February 19, 2021 • 28 mins
Leaked theories about a suicide don’t seem to square with the known physical evidence from the crime scene.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
Somebody Somewhere is a production of Rainstream Media Incorporated. This
podcast investigates the unsolved death of Federal Prosecutor Jonathan Luna
in two thousand and three. It is a true story,
but the opinions of the hosts and interviewees are simply
that opinions, not facts, and the credibility of the witnesses
and what they say is to be determined by the listener.
(00:27):
Everyone is presumed innocent until proven otherwise in a court
of law. Previously on Somebody Somewhere.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Jonathan was so distracted he couldn't keep it together, and
I thought, something is wrong.
Speaker 3 (00:46):
He looked at Jonathan and he said, that's not a problem.
Speaker 4 (00:50):
What's the problem? Ken is slick, always dressed to the nines,
you know, put together, and.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
They were going at it and I thought, oh my god,
I mean this is a rug for final he does.
Speaker 5 (01:03):
This is episode four of season three, The Magic Knight.
I'm your host, David Payne. It's been ten years since
the federal prosecutor was found Edna Boro and Lecaester County.
Speaker 2 (01:22):
We will find out who did this.
Speaker 6 (01:24):
Was he trying to stage some sort of attack and
went to the farm.
Speaker 5 (01:38):
You were the last person to speak with him, and
then two hours later he's jumping on the turnpike and
heading on a five hour car drive around four different states.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
It didn't make sense as a time initially, and I
guess it doesn't make sense now.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
Why what happened between.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
I last talked to him at the courthouse, him leaving
the courthouse later that night and going on this trip.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
It didn't make any sense.
Speaker 5 (02:07):
I remember, it didn't make sense to defense attorney Archie Tuminelli,
and it didn't make sense to me either. I keep
trying to put myself in Jonathan's shoes that night, and
no matter how hard I try, I just can't make
them fit. All Jonathan had to do that night was
bang out some paperwork, draft these plea agreements, and claim
(02:28):
victory in the morning to the newspaper when the defendants
pled guilty the following morning.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
The only thing that changed from the time before we
couldn't work this out, so it worked out was this
information comes out about Grace. But people in that courthouse
knew about that before, and then certainly people in the
US Attorney's office had to know. Priest Rial Services knew
just smaking certainly knew so It's not like all of
(02:54):
a sudden he's got a reason to kill himself. Because
this information is coming out.
Speaker 5 (03:04):
Dissecting these last few hours of Jonathan's life has become
commonplace among people looking at this mystery, and likewise, I
find myself pouring over the details, trying to come up
with some rational explanation for his irrational behaviors. One theory
is that Jonathan had been caught concealing the bad information
about Warren Grace, and when he was forced to go
(03:26):
to his supervisor, James Warwick and drop that murder charge
to get a plea done, he hit a breaking point
because he was effectively writing his own pink slip. But
that last night, when Tim Manelli went upstairs to work
out the deal, Warwick seemed to already know about the
Grace situation and possibly even the letter to Judge Smulkin
written by Jonathan's colleague Jackie Rodriguez Costs.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
There's no way that Warwick went into the meeting with
me with Jonathan that evening without being told this, Because
Warwick turned to me and said, Arkie, what's the problem.
Speaker 7 (04:04):
I explained, what the problem is. Jonathan won't give up
this murder for sentencing. I'm sure Warwick knew all. He
did turn to Jonathan say what the hell is he
talking about?
Speaker 8 (04:15):
He just like said, well you can do that, Jonathan.
Speaker 3 (04:17):
So I'm too Wrewick had did know.
Speaker 5 (04:23):
But it's hard to reconcile the principal Jonathan Luna as
someone who would just go along with what the higher
ups wanted if it crossed an ethical line. And so
I thought there might be some other reason Jonathan may
have acted the way he did, both with regard to
his supervisor and the disclosures about Warren Grace.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
Jonathan hid the ball because Rodriguez did it. She was
his senior Jonathan who just went along with you know,
he didn't rock the boat. And I can't believe that
it didn't have something to do with that letter the
smoking saying well, yeah, you can't do anything to Grace,
it's going to damage him as a witness. I mean, Jonathan,
(05:05):
I believe, would have never done that.
Speaker 5 (05:08):
Do you think Jonathan was trying to protect her by
not revealing that.
Speaker 3 (05:12):
I think it was more institutional thing that somebody had
to know about what happened with Grace and her letter
to smalking.
Speaker 5 (05:23):
Whether it was institutional or simply chivalry towards his colleague
Jackie Rodriguez. Cost We'll never know, but either way, what
could it tell us about why Jonathan would return to
the office two hours later, ostensibly to finish the plea paperwork,
only to get up another two hours later and flee
the scene. The lack of answers in this case has
(05:45):
been fueled by the FBI's intentional decision to withhold information
to the public for some unspoken reason. And it all
starts with the cameras.
Speaker 8 (06:00):
Remember whether there were cameras at the time at that courthouse,
on that garage.
Speaker 2 (06:05):
Oh yeah, absolutely, they could look at.
Speaker 5 (06:08):
The court Reporter Ned Richardson explains the lay of the
land at the critical start of the midnight ride.
Speaker 8 (06:15):
Why do you think the FBI has never released any
of that video and or kind of suggested there is
no video.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
If they're saying there was no video, that's not true
because we always had surveillance cameras. I always used to
wave because I went in there every hour. I'd be
there three o'clock in the morning. But they could look
at the loading dock, they could look at where the
cars were parked, because I saw that myself.
Speaker 8 (06:43):
Ned who would have had access to park a car
in the garage.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
People that had to permit.
Speaker 8 (06:50):
So what type of people could get a permit? Could
you get a permit?
Speaker 1 (06:54):
No?
Speaker 8 (06:55):
Who would they let come into the garage during a trial?
Would the FBI agents be allowed to be in there?
Speaker 2 (07:03):
Oh? I think so, but I don't remember. They might
have had some reserved spots.
Speaker 8 (07:08):
Where there are hard there that you Oh, yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
Well, guys, o Bay. We had to put a guard
in a box out at the end of the driveway
so nothing went in or out without his permission.
Speaker 8 (07:22):
He couldn't have been there at twenty four to seven, right, So,
because Luna left the courthouse at about eleven thirty eight PM,
would there have been a guard there at that point?
Speaker 2 (07:31):
I don't think so. I don't think so because everything
was shut down. But they had cameras everywhere. I mean,
they were all over the place.
Speaker 8 (07:41):
It's really curious what happened to these tapes. There's been
a number of stories, of course, written about this case.
They always make it sound like there are no videos,
and it just didn't make sense to me.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
Well, no, that's not true. I could guarantee you that'saw
not true because I would go in there some ten
o'clock at night, but there was always somebody in that
building twenty four to seven, but they would be in
that little.
Speaker 5 (08:08):
Which begs the question, if the FBI really wanted to
put this case to bed, why not release the video footage,
especially because of the circumstances of Jonathan leaving.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
And they said that his glasses were still on his
desk in front of me. I think his computer was
still turned on. I talked to a couple of the
court security officers because when his car went out, it
was really late, and somebody said, well, there was another
car right behind me, And they said that car followed
(08:41):
him all the way up and something to do with
a toll booth or something he paid for the car
behind or the car in front. I don't remember that.
It was something about the toll booth, and that was
kind of bizarre. I heard that from a couple of
different people. I think they said it was a white car.
That's all I remember about that. It's just sketchy.
Speaker 5 (09:08):
The lack of at least released video evidence from the
courthouse to prove or debunk whether Luna was followed that
night is disturbing, but its absence is amplified by the
fact the FBI has also not released any video or
stills from the toll boose, the rest stops, the gas
station he stopped at. Even the ATM pictures have been suppressed.
Speaker 9 (09:30):
That's the problem. There's not that shadowy ATM photo that
shows two people, or there's not this definitive evidence of
a second person being involved, which allows the suicide theory
to have weight, obviously.
Speaker 10 (09:46):
I think.
Speaker 5 (09:47):
But just because the FBI has not released any video,
it doesn't mean that evidence does not exist. Indeed, the
more you talk to investigative reporters like Jane Miller of WBL,
or Gail Gibson of The Son or even author Bill Keisling,
the thing that jumps out the most is a lack
of common understanding of the known facts regarding not just
(10:08):
the videos, but the rest of the evidence. So, Jane,
when you look back at the Louna case over the
course of now it's almost been seventeen eighteen years, do
you have any different perspective than you did when you
were reporting it as these elements were coming out.
Speaker 9 (10:28):
No, you know, I think I thought about that the
other day when I knew we were going to talk
about this is have I changed my thinking about the case,
And no, I really haven't, because I am so evidence
based that I look at the evidence before me, and
the evidence in this case is so inconsistent you can
(10:48):
make an argument either way with almost equal weight. That's
not true in most of these cases. In most cases
that don't have a definitive suicide homicide resolution, you generally
it weighs one way or the other. More this case
is not like that. You can easily make the argument
both ways.
Speaker 5 (11:09):
But to my way of thinking, set aside all the
armchairs psychological profiling and look at the crime scene itself.
What has been reported consistently is that Jonathan Luna suffered
thirty six stab wounds before he died. The issue in
my mind is where were those stab wounds on the body?
How deep or superficial were they, what type of knife
(11:32):
was used, and where did the blood trail lead. Although
the FBI has officially invoked its right to remain silent
through leaks to reporters like Miller and Gibson, they have
conveniently painted a picture that shift's responsibility away from them
for having to solve a crime.
Speaker 4 (11:50):
Over time, we would continue to learn bits and pieces
and more, and I came to learn through sources the
theory about that had likely been a suicide, and the
reason for that theory was the notion that there were
multiple stab wounds, as many as thirty six, but they
were also very lightly inflicted, suggesting self infliction. That if
(12:14):
you are doing attempting to harm yourself, the depth of
wound would be different.
Speaker 5 (12:23):
Whether that characterization of the wounds was accurate has never
been capable of corroboration by third parties, as the FEDS
have consistently fought efforts to have the autopsy released, which
prevents us from reconciling the known medical evidence with the
known crime scene evidence.
Speaker 4 (12:41):
There was information from sources that there that when they
found the car, there was blood in the back seat
of the vehicle, which would suggest that he had been
there at some point, potentially against his own will, or
that there could have been someone else in play. That
was one of the pieces you had to try and
make fit. What was he in the backseat of the
(13:04):
car and then stumbles out of it at some point.
None of these pieces fit together easily.
Speaker 5 (13:13):
The other thing that didn't seem to fit was where
the stab wounds were, and I asked Jane Miller to
review her old scripts for a timeline of what was reported.
Can you talk a little bit about your reporting around
the stab wounds and what those punctioned wounds were and
where they were.
Speaker 9 (13:31):
So here's the day that I'm This was probably two
weeks later I did a story that said, this is
what I reported. According to stores is at least a
dozen of the thirty six stab wounds Luna suffered to
a specific part of his body, his genital area.
Speaker 5 (13:46):
So according to federal sources, Luna stabbed himself a dozen
times in the testicles and another two dozen elsewhere on
his body, all in some kind of choreographed suicidal farewell.
I put the stab wounds in the testicles as part
of that irreconcilable theory that somehow he was trying to
(14:07):
gain sympathy or kill himself. I don't know anybody who
stabs themselves in the testicles in either situation.
Speaker 4 (14:16):
Even the idea that someone could continue to stab themselves
thirty six times sounded just not believe overall.
Speaker 5 (14:29):
And it wasn't just the number and location of the
wounds that cast doubt on intentions, but also the type
of weapon that was.
Speaker 9 (14:36):
Used and the coroner, who when I talked to the
coroner at the time, said the stab wounds were mostly
superficial and shallow and could have been caused by a penknife.
Speaker 5 (14:46):
The timing of that interview with the coroner was when.
Speaker 9 (14:49):
This was the next day.
Speaker 8 (14:51):
And what did he say.
Speaker 9 (14:52):
He said that the Langster County corner announces Jonathan Luna
was brutalized with multiple stab wounds and then put in
a creek while still alive. His cause of death drowning
combined with the stab wounds.
Speaker 5 (15:05):
You said, pen knife.
Speaker 11 (15:07):
Pen knife.
Speaker 9 (15:07):
That's what the coroner said, the dead had been caused
with a pen knife.
Speaker 5 (15:14):
I obviously knew from my research that Luna's wounds were
allegedly caused by a pen knife, But the incredulity you
hear in my voice was from the fact that I
had never heard it was reported to be the weapon
the day after he was found. So how would the
Lancaster County coroner know that Jonathan Luna had a pen knife?
Speaker 9 (15:34):
Well, or he just said used it as an example.
It could have been caused by a pen knife because they.
Speaker 11 (15:39):
Have short blades.
Speaker 5 (15:41):
Such an odd term.
Speaker 9 (15:42):
I know, Okay, I'm going to read you this okay.
According to the Lancas accounting corner, Jonathan Luna died after
suffering multiple stab wounds, probably inflicted with a pen knife,
and being drowned in the creek where his body was
found early yesterday morning, so this was the next day.
Corner says Luna was still conscious when forced into the
creek and stabbed, the corner believe somewhere else and taken
to die into the Lancaster County occasion to die.
Speaker 5 (16:09):
And the reason it's curious the coroner said the weapon
was a pen knife was that no knife was recovered
the day Jonathan was found, despite it protracted an extensive
search by Pennsylvania State troopers. In fact, it would be
weeks after Jonathan's death that a pen knife would be
discovered in the creek. So someone presumably in law enforcement,
(16:32):
told the coroner the day of the murder that Jonathan
Luna had a pen knife, and then you know, two
weeks later, after a search, let's go back and find it.
Speaker 8 (16:41):
One hundred and.
Speaker 5 (16:42):
Fifty troopers at the time. Then they got two weeks
later and find a pen.
Speaker 8 (16:47):
Knife, right correct?
Speaker 9 (16:49):
I think they knew he had one.
Speaker 5 (16:51):
And there was another odd detail at the crime scene.
I still can't wrap my head around. Do your notes
reflect anything about how this pen knife knife penetrated his
suit because he was found in his business suit.
Speaker 9 (17:04):
Right, correct? No, I don't think that was anything that
was ever resolved. An explanation.
Speaker 5 (17:10):
Yeah, there's really no explanation because there were also stab
wounds on his back at LISTA. It's been reported, so
he had to stab himself through.
Speaker 9 (17:18):
His suit, right, with a penknife with a pen knife, right.
Speaker 5 (17:22):
And it's December, so it's got to be a wool suit, right, Yes,
do you stab yourself in the back with a pen
knife through a suit?
Speaker 3 (17:30):
Right?
Speaker 5 (17:38):
Adding to that question is the reporting that was done
by author Bill Keesling on the subject. Federal sources have
never described the wounds Jonathan suffered in any material detail,
but Keesling tracked down one of the undertakers at the
funeral home where Jonathan's body was taken. The undertaker, a
woman named Kim McLeod, would not return our calls, but
(18:01):
Keisling reported that McLeod gave him key details on the wounds. First,
McLeod said the stab wounds in the back were in
the middle below his shoulder blades and also around the
shoulder blades. Second, she said that Jonathan's hands were quote shredded.
There were quote long cuts between all fingers and cuts
(18:22):
to the front and back of the hands. She said
his hands were so deeply cut that they had to
put gloves on for the funeral viewing. Third, McLeod told
Keiesling Jonathan's neck had been slashed open on the right
side and all the way around the neck. And lastly,
and this is perhaps the most graphic, so apologies, but
(18:43):
she said as scrotum had been slashed open, as if
the assailant had been quote working on it.
Speaker 4 (18:53):
There was a lot of confusion even about manner of
death and how the body was located. Through those first
few days, we had sent a.
Speaker 5 (19:03):
Reporter for it, and uncertainty would continue to rule the day.
As the FBI put forth its suicide theory. To Baltimore's
Sun reporter Gail Gibson to explain the extraordinary number of
stab wounds, the FBI would tell her that cuts were
quote hesitation wounds.
Speaker 4 (19:20):
And you know that's when we began to hear these
series of life. Well, there were hesitation wounds and they
weren't that deep. Well, how does that sit alongside evidence
of blood evidence if something is a more superficial wound,
and so then again and what is the wound that
ultimately causes death?
Speaker 5 (19:40):
And while the FBI wasn't publicly explaining how their evidence
fit with their theory, enough people started buying what they
were selling, including people close to the case like defense
attorney Archie Tuminelli.
Speaker 3 (19:53):
When I first heard it was suicide, it didn't make
much sense to me, but later learned there is information
out there about people committing suicide that try to kill
themselves by stabbing themselves. They have what they refer to
as hesitation wounds, Like he was trying to stab himself
(20:16):
and just couldn't go through it. So when I heard that,
I kind of like accepted that it made sense to me.
Speaker 5 (20:25):
There's so many listencies to the leaks. Yeah, all of
which could be reconciled if they would release the information,
but they're holding the information, so I just don't get it.
Speaker 3 (20:39):
I agree with you, but I kind of put it
the rest in my mind when I heard that the
FBI concluded that these wounds were suicide wounds.
Speaker 5 (20:58):
Somebody somewhere will return right after this break on the
morning of December fourth, two thousand and three. As state troopers, detectives,
and the coroner were trying to figure out what happened
to this handsome young man dressed in a suit and
(21:19):
found dead in a creek, a different sort of drama
was playing out in the courtroom of time obsessed judge
Quarrels and court reporter Ned Richardson was watching the clock.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
Well, I feel sorry for his luna when Honey shows up,
because I didn't know he was dead. I mean, oh,
I knew was he wasn't.
Speaker 8 (21:39):
There was there any sense that something bad had happened, or.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
From what I saw when I walked in, everybody looked
like they got hit by a truck or something. I mean,
it was like they were all long faced and very,
very extremely serious.
Speaker 5 (21:56):
One of those long faces that morning was reporter Gail Gibson,
whom Jonathan had asked to be there to cover the
plea deal.
Speaker 4 (22:04):
I was there in the wooden benches in the back
of the courtroom, and it already became clear as we
all sat there for a minute that something was wrong.
I mean, a missing federal prosecutor is a missing federal prosecutor.
I mean, it wasn't like Jonathan to just simply not
be there. And this was an instance where he was
looking ahead to this plea deal into getting this done,
(22:26):
and so the fact that he wasn't there was very
quickly its own set of questions.
Speaker 5 (22:37):
Questions that would take on a more ominous tone as
the morning went on and it was discovered why Jonathan
had not made his court appearance, questions including whether the
Stash House Records defendants had done their prosecutor in.
Speaker 3 (22:52):
They believed at that point that our clients, you know,
were somehow That's who they were looking at.
Speaker 7 (23:00):
And the theory.
Speaker 3 (23:01):
Was these guys were involved in that rep music. You know,
there's all this violence, and that the defendants like, where
somehow had Jonathan killed. I mean, that's what they thought.
And I can tell you I remember when I sat
down with the FBI that morning. I said to him,
you got to understand something. Until yesterday when we did
(23:25):
that plea, Poindexter was facing a potential life sentence, and
I said, the last person in the world that wants
Jonathan Luna to be killed was my client. And I
think they backed off of that pretty quickly.
Speaker 5 (23:44):
But if the FEDS were willing to back off Arci's clients.
It didn't mean they were willing to back off him.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
And I'll never forget it, but the Bogio is outside
with like four or five.
Speaker 7 (23:58):
Assists in US attorney.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
He's doing a press conference and he's like angry and
we're going to find out who did this.
Speaker 4 (24:06):
And as they.
Speaker 3 (24:07):
Walked find he looks at me and like Claire's at me.
I mean it was like, you know something about this
because at this point they believe our clients did it,
Like I somehow know about it at that point.
Speaker 5 (24:21):
And it wasn't just Arkie the FBI was suspicious of.
It was his co counsel, the attorney for Dion Smith,
a guy named Ken Ravenel.
Speaker 3 (24:31):
You know, they interviewed Ken, and they interviewed May. Who
were the people there for your client? And who were
the people there for you know, they asked Ken about
this client.
Speaker 5 (24:46):
Paul Hazlehurst is a Baltimore attorney who had several trials
against Jonathan and who was in the courtroom the morning
he didn't show. He was also professional friends with Ken
Ravenel and found himself talking with him that morning. As
things went sideways, I.
Speaker 11 (25:02):
Just thought maybe something Jonathan was sick or something that occurred,
and you know, so he kind of figured at that point,
if he didn't show up for something that was in
front of Judge Carrel, something really.
Speaker 4 (25:12):
Had to be wrong.
Speaker 5 (25:14):
I don't know if you know much about the last
case that Jonathan tried now, I.
Speaker 11 (25:18):
Mean, you know, the only thing I remember about that
case is I had a conversation and a sort of
boking conversation with one of the defense jorneys and you know,
what'd you do with Jonathan? You know, why why isn't
he here? And he's like, no, own joke about that?
Speaker 5 (25:30):
So Ken ravenoll Is at the attorney you said that you.
Speaker 11 (25:33):
Yes, yeah, I vividly remember where the conversation occurred. You know,
I think I was coming back from lunch. He who
was going to lunch? And you know it was an
all way outside of a restaurant, because I think, you
know that was their initial inclination of the US Attorney's
office was somebody from this case had something to do
with Jonathan not showing.
Speaker 5 (25:51):
Up, which was an interesting theory given what I'm going
to tell you next. Remember that bank robbery case I
mentioned in episode one, the case that Jonathan was trying
a year before he died, in which the cash evidence
went missing after the case went to the jury. Well,
Jonathan and the FBI weren't the only people in common
(26:12):
on that trial. In the Stash House Records case, In fact,
bank Robert Naco Brown would be represented by the same
guy arguing with Jonathan Luna on his last night outside
of Ned Richardson's office. The same guy who probably had
the last conversation with Jonathan before the midnight ride, Archie
Tuomnelli's co counsel in the Stash House Records case, Ken Ravenol.
(26:45):
Next time on somebody somewhere.
Speaker 2 (26:49):
Seen him on television.
Speaker 6 (26:50):
You've seen him in the courtroom, but you haven't seen
him like this.
Speaker 9 (26:53):
What Abontamer's most sought after defense attorneys found himself defended
in court today.
Speaker 11 (26:59):
Ken both racketeering, money laundering, and drug charges.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
The United States versus Naco Brown was one of the
more remarkable prosecutions in my career. It's like, really a
prosecutor took the money.
Speaker 4 (27:13):
I don't think.
Speaker 2 (27:13):
So.
Speaker 3 (27:14):
You got to remember when this is going on, the
Baggio is trying to fire him.
Speaker 2 (27:19):
You know, I would be like to say, you can't
make this stuff up.
Speaker 10 (27:25):
There It goes the devil telling me to lie. You do,
says I'm around me sales. It's all right to Britain
that you can get more than you give.
Speaker 5 (27:44):
Somebody Somewhere is a production of Rainstream Media Incorporated. Sound design,
editing and mixing has been provided by Resonate Recordings. Original
score and voiceover work provided by Hallie Payne. Artwork provided
by Evan McGlenn and Kendall Payne. If you have any
information regarding the Jonathan Luna case, please contact us via
(28:05):
our website sbswpodcast dot com. And finally, if you enjoyed
this podcast, please rate and review us on Apple Podcasts.
It really helps and we really appreciate it.
Speaker 8 (28:19):
Thank you for listening.
Speaker 2 (28:23):
Here.
Speaker 10 (28:23):
God, I hey, you say, I'm SI good.
Speaker 9 (28:30):
I just word.
Speaker 3 (28:33):
He love.
Speaker 10 (28:36):
Even still love money. I need more money
Somebody Somewhere is a production of Rainstream Media Incorporated. This
podcast investigates the unsolved death of Federal Prosecutor Jonathan Luna
in two thousand and three. It is a true story,
but the opinions of the hosts and interviewees are simply
that opinions, not facts, and the credibility of the witnesses
and what they say is to be determined by the listener.
(00:27):
Everyone is presumed innocent until proven otherwise in a court
of law. Previously on Somebody Somewhere.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Jonathan was so distracted he couldn't keep it together, and
I thought, something is wrong.
Speaker 3 (00:46):
He looked at Jonathan and he said, that's not a problem.
Speaker 4 (00:50):
What's the problem? Ken is slick, always dressed to the nines,
you know, put together, and.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
They were going at it and I thought, oh my god,
I mean this is a rug for final he does.
Speaker 5 (01:03):
This is episode four of season three, The Magic Knight.
I'm your host, David Payne. It's been ten years since
the federal prosecutor was found Edna Boro and Lecaester County.
Speaker 2 (01:22):
We will find out who did this.
Speaker 6 (01:24):
Was he trying to stage some sort of attack and
went to the farm.
Speaker 5 (01:38):
You were the last person to speak with him, and
then two hours later he's jumping on the turnpike and
heading on a five hour car drive around four different states.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
It didn't make sense as a time initially, and I
guess it doesn't make sense now.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
Why what happened between.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
I last talked to him at the courthouse, him leaving
the courthouse later that night and going on this trip.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
It didn't make any sense.
Speaker 5 (02:07):
I remember, it didn't make sense to defense attorney Archie Tuminelli,
and it didn't make sense to me either. I keep
trying to put myself in Jonathan's shoes that night, and
no matter how hard I try, I just can't make
them fit. All Jonathan had to do that night was
bang out some paperwork, draft these plea agreements, and claim
(02:28):
victory in the morning to the newspaper when the defendants
pled guilty the following morning.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
The only thing that changed from the time before we
couldn't work this out, so it worked out was this
information comes out about Grace. But people in that courthouse
knew about that before, and then certainly people in the
US Attorney's office had to know. Priest Rial Services knew
just smaking certainly knew so It's not like all of
(02:54):
a sudden he's got a reason to kill himself. Because
this information is coming out.
Speaker 5 (03:04):
Dissecting these last few hours of Jonathan's life has become
commonplace among people looking at this mystery, and likewise, I
find myself pouring over the details, trying to come up
with some rational explanation for his irrational behaviors. One theory
is that Jonathan had been caught concealing the bad information
about Warren Grace, and when he was forced to go
(03:26):
to his supervisor, James Warwick and drop that murder charge
to get a plea done, he hit a breaking point
because he was effectively writing his own pink slip. But
that last night, when Tim Manelli went upstairs to work
out the deal, Warwick seemed to already know about the
Grace situation and possibly even the letter to Judge Smulkin
written by Jonathan's colleague Jackie Rodriguez Costs.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
There's no way that Warwick went into the meeting with
me with Jonathan that evening without being told this, Because
Warwick turned to me and said, Arkie, what's the problem.
Speaker 7 (04:04):
I explained, what the problem is. Jonathan won't give up
this murder for sentencing. I'm sure Warwick knew all. He
did turn to Jonathan say what the hell is he
talking about?
Speaker 8 (04:15):
He just like said, well you can do that, Jonathan.
Speaker 3 (04:17):
So I'm too Wrewick had did know.
Speaker 5 (04:23):
But it's hard to reconcile the principal Jonathan Luna as
someone who would just go along with what the higher
ups wanted if it crossed an ethical line. And so
I thought there might be some other reason Jonathan may
have acted the way he did, both with regard to
his supervisor and the disclosures about Warren Grace.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
Jonathan hid the ball because Rodriguez did it. She was
his senior Jonathan who just went along with you know,
he didn't rock the boat. And I can't believe that
it didn't have something to do with that letter the
smoking saying well, yeah, you can't do anything to Grace,
it's going to damage him as a witness. I mean, Jonathan,
(05:05):
I believe, would have never done that.
Speaker 5 (05:08):
Do you think Jonathan was trying to protect her by
not revealing that.
Speaker 3 (05:12):
I think it was more institutional thing that somebody had
to know about what happened with Grace and her letter
to smalking.
Speaker 5 (05:23):
Whether it was institutional or simply chivalry towards his colleague
Jackie Rodriguez. Cost We'll never know, but either way, what
could it tell us about why Jonathan would return to
the office two hours later, ostensibly to finish the plea paperwork,
only to get up another two hours later and flee
the scene. The lack of answers in this case has
(05:45):
been fueled by the FBI's intentional decision to withhold information
to the public for some unspoken reason. And it all
starts with the cameras.
Speaker 8 (06:00):
Remember whether there were cameras at the time at that courthouse,
on that garage.
Speaker 2 (06:05):
Oh yeah, absolutely, they could look at.
Speaker 5 (06:08):
The court Reporter Ned Richardson explains the lay of the
land at the critical start of the midnight ride.
Speaker 8 (06:15):
Why do you think the FBI has never released any
of that video and or kind of suggested there is
no video.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
If they're saying there was no video, that's not true
because we always had surveillance cameras. I always used to
wave because I went in there every hour. I'd be
there three o'clock in the morning. But they could look
at the loading dock, they could look at where the
cars were parked, because I saw that myself.
Speaker 8 (06:43):
Ned who would have had access to park a car
in the garage.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
People that had to permit.
Speaker 8 (06:50):
So what type of people could get a permit? Could
you get a permit?
Speaker 1 (06:54):
No?
Speaker 8 (06:55):
Who would they let come into the garage during a trial?
Would the FBI agents be allowed to be in there?
Speaker 2 (07:03):
Oh? I think so, but I don't remember. They might
have had some reserved spots.
Speaker 8 (07:08):
Where there are hard there that you Oh, yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
Well, guys, o Bay. We had to put a guard
in a box out at the end of the driveway
so nothing went in or out without his permission.
Speaker 8 (07:22):
He couldn't have been there at twenty four to seven, right, So,
because Luna left the courthouse at about eleven thirty eight PM,
would there have been a guard there at that point?
Speaker 2 (07:31):
I don't think so. I don't think so because everything
was shut down. But they had cameras everywhere. I mean,
they were all over the place.
Speaker 8 (07:41):
It's really curious what happened to these tapes. There's been
a number of stories, of course, written about this case.
They always make it sound like there are no videos,
and it just didn't make sense to me.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
Well, no, that's not true. I could guarantee you that'saw
not true because I would go in there some ten
o'clock at night, but there was always somebody in that
building twenty four to seven, but they would be in
that little.
Speaker 5 (08:08):
Which begs the question, if the FBI really wanted to
put this case to bed, why not release the video footage,
especially because of the circumstances of Jonathan leaving.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
And they said that his glasses were still on his
desk in front of me. I think his computer was
still turned on. I talked to a couple of the
court security officers because when his car went out, it
was really late, and somebody said, well, there was another
car right behind me, And they said that car followed
(08:41):
him all the way up and something to do with
a toll booth or something he paid for the car
behind or the car in front. I don't remember that.
It was something about the toll booth, and that was
kind of bizarre. I heard that from a couple of
different people. I think they said it was a white car.
That's all I remember about that. It's just sketchy.
Speaker 5 (09:08):
The lack of at least released video evidence from the
courthouse to prove or debunk whether Luna was followed that
night is disturbing, but its absence is amplified by the
fact the FBI has also not released any video or
stills from the toll boose, the rest stops, the gas
station he stopped at. Even the ATM pictures have been suppressed.
Speaker 9 (09:30):
That's the problem. There's not that shadowy ATM photo that
shows two people, or there's not this definitive evidence of
a second person being involved, which allows the suicide theory
to have weight, obviously.
Speaker 10 (09:46):
I think.
Speaker 5 (09:47):
But just because the FBI has not released any video,
it doesn't mean that evidence does not exist. Indeed, the
more you talk to investigative reporters like Jane Miller of WBL,
or Gail Gibson of The Son or even author Bill Keisling,
the thing that jumps out the most is a lack
of common understanding of the known facts regarding not just
(10:08):
the videos, but the rest of the evidence. So, Jane,
when you look back at the Louna case over the
course of now it's almost been seventeen eighteen years, do
you have any different perspective than you did when you
were reporting it as these elements were coming out.
Speaker 9 (10:28):
No, you know, I think I thought about that the
other day when I knew we were going to talk
about this is have I changed my thinking about the case,
And no, I really haven't, because I am so evidence
based that I look at the evidence before me, and
the evidence in this case is so inconsistent you can
(10:48):
make an argument either way with almost equal weight. That's
not true in most of these cases. In most cases
that don't have a definitive suicide homicide resolution, you generally
it weighs one way or the other. More this case
is not like that. You can easily make the argument
both ways.
Speaker 5 (11:09):
But to my way of thinking, set aside all the
armchairs psychological profiling and look at the crime scene itself.
What has been reported consistently is that Jonathan Luna suffered
thirty six stab wounds before he died. The issue in
my mind is where were those stab wounds on the body?
How deep or superficial were they, what type of knife
(11:32):
was used, and where did the blood trail lead. Although
the FBI has officially invoked its right to remain silent
through leaks to reporters like Miller and Gibson, they have
conveniently painted a picture that shift's responsibility away from them
for having to solve a crime.
Speaker 4 (11:50):
Over time, we would continue to learn bits and pieces
and more, and I came to learn through sources the
theory about that had likely been a suicide, and the
reason for that theory was the notion that there were
multiple stab wounds, as many as thirty six, but they
were also very lightly inflicted, suggesting self infliction. That if
(12:14):
you are doing attempting to harm yourself, the depth of
wound would be different.
Speaker 5 (12:23):
Whether that characterization of the wounds was accurate has never
been capable of corroboration by third parties, as the FEDS
have consistently fought efforts to have the autopsy released, which
prevents us from reconciling the known medical evidence with the
known crime scene evidence.
Speaker 4 (12:41):
There was information from sources that there that when they
found the car, there was blood in the back seat
of the vehicle, which would suggest that he had been
there at some point, potentially against his own will, or
that there could have been someone else in play. That
was one of the pieces you had to try and
make fit. What was he in the backseat of the
(13:04):
car and then stumbles out of it at some point.
None of these pieces fit together easily.
Speaker 5 (13:13):
The other thing that didn't seem to fit was where
the stab wounds were, and I asked Jane Miller to
review her old scripts for a timeline of what was reported.
Can you talk a little bit about your reporting around
the stab wounds and what those punctioned wounds were and
where they were.
Speaker 9 (13:31):
So here's the day that I'm This was probably two
weeks later I did a story that said, this is
what I reported. According to stores is at least a
dozen of the thirty six stab wounds Luna suffered to
a specific part of his body, his genital area.
Speaker 5 (13:46):
So according to federal sources, Luna stabbed himself a dozen
times in the testicles and another two dozen elsewhere on
his body, all in some kind of choreographed suicidal farewell.
I put the stab wounds in the testicles as part
of that irreconcilable theory that somehow he was trying to
(14:07):
gain sympathy or kill himself. I don't know anybody who
stabs themselves in the testicles in either situation.
Speaker 4 (14:16):
Even the idea that someone could continue to stab themselves
thirty six times sounded just not believe overall.
Speaker 5 (14:29):
And it wasn't just the number and location of the
wounds that cast doubt on intentions, but also the type
of weapon that was.
Speaker 9 (14:36):
Used and the coroner, who when I talked to the
coroner at the time, said the stab wounds were mostly
superficial and shallow and could have been caused by a penknife.
Speaker 5 (14:46):
The timing of that interview with the coroner was when.
Speaker 9 (14:49):
This was the next day.
Speaker 8 (14:51):
And what did he say.
Speaker 9 (14:52):
He said that the Langster County corner announces Jonathan Luna
was brutalized with multiple stab wounds and then put in
a creek while still alive. His cause of death drowning
combined with the stab wounds.
Speaker 5 (15:05):
You said, pen knife.
Speaker 11 (15:07):
Pen knife.
Speaker 9 (15:07):
That's what the coroner said, the dead had been caused
with a pen knife.
Speaker 5 (15:14):
I obviously knew from my research that Luna's wounds were
allegedly caused by a pen knife, But the incredulity you
hear in my voice was from the fact that I
had never heard it was reported to be the weapon
the day after he was found. So how would the
Lancaster County coroner know that Jonathan Luna had a pen knife?
Speaker 9 (15:34):
Well, or he just said used it as an example.
It could have been caused by a pen knife because they.
Speaker 11 (15:39):
Have short blades.
Speaker 5 (15:41):
Such an odd term.
Speaker 9 (15:42):
I know, Okay, I'm going to read you this okay.
According to the Lancas accounting corner, Jonathan Luna died after
suffering multiple stab wounds, probably inflicted with a pen knife,
and being drowned in the creek where his body was
found early yesterday morning, so this was the next day.
Corner says Luna was still conscious when forced into the
creek and stabbed, the corner believe somewhere else and taken
to die into the Lancaster County occasion to die.
Speaker 5 (16:09):
And the reason it's curious the coroner said the weapon
was a pen knife was that no knife was recovered
the day Jonathan was found, despite it protracted an extensive
search by Pennsylvania State troopers. In fact, it would be
weeks after Jonathan's death that a pen knife would be
discovered in the creek. So someone presumably in law enforcement,
(16:32):
told the coroner the day of the murder that Jonathan
Luna had a pen knife, and then you know, two
weeks later, after a search, let's go back and find it.
Speaker 8 (16:41):
One hundred and.
Speaker 5 (16:42):
Fifty troopers at the time. Then they got two weeks
later and find a pen.
Speaker 8 (16:47):
Knife, right correct?
Speaker 9 (16:49):
I think they knew he had one.
Speaker 5 (16:51):
And there was another odd detail at the crime scene.
I still can't wrap my head around. Do your notes
reflect anything about how this pen knife knife penetrated his
suit because he was found in his business suit.
Speaker 9 (17:04):
Right, correct? No, I don't think that was anything that
was ever resolved. An explanation.
Speaker 5 (17:10):
Yeah, there's really no explanation because there were also stab
wounds on his back at LISTA. It's been reported, so
he had to stab himself through.
Speaker 9 (17:18):
His suit, right, with a penknife with a pen knife, right.
Speaker 5 (17:22):
And it's December, so it's got to be a wool suit, right, Yes,
do you stab yourself in the back with a pen
knife through a suit?
Speaker 3 (17:30):
Right?
Speaker 5 (17:38):
Adding to that question is the reporting that was done
by author Bill Keesling on the subject. Federal sources have
never described the wounds Jonathan suffered in any material detail,
but Keesling tracked down one of the undertakers at the
funeral home where Jonathan's body was taken. The undertaker, a
woman named Kim McLeod, would not return our calls, but
(18:01):
Keisling reported that McLeod gave him key details on the wounds. First,
McLeod said the stab wounds in the back were in
the middle below his shoulder blades and also around the
shoulder blades. Second, she said that Jonathan's hands were quote shredded.
There were quote long cuts between all fingers and cuts
(18:22):
to the front and back of the hands. She said
his hands were so deeply cut that they had to
put gloves on for the funeral viewing. Third, McLeod told
Keiesling Jonathan's neck had been slashed open on the right
side and all the way around the neck. And lastly,
and this is perhaps the most graphic, so apologies, but
(18:43):
she said as scrotum had been slashed open, as if
the assailant had been quote working on it.
Speaker 4 (18:53):
There was a lot of confusion even about manner of
death and how the body was located. Through those first
few days, we had sent a.
Speaker 5 (19:03):
Reporter for it, and uncertainty would continue to rule the day.
As the FBI put forth its suicide theory. To Baltimore's
Sun reporter Gail Gibson to explain the extraordinary number of
stab wounds, the FBI would tell her that cuts were
quote hesitation wounds.
Speaker 4 (19:20):
And you know that's when we began to hear these
series of life. Well, there were hesitation wounds and they
weren't that deep. Well, how does that sit alongside evidence
of blood evidence if something is a more superficial wound,
and so then again and what is the wound that
ultimately causes death?
Speaker 5 (19:40):
And while the FBI wasn't publicly explaining how their evidence
fit with their theory, enough people started buying what they
were selling, including people close to the case like defense
attorney Archie Tuminelli.
Speaker 3 (19:53):
When I first heard it was suicide, it didn't make
much sense to me, but later learned there is information
out there about people committing suicide that try to kill
themselves by stabbing themselves. They have what they refer to
as hesitation wounds, Like he was trying to stab himself
(20:16):
and just couldn't go through it. So when I heard that,
I kind of like accepted that it made sense to me.
Speaker 5 (20:25):
There's so many listencies to the leaks. Yeah, all of
which could be reconciled if they would release the information,
but they're holding the information, so I just don't get it.
Speaker 3 (20:39):
I agree with you, but I kind of put it
the rest in my mind when I heard that the
FBI concluded that these wounds were suicide wounds.
Speaker 5 (20:58):
Somebody somewhere will return right after this break on the
morning of December fourth, two thousand and three. As state troopers, detectives,
and the coroner were trying to figure out what happened
to this handsome young man dressed in a suit and
(21:19):
found dead in a creek, a different sort of drama
was playing out in the courtroom of time obsessed judge
Quarrels and court reporter Ned Richardson was watching the clock.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
Well, I feel sorry for his luna when Honey shows up,
because I didn't know he was dead. I mean, oh,
I knew was he wasn't.
Speaker 8 (21:39):
There was there any sense that something bad had happened, or.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
From what I saw when I walked in, everybody looked
like they got hit by a truck or something. I mean,
it was like they were all long faced and very,
very extremely serious.
Speaker 5 (21:56):
One of those long faces that morning was reporter Gail Gibson,
whom Jonathan had asked to be there to cover the
plea deal.
Speaker 4 (22:04):
I was there in the wooden benches in the back
of the courtroom, and it already became clear as we
all sat there for a minute that something was wrong.
I mean, a missing federal prosecutor is a missing federal prosecutor.
I mean, it wasn't like Jonathan to just simply not
be there. And this was an instance where he was
looking ahead to this plea deal into getting this done,
(22:26):
and so the fact that he wasn't there was very
quickly its own set of questions.
Speaker 5 (22:37):
Questions that would take on a more ominous tone as
the morning went on and it was discovered why Jonathan
had not made his court appearance, questions including whether the
Stash House Records defendants had done their prosecutor in.
Speaker 3 (22:52):
They believed at that point that our clients, you know,
were somehow That's who they were looking at.
Speaker 7 (23:00):
And the theory.
Speaker 3 (23:01):
Was these guys were involved in that rep music. You know,
there's all this violence, and that the defendants like, where
somehow had Jonathan killed. I mean, that's what they thought.
And I can tell you I remember when I sat
down with the FBI that morning. I said to him,
you got to understand something. Until yesterday when we did
(23:25):
that plea, Poindexter was facing a potential life sentence, and
I said, the last person in the world that wants
Jonathan Luna to be killed was my client. And I
think they backed off of that pretty quickly.
Speaker 5 (23:44):
But if the FEDS were willing to back off Arci's clients.
It didn't mean they were willing to back off him.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
And I'll never forget it, but the Bogio is outside
with like four or five.
Speaker 7 (23:58):
Assists in US attorney.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
He's doing a press conference and he's like angry and
we're going to find out who did this.
Speaker 4 (24:06):
And as they.
Speaker 3 (24:07):
Walked find he looks at me and like Claire's at me.
I mean it was like, you know something about this
because at this point they believe our clients did it,
Like I somehow know about it at that point.
Speaker 5 (24:21):
And it wasn't just Arkie the FBI was suspicious of.
It was his co counsel, the attorney for Dion Smith,
a guy named Ken Ravenel.
Speaker 3 (24:31):
You know, they interviewed Ken, and they interviewed May. Who
were the people there for your client? And who were
the people there for you know, they asked Ken about
this client.
Speaker 5 (24:46):
Paul Hazlehurst is a Baltimore attorney who had several trials
against Jonathan and who was in the courtroom the morning
he didn't show. He was also professional friends with Ken
Ravenel and found himself talking with him that morning. As
things went sideways, I.
Speaker 11 (25:02):
Just thought maybe something Jonathan was sick or something that occurred,
and you know, so he kind of figured at that point,
if he didn't show up for something that was in
front of Judge Carrel, something really.
Speaker 4 (25:12):
Had to be wrong.
Speaker 5 (25:14):
I don't know if you know much about the last
case that Jonathan tried now, I.
Speaker 11 (25:18):
Mean, you know, the only thing I remember about that
case is I had a conversation and a sort of
boking conversation with one of the defense jorneys and you know,
what'd you do with Jonathan? You know, why why isn't
he here? And he's like, no, own joke about that?
Speaker 5 (25:30):
So Ken ravenoll Is at the attorney you said that you.
Speaker 11 (25:33):
Yes, yeah, I vividly remember where the conversation occurred. You know,
I think I was coming back from lunch. He who
was going to lunch? And you know it was an
all way outside of a restaurant, because I think, you
know that was their initial inclination of the US Attorney's
office was somebody from this case had something to do
with Jonathan not showing.
Speaker 5 (25:51):
Up, which was an interesting theory given what I'm going
to tell you next. Remember that bank robbery case I
mentioned in episode one, the case that Jonathan was trying
a year before he died, in which the cash evidence
went missing after the case went to the jury. Well,
Jonathan and the FBI weren't the only people in common
(26:12):
on that trial. In the Stash House Records case, In fact,
bank Robert Naco Brown would be represented by the same
guy arguing with Jonathan Luna on his last night outside
of Ned Richardson's office. The same guy who probably had
the last conversation with Jonathan before the midnight ride, Archie
Tuomnelli's co counsel in the Stash House Records case, Ken Ravenol.
(26:45):
Next time on somebody somewhere.
Speaker 2 (26:49):
Seen him on television.
Speaker 6 (26:50):
You've seen him in the courtroom, but you haven't seen
him like this.
Speaker 9 (26:53):
What Abontamer's most sought after defense attorneys found himself defended
in court today.
Speaker 11 (26:59):
Ken both racketeering, money laundering, and drug charges.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
The United States versus Naco Brown was one of the
more remarkable prosecutions in my career. It's like, really a
prosecutor took the money.
Speaker 4 (27:13):
I don't think.
Speaker 2 (27:13):
So.
Speaker 3 (27:14):
You got to remember when this is going on, the
Baggio is trying to fire him.
Speaker 2 (27:19):
You know, I would be like to say, you can't
make this stuff up.
Speaker 10 (27:25):
There It goes the devil telling me to lie. You do,
says I'm around me sales. It's all right to Britain
that you can get more than you give.
Speaker 5 (27:44):
Somebody Somewhere is a production of Rainstream Media Incorporated. Sound design,
editing and mixing has been provided by Resonate Recordings. Original
score and voiceover work provided by Hallie Payne. Artwork provided
by Evan McGlenn and Kendall Payne. If you have any
information regarding the Jonathan Luna case, please contact us via
(28:05):
our website sbswpodcast dot com. And finally, if you enjoyed
this podcast, please rate and review us on Apple Podcasts.
It really helps and we really appreciate it.
Speaker 8 (28:19):
Thank you for listening.
Speaker 2 (28:23):
Here.
Speaker 10 (28:23):
God, I hey, you say, I'm SI good.
Speaker 9 (28:30):
I just word.
Speaker 3 (28:33):
He love.
Speaker 10 (28:36):
Even still love money. I need more money
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.