe every single time.
Oh, it's awful.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
Disgusting.
Jimmy calls the chief of thehomicide squad, jack Donahoe,
and tells him that he will sharethe location of the trunk, but
only if they open it at theexaminer's office.
Jack, of course, cannot pass upan opportunity to get a hold of
this key piece of evidence thatyou know what if this broke the
(11:46):
case.
So he agrees to the deal.
Speaker 1 (11:50):
Okay, this is.
Is this what you call I don'tknow obstruction of justice?
Much oh probably.
Speaker 2 (12:00):
I have this huge piece of evidence, but I can
only share it with you if youlet me get the initial scoop on
it.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
I hate that they can do this.
I hate it.
We talked about this in theCecil Hotel too.
The reporter I think her namewas Laurel Erickson how she
withheld the information about,or no, she threatened she was
going to share the type of shoeand size of Richard Ramirez.
if the police did not get her aninterview which is so
(12:32):
disgusting considering then hecould have destroyed the shoe
and then those families wouldnever get justice because it'd
be one where people would getmurdered.
Yeah, because it's one thing.
It was the only thing linkinghim to those crime scenes.
The press can be so amazing andso helpful and there's so many
amazing journalists.
I think that these individualsare just an insult to the
(12:55):
profession and basic decency.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
When they opened the trunk they found typical
contents Clothes, for example.
Trunk.
They found typical contentsclothes, for example.
They also found photos, albums,letters to and from different
men that she'd been inrelationships with and it gave
kind of general insight into herlife.
But there's a little bit morerevealing evidence coming up
(13:19):
later.
What happened on the morning ofJanuary 23rd, eight days after
Elizabeth's body was found, islike a scene from a movie.
Jimmy would later describe itin detail in his autobiography
that he wrote.
He took a call that afternoonand the sly, soft voice on the
other end asked is this the cityeditor?
(13:41):
The city editor?
He confirms and the person onthe other end says well, mr
Richardson, I must congratulateyou on what the examiner has
done in the Black Dahlia case.
After Jimmy thanks him, he saysyou seem to have run out of
material.
This is like a movie, I know.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
Poorly written.
Speaker 2 (14:03):
The caller proceeds to offer some help.
He says I'll send you some ofthe things she had with her when
she, shall we say, disappeared.
Dun dun dun.
Speaker 1 (14:14):
Meanwhile, yeah, right I can't help it.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Jimmy is frantically sending a note to his assistant
trying to trace the call, butunfortunately he wasn't able to
keep that caller on long enoughfor them to trace the call, but
unfortunately he wasn't able tokeep that collar on long enough
for them to trace.
When he gets the promisedmaterials two days later in the
mail, he is convinced thatwhoever he spoke to was the
killer.
So the package included a notethat said in newspaper cutouts,
(14:40):
which is interesting also, but Iguess there's a reason for that
stereotype.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
That's something that doesn't happen anymore.
Newspaper cutouts that is likea thing of the past.
Speaker 2 (14:52):
So it says here is Dahlia's belongings Letter to
follow.
Did it really say here is andnot here?
Speaker 1 (15:03):
are it did?
Yes, it's a point of contention.
Speaker 2 (15:07):
Later I feel like it's such bad grammar I know I
like have a hard time reading itbecause I was like I can't hear
, Anyways.
Speaker 1 (15:16):
Yeah, it's a point of contention.
It's so bad that it's like butwas the person who was sending
these things?
Were they doing that on purpose?
Speaker 2 (15:30):
Purpose, or do they really have bad grammar?
The actual contents includedElizabeth's identification
address book, her birthcertificate and social security
card, and the package smelledlike gasoline, so the reason for
that was to remove fingerprints.
I'm going to confess that IGoogled how does gasoline remove
(15:53):
fingerprints and also why doesgasoline remove fingerprints and
some other questions thatGoogle suggested.
So God forbid, should anythinghappen in the future.
This is me like saying today, IGoogled this and that's why
it's for this case.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
Oh, trust me, and not anything else, the research I
have done on this case and youhave done on this case, or just
in general for Dark City, we areon probably multiple lists at
this point I was like.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
I sat in front of it and I was like, should I
actually Google this?
Speaker 1 (16:29):
I've asked questions to chat GPT and they've come
back to tell me howinappropriate the question was,
and I always write back just soyou know.
Here's the address of thepodcast oh my gosh.
So basically, if you or I wereto commit a crime, it would be
really dumb and I hope we'renever framed for one.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Oh, I would have to do it in a hazmat suit.
I don't feel like I don't know.
Anyways, I don't think thisperson I feel like I'm shedding
my hair is going to beeverywhere.
Oh yeah, it's not going to work.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
I don't know how anyone gets away with stuff
today just with the cameras thatare everywhere, like the park,
the site where she was foundlike somebody now would probably
have a camera.
You have like all kinds ofadvances where fiber analysis
and fingerprint analysis can bedone like DNA testing, and it's
amazing to me that stuff doesn'tstill get solved.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
But Right, yeah, yeah , yeah.
Well, in case anybody'swondering, it has to do with,
like, the stuff that's in ourfingerprints.
Some is polar and some isnonpolar, and I think the
gasoline works on both types ofsubstances.
I'm pretty sure that's how soapworks also, anyways.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
So that's as scientific as I'll get, but yeah
, but still, and I feel likethat lends to like this person
is like reasonably intelligentto know that Right.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
To do that?
I mean back then you can'tGoogle it.
Who do you ask?
I don't know.
Maybe you just run in thosecircles that you would know this
information, somebody with ascience background would know.
I don't know.
Yeah, that you would know thisinformation.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Somebody with a science background would know.
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
Yeah, yeah, possibly there were fingerprints found,
but not positively ID'd, andprobably because they were too
smudged, which I did see.
Like gasoline can take off someof it but not all of it, but I
don't know if that's because ofour technology today, which is
quite different than you knowwhat it was.
What is particularlyinteresting among these contents
(18:27):
is the address book.
It included over 75 names andembossed on the cover of the
book was a different name.
That name would become theprime suspect in the case.
In fact, an entire book waswritten on this case, in which
he was one of several peoplethat the author concluded was
(18:49):
likely responsible for herkilling, and we're going to
leave you hanging on to that forright now.
Don't worry, we'll come back toit.
Speaker 1 (18:58):
As for the note to follow, the following weeks
brought a flood of furtherletters and postcards addressed
to the LAPD and variousnewspapers.
It was a lot to sift through,but the police believe that the
first package and note were fromthe real killer, along with a
few others.
There was one handwrittenpostcard that is believed to be
(19:20):
that quote note to follow and itsays says here it is turning.
In wednesday, january 29th, 10am, had my fun at police, signed
the black dahlia avenger I feellike that's weird that they
signed it, the black dahliaavenger it might have implied
(19:42):
that maybe they murdered her forsome avenged wrong.
But okay, so there's another fewclippings that come through.
These, the rest of these thiswas the only hand written note.
The rest of these were all cutfrom news clippings.
On january 30th they gotanother note that said have
(20:02):
changed my mind.
You would not give me a squaredeal.
Dahlia killing was justified.
And then they get another onefrom pasted letters from
newspapers.
It says Dahlia's killer,cracking, wants terms.
But then they had another onethat says I will give up in
Dahlia killing if I get 10 years.
Don't try to find me.
All of these are considered,among all of the muck, to be
(20:25):
legitimate.
It seems like again he's sort ofteasing them and then
indicating he wants to turnhimself in.
I think this sounds like, if itis the killer, it just sounds
like they're having fun after,right, if it is the killer, it
just sounds like they're havingfun after and clearly, just
given the staged presentation ofElizabeth's body, they're doing
(20:48):
all this to get noticed in acertain way.
There were fingerprints found,I believe, throughout, but there
was never a match made and,honestly, because a lot of
evidence that they had at onepoint got lost.
I don't even know if you couldtest them from now, and there's
certainly a lot of people whohave been following this case so
(21:09):
closely which we'll talk aboutvery soon here that if they
could test and do a match, Ihave a feeling they would have
done it already.
Yeah, so with that, let's getinto the theories as to who
killed Elizabeth.
So there are so many of them.
We're just going to talk to youabout the ones that are most
(21:30):
discussed and researched, andall of these have corresponding
books indicating the depth ofresearch and thought that was
put into each of them into eachof them.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
One theory for who murdered Elizabeth Short was put
forward by Janice Knowlton inher 1995 book.
Daddy Was the Black DahliaKiller.
Janice claimed she uncovered aseries of repressed memories
involving her father.
Those memories included thatGeorge Knowlton, her father,
having sexually molested her asa child, that he threatened to
kill her mother and committedmultiple violent acts.
(22:09):
Among these memories was agraphic account of him murdering
Elizabeth Short.
According to Janice, shewitnessed her father beat
Elizabeth to death with a clawhammer in the family's garage
where Short had been stayingafter an alleged affair and
miscarriage.
Janice said she was forced toaccompany her father when he
(22:31):
disposed of Elizabeth's body,describing how he first
attempted to dump the corpse atthe Seal Beach Pier before
ultimately getting rid of it inLos Angeles.
She even claimed to have calledshort Aunt Betty and was
frequently taken to herapartment in Hollywood which I'm
assuming is slightly on adifferent timeline when she
(22:54):
wasn't living in their garage.
Speaker 1 (22:56):
This is interesting too, because she said that he
tried to dump the corpse at theSeal Beach Pier.
How clean the body was.
It just seemed like it wouldhave been a very careful.
You would have to be verycareful to move it from wherever
they did what they did to thenew location.
(23:16):
It doesn't feel like there's alot of room to put it other
places.
Speaker 2 (23:25):
Her story did gain some initial traction.
In 1991, she convincedWestminster police to excavate
her former home's vacant lot,searching for evidence, but they
didn't find anything.
Speaker 1 (23:33):
That's also really interesting too, that she was
able to produce enough doubtthat they went excavating a lot
Like right, that's not somethingthat is not exactly not
resource intensive becausedidn't she think her father had
buried other like stuff and orpeople or something?
Speaker 2 (23:52):
yeah, there was enough at least for them to go
put manpower into thatpsychiatrist specializing in
post-traumatic stress disorderfound her accounts potentially
plausible and she appeared onnational talk shows to tell her
story and published her book in1995 with all of her allegations
(24:13):
.
She went on Larry King Live anddo you remember Sally Jessie
Raphael?
Speaker 1 (24:17):
Oh gosh yes, I feel With the big glasses.
Oh gosh, those shows are soexploitive, but yes, Her family,
however, vehemently rejectedher claims.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
Her stepsister, jolaine Emerson, insisted quote
her book was trash and it wasn'teven true.
She felt like she had a goodassessment of the situation
because she had stayed with thefamily for over a decade, so it
kind of lent a littlecredibility.
Not that people can't hidethings in a household, though.
Speaker 1 (24:50):
Oh for sure.
Yes, I know I mean.
How many times do people getsurprised when it turns out
so-and-so member of the familydid A, b or C?
Speaker 2 (24:59):
Janice died in 2003.
Her death ruled a suicide bydrug overdose.
Speaker 1 (25:04):
Her stepsister believed it was accidental, a
final chapter in a life consumedby what she saw as a
devastating psychologicalfantasy I think suffice to say
that she was a very deeplytroubled person at a minimum,
and that's a sad story,regardless of what the truth
(25:25):
actually is.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
If it was true or not .
Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 1 (25:30):
The next theory was also covered extensively in a
book we've already cited by PewEatwell, called Black Dahlia Red
Rose.
Remember how I said we wouldcome back to the name on the
address book that was includedin Elizabeth's possessions?
That name was Mark Hansen, andhe is a character.
(25:52):
So Mark Hansen, at the time ofher death, was 55 years old,
originally from Denmark, butmoved to the US at age 19 and
became very wealthy, verypowerful.
He owned about a dozen theaters.
He part-owned a nightclubcalled the Florentine Gardens on
Hollywood Boulevard and that isknown for its shows with
(26:15):
scantily clad girls and a hiddencasino.
He might have been part also,too, of an illegal abortion
racket, among so many otherthings.
He had his hands in a lot, alot of shady stuff.
So not a good guy.
Also, remember how I mentionedin part one in the summer of
(26:36):
1946, after Elizabeth'srelationship with Gordon
Fickling came to an end, shemoved to LA from where she was
staying in Long Beach.
There were problems with herroommates and ultimately she had
to leave because of thoseissues and she couldn't make the
rent, and that's where.
From there she went to SanDiego.
(26:56):
That she was living during thattime was one of Mark Hansen's
rooming houses behind theFlorentine Gardens which he
rented to Hollywood hopefuls andapparently this was a thing too
, where some of these nightclubowners would also own housing
that they would rent or letwomen stay in.
(27:19):
It was such a manipulative, itsounds shady, so shady, it's
like the fox running the henhouse.
That's what I think readingthat.
Oh God.
Now Mark Hansen took quite aliking to Elizabeth reported
confirmed by other girls thatshe was living with at the time
and he was noticeably differentwith her than he was with anyone
(27:42):
else.
But it wasn't reciprocated, shewas not interested in him.
He was in fact so jealous ofall the men coming in and out of
her life he would forbid themfrom coming, like they had to
park a few blocks away just todrop her off, so he wouldn't see
them off.
(28:06):
So he wouldn't see them.
And she was kicked out of theapartment when she got into a
fist fight with another girlthat Mark brought home because
she was worried like this girlwas going to try to break into
her suitcase.
But there was a lot of dramabefore that, like she'd been
kicked out before and then cameback under different
circumstances.
So this was just not a good,easy time and there was a lot of
(28:29):
resentment and a lot of badwillbetween her and Mark.
Pugh-eat-wall's theory is thatMark was so angry because he was
constantly getting rejected byElizabeth, and also, potentially
, she knew too much about someof his illicit dealings, that he
asked a man named Leslie Dillon, who was like a low-level
(28:51):
associate she believed, orpotentially a pimp, for him to,
you know, quote unquote takecare of her.
You know, not realizing thatwhat he would translate that to
be would be something morehorrific than anybody could
imagine.
Fbi documents revealed thatLeslie was, at one point, the
(29:12):
top suspect in the case, and howhe got on their radar is an
insane, deeply disturbing story.
On October 28th 1948, almosttwo years after Elizabeth's body
was found, lapd psychiatrist DrPaul DeRiver received a letter
from a man named Jack Sands witha return address of a PO box in
(29:38):
Miami Beach.
This Jack Sands said he knewsomeone who was present a man
that he would later identify asJeff at the killing, and knew a
lot of the people involved,though Jeff claimed he was not
the actual murderer.
Now the man, jack Sands said hewanted to get in touch with the
(30:01):
psychiatrist to help assist andtrack down the person.
So Dr DeRiver plays along.
They correspond for a few months.
You know they talk about thetypical stuff like Jack's
interest in sexual sadism andwhat the psych profile is of the
dolly or killer.
Yeah, I know this will bereally shocking but it turns out
(30:25):
the author of the letters wasnot actually Jack Sands, it
turned out to be Leslie Dillon.
Oh gosh, this reminds me thisletter writing between the two.
It kind of reminds me of in theJohn Benny Ramsey case.
There was a schoolteacherhorrifying named John Mark Carr
(30:45):
that started corresponding withan investigator.
Like there was a ton ofcorrespondence before they
finally found him working as ateacher abroad.
I remember that name.
John Mark Carr might soundfamiliar because he's probably
come up a lot in the news nowbecause the new JonBenet Ramsey
series talks about him.
It's that weirdness of a persongoing and contacting
(31:09):
authorities and correspondingand inserting themselves in
these crimes.
Speaker 2 (31:14):
Yeah, that's so strange, it's just it gives me
the heebie-jeebies.
Speaker 1 (31:19):
Also too, when I looked up Leslie Dillon and John
Mark Carr, they kind of lookthe same.
They're both lanky, I can'ttell.
It said Leslie Dillon was tallbut John Mark Carr might've been
.
They have like those likedownward sloping shoulders and
like the vacant eyes that likejust don't connect with any
other human.
It's very, very weird.
(31:40):
Let me give you a littlebackground on Leslie Dillon.
So he's originally fromOklahoma and eventually ended up
in LA.
He's one of those people who'sjust.
He's been around so manydifferent places, a lot of
geographic instability.
He had a lot of different jobs.
He was dishonorably dischargedfrom the military for stealing
(32:03):
watches of all things.
He was later arrested andcharged for being a pimp.
Other not as bad types ofoccupations that he had included
.
He was a bellhop, a danceinstructor, a taxi driver and
get this he even had a daughterhe ended up naming Elizabeth.
Speaker 2 (32:24):
Oh yeah, come on man, oh yeah come on man.
Speaker 1 (32:26):
So obviously so, at a minimum.
This guy is a complete basketcase creep and he's obsessed
with this case.
When law enforcement initiallytracks leslie down in person,
he's really reluctant to talkand he insists he will not come
to los angeles.
So they end up meeting.
(32:47):
There's a whole circuitousroute that ends up being
followed.
I'm not going to get into it,but basically he, dr DeRiver and
I believe a few detectives likeat least one end up in Banning,
near Palm Springs, at a healthresort and hotel and they stay
there for a few days, duringwhich Dr DeRiver and Leslie
(33:08):
would meet in the hotel room anddiscuss the case and Leslie
would talk about it in a lot ofgraphic detail.
And then at one point DrDeRiver asked Leslie if he would
take off his shirt and thenalso his trousers so he could
physically inspect him.
Oh my gosh, yeah.
So like reading that, I thoughtI am extremely uncomfortable.
(33:29):
This is so psychotic.
I know this is the 40s and it'snot exactly like you have
professional standards in place,but this is sketchy af okay.
So if this isn't insanityenough, then dr de river and
detectives um end upaccompanying leslie for like
more than a week.
They move around variouslocations in Southern California
(33:51):
, and then, in January 1949,they ended up at this hotel in
LA it's downtown called theStrand Hotel, where Leslie drops
a handwritten note out of thehotel window asking for someone
to notify his defense attorneybecause he's being unlawfully
held by police this wholesituation is so bizarre.
(34:14):
It is so bizarre this whole bookwas like.
It was like it was like a feverdream this part.
Yeah, so belly pd getscontacted and they officially
book leslie.
Now dr de river's theory waswas that Jeff was an alter ego
for Leslie, but then theyactually found the real Jeff
Connors who, enough about him,matched the description that
(34:38):
Leslie had shared.
He was from San Francisco.
So this guy, the real JeffConnors, comes in for
questioning Both of them, areinvestigated and ultimately
neither one of them gets chargedand released and in fact Leslie
would later sue the LAPD and DrDeRiver for unlawful detention
and false arrest and it's myunderstanding I think he might
(35:00):
have even gotten a settlementout of it.
So so sketchy.
Now in Puyat-Well's book.
It's very well researched.
She went to a lot of legaldocuments.
She talked to people alivetoday that were close to the
case or would know a lot aboutit.
So it's very deep in terms ofresearch.
(35:20):
It paints a really good pictureof the era and also goes into
like the shenanigans of thepress and all of the characters
in this drama.
But the main theory that sheputs forward is that she thought
she put together evidence thatshe thought Mark and Leslie were
involved at least the two ofthem, and possibly Jeff Connors,
(35:42):
were involved in Elizabeth'sdeath and the reason why she
fought this.
One of the reasons why shethought this is that she found
when she was going in herin-depth research, there was
like missing documents, pagesremoved, and it seemed like they
always related to Mark andLeslie.
Digging further into this, shefound that one of the detectives
(36:03):
leading the investigation was aman named.
Of the detectives leading theinvestigation was a man named
Finnis Brown.
According to further research,she found that it's possible
that Brown was like mixed upwith Hansen, as in there was
probably like underhanded stuffgoing on where he would cover
(36:23):
for him, and then, to furthercomplicate this, finnis Brown
had an older brother named ThadBrown, who was also a powerful
commander on the LAPD.
He could basically protect hisbrother, who could then do
things that looked reallysketchy when they went back into
the files.
Okay, here's what I think aboutthis.
(36:43):
I think that Mark Hansen had alot of reasons to not want to
get on the police's radar forany reason whatsoever.
So even if that's true, thatFinnis and Mark were too close
for comfort and then Finnis'sbrother, thad, would help
anytime he wanted to cover upthings or not play fair and
(37:06):
square.
I don't think that means he's akiller.
I think it just means he Idon't know maybe he doesn't want
to get called in and questionedfor Elizabeth's murder.
And then they start talkingabout maybe the casino, other
things or the abortion racket.
So I can explain that away andsay like that has nothing to do
with Elizabeth and everything todo with this.
Guy had his hands in like awhole hodgepodge of different
illegal things that he did notwant to be.
Speaker 2 (37:27):
Like it was self-preservation.
Speaker 1 (37:30):
So I don't buy that.
Here's something, though.
I can't exactly explain awaythe scene of the crime, so we
don't know exactly.
We know she was transported.
Elizabeth was transported, butwe don't really know from where.
But we don't really know fromwhere.
(38:12):
Well, it turned out when she,when P Wheatwell was doing her
research, that there is a motelwhere they found it was drenched
in blood, like carpet, all thelinens, and there were feces on
the wall, which is an importantdetail in addition to being
incredibly gut-wrenching,because from the autopsy it
found that Elizabeth had beenforced to eat fecal matter.
So this is sounding really,really sketchy.
(38:33):
And, to make things even morecomplicated, there were multiple
people, including the Hoffmans,that said, yeah, I think Leslie
was staying here around thattime and we think we saw her as
well, and not just the Hoffmans,but other people.
Now we do know at least LeslieDillon stayed there in April, so
(38:54):
that's a few months later, andthere aren't like hardcore
records.
In January, because it turnedout the daughter had taken them,
she had taken them home andthey were running out of space,
so she burned them, which in andof itself sounds so sketchy.
So, all right.
Another question you might haveis like okay, so if you open up
(39:16):
a room and you find this is thesite of a horrifying crime,
obviously why are you notcalling the police?
Well, it turns out Right.
Yeah, well it turns out the.
Hoffmans also didn't want to beon the police's radar because
Henry Hoffman had, just daysbefore, been booked for a
domestic incident and spent thenight, and there was a lot of
(39:36):
stuff going on, that you know.
Again, I think it's like withMark Hansen, just because they
didn't commit this crime doesn'tmean they don't, it doesn't
mean that they're in a goodplace for the police coming and
sniffing around, right so, butit is all these shady people.
(39:57):
It is strange.
I will give it that it is.
It is strange.
It is a very, very, veryuncanny coincidence.
You know, then again, losangeles had a lot of crazy stuff
going on.
I mean, like Cecil Hotel, likewe've seen horrible stuff happen
there, but like the timing, theday, the timing with her body
being found, it's very hard toyou know square with.
But it's also described as amotel too, where it's the type
(40:18):
of place where men in dark suitspay cash for rooms.
So this, is you know, this is aplace you do not who knows.
It could have been anything.
It could, yeah, it could havebeen anything.
It could yeah, it could havebeen anything.
There's another compellingdetail too, for also why Pew
thinks Leslie Dillon committedthe murder.
In those really sketchy hotelroom conversations over days
(40:41):
with Dr DeRiver, she said it wasrevealed that he knew a couple
of details about her mutilationthat the police never released.
Only a very small number ofpeople knew about these.
But here's the thing though thethe transcripts from those
conversations they're not.
If they're, they're out there.
(41:02):
I would like to see how thatconversation transpired, because
the way she put it in her bookwas he knew the answer to two
questions that had not beenreleased.
These are there.
If you really want to know them, you could probably go digging.
They're extremely graphic andviolent things that were there,
just horribly disturbing thingsthat happened to her body.
(41:22):
But I could see how you couldask the question and how he
could get.
He could potentially guesscorrectly.
Also, dr de river, we're notgoing to get into all of the
things around him, but there wasa lot of sketchy stuff, you
know.
In addition to the fact that Idon't know he's like asking this
guy to undress in a hotel roomso he can inspect him, so a lot
(41:44):
of stuff like that, where it'slike I'm not saying he was lying
, I'm just saying I don't knowif I I would side-eye everything
this guy says.
He doesn't sound like a credible, a credible person.
So whole side story.
You can read the book and itwill go into that.
Another.
Another detail too is thatLeslie Dillon there were a
(42:06):
couple of people that put him inthe San Francisco area the day
before and after the crime, Idon't know.
You know, it's kind of likewith these people being
questioned.
It's the same with, like thepeople who said, like the
Hoffmans, who said they sawLeslie and they saw Elizabeth at
the motel.
They were getting questionedlike up to like anywhere from a
(42:27):
year and a half to a coupleyears later that they were
getting this stuff on record.
Speaker 2 (42:31):
So it's like you know how reliable is the memory?
Speaker 1 (42:35):
So maybe you know, maybe he could have driven back
to LA, maybe he wasn't really inSan Francisco, maybe dates were
mixed up and all of that.
Maybe there's credibilityissues.
Okay, here's the big issue Ihave with this theory the person
who committed this murder hadto have some sort of medical
knowledge or training.
For sure.
Yeah, and I came across thismultiple, multiple places that a
(42:59):
lot of different types ofexperts said this.
Steve Hodel notes this in BlackDahlia, avenger 2.
Steve Hodel notes this in BlackDahlia, avenger 2, and I also
noted this in other places thatthere's a lot of professionals
who studied this crime veryclosely Law enforcement officers
, district attorneys, coronerexperts, fbi and they all
generally agree that this had tobe someone who was skilled.
(43:21):
Some go so far as to say it hadto be a surgeon, but basically
they had to be skilled.
Pew will say well, leslieDillon was a mortician's
assistant.
Here's the thing he was amortician's assistant for three
weeks.
So, like you're hardly throughthe training manual, you're an
assistant, so that means you'reprobably not hands-on doing
anything with the corpses.
And last I checked whatmorticians do is they embalm
(43:45):
bodies.
And when they do that, whenthey drain the body of blood,
it's like a very precise, cleanprocedure, that massacre that
they saw in the hotel room.
If Leslie really knew how todrain a body, he went into
detail about how it would bedone or how it would work with
Dr DeRiver.
(44:06):
So he's obviously interested.
But then why in the world wouldyou have such a messy crime
scene and then be able to cleanthe body so it's so immaculate?
Also a hysterectomy and theorgans that were removed that
like.
I think you have to be morethan a butcher, for example, to
know that.
But that requires a lot ofknowledge about anatomy and
(44:34):
there is nothing in Leslie'sbackground that indicates that.
Okay.
So, with that said, now thatwe're talking about, this person
had to be pretty highly trained, know the body really really
well.
Well, that's going to limit oursuspect pool dramatically.
That gets us to the lastsuspect.
Dramatically, that gets us tothe last suspect, the one I
personally think committed themurder.
But I'm not going to tell youabout that directly Steve Hodel,
(44:55):
who I just cited his work.
He is a homicide detectivewho's done a lot of work
examining the evidence aroundthis.
He can tell the story farbetter than we ever could.
So we are going to go into apart three, have Steve speak for
himself and the evidence thathe found around this case and
(45:17):
also, to throw another twist init the killer he suspects is his
dad.
Speaker 2 (45:22):
So while we get that episode ready for you, we have a
special bonus episode withjournalist and author James
Bartlett.
He's the author of GourmetGhosts and has done a lot of
research around true crime andhauntings tied to various places
around LA.
Speaker 1 (45:38):
So that episode with James will drop next week, and
then in two weeks the episodewith Steve Hodel will drop, but
we might be able to drop itsooner.
So follow us at Dark City Podon all of our social media
Instagram, Facebook threads andTikTok.
We'll post when it's ready.
Also, follow us wherever you'relistening, because then it will
(46:01):
be available for you in yourmost updated episode stream.
Until then, bye, Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.