February 19, 2021 • 31 mins
When Jonathan Luna goes missing, the press makes an immediate connection with a bank robbery case that he had tried the year before in which the cash evidence was stolen. And the cast from the Stash House Records case is back for this prequel.
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 Luna was brutalized with multiple stab wounds and then
put in a creek while still alive.
Speaker 3 (00:46):
You know, what'd you do with Jonathan?
Speaker 4 (00:48):
Why is any here?
Speaker 3 (00:49):
I own no no, no joke about that.
Speaker 4 (00:51):
I think the shove was a white car, but that's
all I remember about that.
Speaker 5 (00:54):
It's just sketchy, that's the problem.
Speaker 6 (00:57):
There's not that shadowy atmo though.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
That shows two people, which allows the suicide theory.
Speaker 7 (01:03):
To have weight.
Speaker 8 (01:05):
This is episode five of season three, the character assassination
of Jonathan Luna. I'm your host, David Payne. It's been
ten years since the federal prosecutors found Edmondbrurh and Leicester County.
(01:26):
We will find out who did this. Was he trying
to stage some sort of attack and went to.
Speaker 9 (01:31):
Far It's interesting. You've probably heard in your reporting in
Baltimore that it's sometimes called Smaltimore, and so it's funny
(01:52):
and much of the reporting I did for the Baltimore
Son you would find these weird overlaps where characters showed up,
you know, in one place and then again in the nets.
Speaker 8 (02:03):
It's a small, big town, as the Baltimore Suns Federal
Court reporter Gail Gibson would see and hear from a
lot of the same characters. Characters that would show up
not only in the last case that Jonathan tried, but
in another case that was tried the year prior, United
States versus Naco Brown.
Speaker 9 (02:23):
So that was a bank robbery case that Jonathan was prosecuting.
The judge in the case was Andre Davis, who was
also a mentor of Jonathan's. And so in the moment
thinking about, oh, kind of, Ravenel's the defense attorney in
this case, right, but this isn't an interesting one. You
pull back and think about, let's look more fully at
(02:45):
the cast and what do we learn from each player
and the cast feels important.
Speaker 8 (02:53):
And it wasn't just Ravenel and Jonathan who were involved
in the bank robbery trial. It seemed like the entire
cast would be part of the fiasco otherwise known as
the Missing Money case. Archie Tuo Manelli would have a
cameo representing a woman who assisted an escape attempt by
Naco Brown, and Jackie Rodriguez Koss, the prosecutor who wrote
(03:15):
the memo to the judge about Warren Grace, would be
second chair to Jonathan.
Speaker 10 (03:20):
The case came to me because Jonathan was getting ready
to take that case to trial, and I had prior
bankrobbery trial experience, and so he basically came to me
and said, will you do this trial with me?
Speaker 3 (03:36):
And I said sure.
Speaker 8 (03:38):
So it is perhaps not surprising that on the morning
that Jonathan did not show up to court to execute
the Stash House plea agreements, the audience made a mental
connection between the prior season's drama and the one that
was unfolding before them.
Speaker 9 (03:53):
The US Attorney Time Debajo had a press conference about
what had happened late that night. I mean it was
in darkness. I can remember standing and talking to Jane Miller,
who's a long time television journalist in Baltimore about what
do you think have been? This is crazy? And she
and I I can't remember who said it first, but
(04:14):
it was a conversation about are you going to write
about the bank robbery case in this story? Essentially our conversation.
Speaker 8 (04:21):
For that and this innocent in the moment question between
two of Baltimore's most authoritative media figures appeared to send
the FBI down a multi year rabbit hole that I
would find myself following seventeen years later, a rabbit hole
that would leave me reflecting not only on Jonathan's life,
but my own. When Jonathan Luna's body was found under
(04:46):
mysterious circumstances, Lancaster, Pennsylvania authorities classified the death as a homicide.
It was only later, when the FBI took over the investigation,
that theories of suicide perhap aps driven by what happened
in the bank robbery case began to emerge. Although it's
not like the FBI went one hundred percent towards suicide
(05:08):
right away. In fact, the FBI would first plow the
traditional ground associated with any mysterious death Preachall Services Supervisor
Barbara Skidmore saw it firsthand.
Speaker 7 (05:21):
The first rumor that circulated was about relationships with other people.
There was a young girl who worked in the little canteen,
you know where you get coffee in the morning. Very
very sweet girl, very attractive, and she was a bit
of an artist. She said to you know, you say,
oh my god, isn't it terrible? She goes, yeah, the
(05:44):
FBI talked to me. And I thought, the FBI.
Speaker 3 (05:47):
Talked to you?
Speaker 7 (05:48):
Why would they talk to you? And here's what I thought.
I thought, what did they go to every young girl
in the building and talk to them?
Speaker 3 (05:56):
Did he ever hit on you?
Speaker 7 (05:57):
It was really weird.
Speaker 8 (06:01):
And while you can't fault investigators for casting a wide net,
you can question their judgment and you can judge their
actions because it wasn't just chasing absurd and spurious threads
like the coffee girl. It was that the FBI had
developed a pattern of leaking a series of victim blaming
circumstances that frankly colored the public's perception of what happened.
Speaker 7 (06:24):
He had a case that was going sour.
Speaker 8 (06:26):
He was womanizing with the woman in the camp.
Speaker 7 (06:29):
Women, and there was also you know, not just with women,
but with prostitutes paying for sex, he had credit card.
I mean, all this stuff was swirling around, and you're
like Jonathan, you know, like boy, I guess I don't know.
Speaker 9 (06:44):
People.
Speaker 8 (06:46):
The FBI leaks that made people who knew Jonathan believe
they didn't know him were rampant. They also strained credulity.
For instance, the FBI leak that someone with the name
of Jonathan Luna had posted a message on an Internet
sex message board six years before he died, as if
that could possibly have any relevance, And every drip, drip
(07:09):
drip had a cumulative effect.
Speaker 7 (07:12):
Yeah, it just seems odd given what he did and
the kinds of cases he was involved in. He was
dealing with the worst or the worst. And I don't
even know about his other cases. You know, these were
just the ones that were going on at the time.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Yeah.
Speaker 8 (07:27):
Well, and think about it in the context with the
evidence that they had, which was his throat was slit.
He was stabbed thirty six times, you know, and they're
interviewing the woman in the canteen.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
It's absurd.
Speaker 7 (07:39):
I mean, if you would see her, she was the
sweetest thing. I mean, you know, she was probably like
twenty three years old. I mean, maybe when she told
me that my map just dropped, I said what.
Speaker 8 (07:50):
And so then we're all left with this kind of
just ug feeling and this impression.
Speaker 7 (07:56):
Sometimes they get a fury in their minds, and they
failed to investigate the other potential things. I don't know,
when your job for a living is to prosecute these
bad guys, and that wouldn't have been more robustly explored.
Speaker 8 (08:12):
Is strange In the absence of any credible theory or
evidence that athletically built Jonathan was overpowered by a woman
and stabbed with a pen knife thirty six times, we
will not spend any more time here. And that takes
us back to where we started this episode, when the
(08:35):
idea of a possible connection between the so called missing
money case and Jonathan's death first surface between reporters Gail
Gibson and WBAL's Jane Miller.
Speaker 6 (08:46):
Get about the bank robbery, yes, of course, and the
money missing money.
Speaker 8 (08:50):
Yes, yeah, let's talk about it.
Speaker 2 (08:53):
I actually did that story.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
What is it?
Speaker 2 (08:55):
That story when it happened when thirty six thousand dollars
essentially walked out of the Federal court House and he
was the prosecutor, thirty six thousand dollars in evidence disappeared
when someone in the courthouse told me, and I got
it confirmed through FBI or someone that they had had
a lapse.
Speaker 7 (09:13):
In security.
Speaker 6 (09:18):
Lapse, Yeah, right, correct, And so it came up again,
obviously in the investigation of his death, because it was
in a year of his death that happened, but they
didn't go anywhere.
Speaker 8 (09:33):
Jane is right that technically the investigation into the missing
money never came to a resolution, but the mere coupling
of the two cases by the press had an unquestionable
impact on Jonathan's death investigation a year later, And so.
Speaker 9 (09:48):
When the theory of the suicide first became public, it
was another point to look back at what questions were
still there around the the bankruptery case and the missing evidence,
and could that have driven a person to feel like
they didn't have other choices other than to end their life.
Speaker 8 (10:11):
What do you think about that notion that somehow was
related to this and that led him to commit suicide.
Speaker 9 (10:18):
You know, in all candor, I have never known whether
these two incidents are linked. They are both extraordinarily spectacular
incidents to happen in any federal courthouse in this country,
and that it's impossible to not look at those set
(10:39):
of circumstances side by side. I cannot say that they
were linked, but I know that law enforcement looking into
Jonathan's death was also looking at everything around that other case,
and that neither has been resolved.
Speaker 8 (11:02):
Somebody somewhere will return right after this break. For many
months now, I've been racking my brain trying to find
the missing link that would lead me to the same
conclusion the FBI apparently reached that Jonathan took his own
(11:24):
life by stabbing himself thirty six times. On its face,
it's a preposterous theory and I kind of feel gaslighted
every time I try it on. But there was this
one unresolved issue out there. What exactly happened in the
missing money case? Was there a motive there for someone
to kill Jonathan? Or was there enough shame for him
(11:47):
in what happened that he did himself in? I mean,
was there any connection between the missing thirty six K
and the thirty six wounds.
Speaker 11 (11:58):
In my fourteen year career as a federal district judge,
United States versus Naco Brown.
Speaker 3 (12:04):
Was one of the more remarkable prosecutions.
Speaker 8 (12:08):
It was really quite a remarkable former US District Court
Judge Andre Davis is a legal giant and a pillar
of the Baltimore legal community. After fourteen years as a
trial judge and eight years on the Fourth Circuit, Judge
Davis turned his life's work towards police reform as the
Baltimore City Solicitor before recently retiring for good. And he
(12:29):
was gracious enough to tell us what he remembered about
the missing money case he presided over almost two decades ago.
Thanks for taking time. You enjoying retired life more.
Speaker 3 (12:41):
Than you can imagine.
Speaker 11 (12:43):
My wife is not very happy that I don't get
as much exercise as I should, but I will after it.
Speaker 12 (12:48):
Who gets enough exercise?
Speaker 13 (12:50):
Nobody?
Speaker 3 (12:52):
True? True, So I.
Speaker 8 (12:54):
Wanted toroduce you to Jody. And while Judge Davis's body
may not be in the shape his wife wants, his
mind is as sharp as ever. Despite a storied legal
career where he handled thousands of cases, he has no
problem recalling the most minute details of the United States
versus Naco Brown.
Speaker 11 (13:13):
It's really remarkable that I remember so much detail, and
I think if I've been a good judge, it was
because every case was really about human beings.
Speaker 3 (13:26):
What they wished for what they were striving for.
Speaker 11 (13:29):
And so this particular case, Naco Brown, the facts really
stood out to me, I think in part because of
the work that Ken Ravenel did to personalize Naco.
Speaker 8 (13:41):
What do you remember about the facts around how these
robberies happened, what he did in the bank, and so forth.
Speaker 11 (13:47):
I remember that Nako was active in a church, and
what came to light was that Naco wanted money to
support the metrical productions that Naco was involved in through
the church.
Speaker 3 (14:06):
So Naco fancied.
Speaker 11 (14:09):
Himself as someone who was deeply involved with young people,
deeply involved in a community, was a person of faith.
And here was this paradox that this guy who was
so described chose to fund his incredible charitable and religious
activities through bank robbery. And so it always struck me
(14:31):
as really remarkable.
Speaker 8 (14:36):
The story of Naco Brown is indeed remarkable in more
ways than one, and his trial on four bank robbery
charges would provide just a glimmer of the onion that
is Naco Brown.
Speaker 10 (14:48):
I remember thinking, like, why is this guy going to trial?
Speaker 3 (14:51):
You know? And what was driving the decision?
Speaker 8 (14:54):
I don't know, because I don't know what Even though
she was the more experienced prosecutor of the two, say,
Jackie Rodriguez cost was riding shotgun as Jonathan prosecuted Naco
Brown in Judge Davis's courtroom.
Speaker 10 (15:07):
So I was not involved in the original investigation of
the case or what had transpired. I came in specifically
to assist Jonathan in preparing the case for trial.
Speaker 8 (15:17):
Were you involved in the questioning of witnesses or cross
or how did you guys divide it up?
Speaker 4 (15:22):
Sure?
Speaker 10 (15:23):
So preparing for trial means that we were going to,
you know, interview all of our witnesses again, this time
around with the idea of actually declaring what would be
their testimony at trial. I just remember it being like,
why is this guy going to trial?
Speaker 3 (15:39):
You know, I do remember that, and.
Speaker 8 (15:46):
In fact, Naco Brown must have been thinking the same
thing at some point.
Speaker 11 (15:51):
So Nico Brown was notable because it did go to
child before jury. Although he did attempt to plead guilty
a couple of times before we had trial. He reached
plea agreements with the government twice, and for one reason
or another, he changed his mind. But what was notable
most of all about Naco Brown was that it was
(16:14):
one of two cases I had that were what I
call vault jobs, and the typical bank robbery is a
teller typically places anywhere from nine hundred to twenty two
hundred dollars in a bag, and the person escapes from
the bank. The Naco Brown perpetrators went into the bank
(16:37):
vault and collected cash in a large container, and so
they got away with fifty sixty seventy thousand dollars in
bank funds.
Speaker 8 (16:48):
In the docket, it does say that you ordered three
hundred and seventy eight thousand dollars worth of restitution, So
I'm guessing that was the total amount that was taken
on the bank.
Speaker 11 (16:58):
Actually, the actual would have been more than four hundred thousand,
because the FBI had actually recovered a sizeable amount of money.
Speaker 3 (17:08):
I think something on the order of close to.
Speaker 11 (17:09):
Sixty sixty five thousand, something in that range from the
code defendant Naco Brown's code defendant.
Speaker 8 (17:20):
Judge Davis's memory is as good as he thinks it is.
The FBI sees sixty eight thousand dollars from the home
safe of Brown's code defendant, a guy named Kevin Hilliard,
and just like Warren Grace, a year later, the FBI
would flip Hilliard and turn him states evidence against Naco.
Speaker 11 (17:39):
Kevin Hilliard, what's his name, something of a down and
out kind of guy. And I became quite persuaded that
Naco Brown very deathly manipulated Kevin into his participation. Not
that Kevin wasn't responsible, but I don't think Kevin ever
would have thought about robbing a bank before he came
(18:01):
under the influence of Naco Brown.
Speaker 8 (18:04):
And he is described as the getaway driver, right, is
that your recollection?
Speaker 3 (18:10):
That is my recollection.
Speaker 11 (18:11):
He never entered the bank, He was the wheelman and
waiting outside for Nako to come out of the bank.
Speaker 8 (18:19):
What do you remember about what he did in the
bank and so forth?
Speaker 3 (18:23):
You got to laugh at this.
Speaker 11 (18:24):
Part of Nako's modus operandi was, of course to use
costuming from his theatrical activities at the church in the
bank robberies, and so he would wear false mustaches. He
wore costumes, and I'll never forget that. Today he was arrested,
(18:46):
Nako was dressed in surgical scrubs, and he had a
stethoscope either on his person or certainly in the car.
Speaker 3 (18:57):
You know, I we like to say, you can't make
this stuff.
Speaker 8 (19:00):
Oh indeed, you can't not only the circumstances of the
bank robbery, but the circumstances leading up to the trial
as well.
Speaker 11 (19:09):
He had an escape attempt during his pre child detention,
which was again just remarkable. He had somebody ship him
a hacksaw blade hidden in one of a pair of
Timberland boots. I remember that.
Speaker 8 (19:34):
The attorney who would represent the side show boot shipper
was none other than Arkie Tuminelli, but it would be
Arkie's co council from the Stash Records case, Ken Ravenel,
that would be the lead council in the main tent.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
Ken Ravenel was the defense attorney.
Speaker 11 (19:51):
And I had gotten to know Ken when I was
on the State bench, and I had high regard for
his ability. He always made excellently arguments, and he was
really a mature attorney. And it was always a pleasure
when a good lawyer appeared before a judge, and when
two good lawyers appeared, it was really the best of
(20:13):
all possible worlds.
Speaker 8 (20:15):
And that's what Judge Davis got when he oversaw US v.
Naco Brown, or put another way, Jonathan Luna v. Ken Ravenel.
Speaker 11 (20:25):
Jonathan Luna was a young assistant US attorney that I
had befriended and we formed something of a mentor mentee relationship.
Jonathan Luna, I think did a good job, a really
excellent job, as I recall him pointing out the similarities
in the three robberies, the stature of the perpetrator, and
(20:48):
why this guy sitting there at the trial looking perfectly
harmless and polite was the person depicted in those.
Speaker 3 (20:56):
Videos as the bank robber.
Speaker 11 (20:59):
And for all my affinity for Jonathan, he and the
assistant US attorney who tried the case with him, they
were still a little green, and so Ken was put
in the position of yanking their change from time to
time and making life a little less pleasant for them
(21:20):
than they had hoed.
Speaker 8 (21:23):
Of course, that didn't preclude Naco Brown from doing a
little yanking of his own either.
Speaker 11 (21:30):
I was reminded he tried to fire Ravenue, and I
think he tried to fire Ravenel more than once.
Speaker 3 (21:37):
So there was all of that, There was the overall
in there.
Speaker 8 (21:40):
But for all of that drama, the facts of the
case would ultimately lead to a predictable and pedestrian outcome.
Speaker 11 (21:48):
They convicted on three and the jury couldn't reach a
verdict on the fourth bank robbery.
Speaker 3 (21:54):
So that was the story of.
Speaker 11 (21:56):
The case, that here was this man of faith, devoted
to his community and his church, who committed these bank
robberies and who terrified, absolutely terrified the tellers, but once
he got in the bank, he was in total control.
Speaker 8 (22:17):
In addition to the facts of the bank robberies, the
players involved, and the defendant himself, the trial of Naco
Brown would of course be memorable for one other reason.
Sometime between the time the jury started deliberating and the
final accounting of the evidence after conviction, thirty six thousand
dollars of the cash evidence, about half of the cash
(22:39):
that was recovered from Kevin Hilliard's home, disappeared into thin air.
Speaker 9 (22:44):
I feel like I remember talking with Judge Davis about
that story and his just real astonishment that that could
have happened in his courtroom, and his real concern for
how it was being investigated, and concerned for of them it. Certainly,
as a prosecutor in the case, he bore responsibility for
(23:05):
how evidence had been handled.
Speaker 8 (23:08):
Do you have a recollection of the various theories around
what actually happened?
Speaker 9 (23:13):
I mean, there's a limited number of people who have
access to any federal courtroom, you know, the attorneys on
both sides, the judge and their staff, and sort of
law enforcement court security figures, And so if cash evidence
went missing, there was a really finite set of players
(23:33):
for whom could have been involved in that.
Speaker 8 (23:41):
And the players included not only the FBI and many
of the cast from the Stash House Records case, but
also all of Judge Davis's courtroom personnel.
Speaker 13 (23:51):
I was coming out of court one day and there
were two court clerks there. One of them was the
courtroom clerk the case when the money went missing. This
is like right around a day or a couple of
days after Jonathan is found dead. And I said something
(24:11):
about this whole thing about Jonathan, and the courtroom clerk
said to me something about she was really angry about
because all the court personnel that were around that courtroom
and that money became subjects and who could have taken
the money, and she was really pissedaw that she made
(24:33):
clear that Jonathan jeopardized her and other people when this happened.
Speaker 8 (24:40):
Yeah, they interviewed eighty four people for that.
Speaker 13 (24:42):
Yeah, so there, Well I didn't know that, but that's
consistent with what I thought.
Speaker 8 (24:51):
Oddly, the people doing the interviewing were FBI agents from
the Baltimore Field Office, the same field office that was
certainly as or more responsible than Jonathan for securing the
cash evidence in the case. And with agents talking to
everyone in the courthouse, the tongue started to wag.
Speaker 7 (25:12):
The scuttle butt was that you know who took the
money and where did the money go? But Jonathan Luna's
name was involved in that, like, really a prosecutor took
the money.
Speaker 3 (25:22):
I don't think that.
Speaker 13 (25:23):
Not only did the US Attorney Office, you know, Toabajio,
believed that Jonathan took the money, but so did people
in your.
Speaker 4 (25:31):
Story I heard he tried to blame it on the
FBI agent. From what I heard, and after that, I
think Jonathan was not the most favorite person on the
FBI relationship list.
Speaker 8 (25:49):
With accusations and finger pointing going on, the FBI would
do what the FBI does, ask everyone at the court
to take polygraphs.
Speaker 11 (26:00):
To my knowledge, everybody said yes, and just informally, I
seem to recall hearing that there were a couple of
people around the courthouse who were polygraphed, and I was interviewed.
Everybody in the courthouse, was interviewed, and I noted from
the three to Zho two that you sent me, David,
(26:21):
that Jonathan was asked and agreed to take a lie
detective test. But I don't think they ever developed a
strong suspect. I mean, the FBI was embarrassed beyond description.
That's something that can never happen, should never happen, and
what can you say that should never have happened.
Speaker 8 (26:42):
And there was another thing that may not have happened.
And I say may because the FBI has not officially
released who all took polygraphs and who didn't.
Speaker 12 (26:52):
And I also know secondhand that Jonathan had agreed to
take a polygraph test regarding the money, but at some
point when the time came to do it, he refused
to take the polygraph test. I kind of suspected others.
Speaker 13 (27:09):
Were asked to take a polygraph test and it probably
wound up that he was the only one that wound
up refusing.
Speaker 8 (27:18):
But was that true? Was Jonathan Luna the only person
who refused to take a polygraph when questioned about the
missing money?
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Not?
Speaker 8 (27:26):
According to the man who originally stole the money from
the bank in the first place. The college from Brown
ann this college being recorded and it's subject to monitoring.
Speaker 5 (27:48):
Where when I was the only one that didn't take
a polygraph test, he was the only one I didn't
get interviewed by the AFA. So when I looked at
all of the discovery that I gofinitepl to continue to
get it, he was the only one that wasn't followed
that in the group.
Speaker 8 (28:03):
How do you know that because I haven't seen those.
Speaker 5 (28:06):
I don't have anything. Once again, I have all the
discovery from that investigation, put the inst in evidence investigations.
I have all the discovery of that. And his name
can come up one time in an interview at one time.
Speaker 8 (28:19):
And whether we could deduce anything from this claim of
missing documentation about missing money is an open question. But
the credibility of the FBI, Jonathan Luna, Naco Brown, and
yes Ken Ravenel would not only rest on what could
be factually verified, but also on some more recent events
(28:40):
events that remain, like Brown's claim, merely allegations that have
yet to be proven in a court of law.
Speaker 3 (28:49):
See them on television. You've seen him in the.
Speaker 8 (28:51):
Courtroom, but you haven't seen him like this. What of
Baldember's most.
Speaker 4 (28:53):
Sought after defense attorneys found himself defended in court.
Speaker 8 (28:58):
Today, Ken Ravenel is facing thracreteering, money laundering and drug
charges next time on Somebody Somewhere.
Speaker 7 (29:11):
This is a major league drug trafficking case.
Speaker 6 (29:14):
This wasn't small local, this was nationwide.
Speaker 5 (29:19):
And I see things and they it's the Holy Spirit
tell me to look at certain things. At the end
of the trial, he literally brought another breakcase.
Speaker 10 (29:26):
God is a god of second chances, and so he
definitely recognized that this was his chance to get it right.
Speaker 8 (29:34):
That makes sense, actually more than he went and staffed
himself thirty six times.
Speaker 9 (29:39):
Ain't nobody's buying that bullshit.
Speaker 8 (29:42):
There goes the devil telling me to lie again.
Speaker 1 (29:48):
Says I'm around me.
Speaker 8 (29:51):
Said it's all right to everythin that you can get more.
Speaker 10 (29:59):
Then you get.
Speaker 8 (30:02):
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
(30:23):
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. Thank you
for listening.
Speaker 6 (30:41):
Here.
Speaker 7 (30:41):
God a Hey said, good.
Speaker 2 (30:49):
Word.
Speaker 8 (30:51):
Hellove even still 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 Luna was brutalized with multiple stab wounds and then
put in a creek while still alive.
Speaker 3 (00:46):
You know, what'd you do with Jonathan?
Speaker 4 (00:48):
Why is any here?
Speaker 3 (00:49):
I own no no, no joke about that.
Speaker 4 (00:51):
I think the shove was a white car, but that's
all I remember about that.
Speaker 5 (00:54):
It's just sketchy, that's the problem.
Speaker 6 (00:57):
There's not that shadowy atmo though.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
That shows two people, which allows the suicide theory.
Speaker 7 (01:03):
To have weight.
Speaker 8 (01:05):
This is episode five of season three, the character assassination
of Jonathan Luna. I'm your host, David Payne. It's been
ten years since the federal prosecutors found Edmondbrurh and Leicester County.
(01:26):
We will find out who did this. Was he trying
to stage some sort of attack and went to.
Speaker 9 (01:31):
Far It's interesting. You've probably heard in your reporting in
Baltimore that it's sometimes called Smaltimore, and so it's funny
(01:52):
and much of the reporting I did for the Baltimore
Son you would find these weird overlaps where characters showed up,
you know, in one place and then again in the nets.
Speaker 8 (02:03):
It's a small, big town, as the Baltimore Suns Federal
Court reporter Gail Gibson would see and hear from a
lot of the same characters. Characters that would show up
not only in the last case that Jonathan tried, but
in another case that was tried the year prior, United
States versus Naco Brown.
Speaker 9 (02:23):
So that was a bank robbery case that Jonathan was prosecuting.
The judge in the case was Andre Davis, who was
also a mentor of Jonathan's. And so in the moment
thinking about, oh, kind of, Ravenel's the defense attorney in
this case, right, but this isn't an interesting one. You
pull back and think about, let's look more fully at
(02:45):
the cast and what do we learn from each player
and the cast feels important.
Speaker 8 (02:53):
And it wasn't just Ravenel and Jonathan who were involved
in the bank robbery trial. It seemed like the entire
cast would be part of the fiasco otherwise known as
the Missing Money case. Archie Tuo Manelli would have a
cameo representing a woman who assisted an escape attempt by
Naco Brown, and Jackie Rodriguez Koss, the prosecutor who wrote
(03:15):
the memo to the judge about Warren Grace, would be
second chair to Jonathan.
Speaker 10 (03:20):
The case came to me because Jonathan was getting ready
to take that case to trial, and I had prior
bankrobbery trial experience, and so he basically came to me
and said, will you do this trial with me?
Speaker 3 (03:36):
And I said sure.
Speaker 8 (03:38):
So it is perhaps not surprising that on the morning
that Jonathan did not show up to court to execute
the Stash House plea agreements, the audience made a mental
connection between the prior season's drama and the one that
was unfolding before them.
Speaker 9 (03:53):
The US Attorney Time Debajo had a press conference about
what had happened late that night. I mean it was
in darkness. I can remember standing and talking to Jane Miller,
who's a long time television journalist in Baltimore about what
do you think have been? This is crazy? And she
and I I can't remember who said it first, but
(04:14):
it was a conversation about are you going to write
about the bank robbery case in this story? Essentially our conversation.
Speaker 8 (04:21):
For that and this innocent in the moment question between
two of Baltimore's most authoritative media figures appeared to send
the FBI down a multi year rabbit hole that I
would find myself following seventeen years later, a rabbit hole
that would leave me reflecting not only on Jonathan's life,
but my own. When Jonathan Luna's body was found under
(04:46):
mysterious circumstances, Lancaster, Pennsylvania authorities classified the death as a homicide.
It was only later, when the FBI took over the investigation,
that theories of suicide perhap aps driven by what happened
in the bank robbery case began to emerge. Although it's
not like the FBI went one hundred percent towards suicide
(05:08):
right away. In fact, the FBI would first plow the
traditional ground associated with any mysterious death Preachall Services Supervisor
Barbara Skidmore saw it firsthand.
Speaker 7 (05:21):
The first rumor that circulated was about relationships with other people.
There was a young girl who worked in the little canteen,
you know where you get coffee in the morning. Very
very sweet girl, very attractive, and she was a bit
of an artist. She said to you know, you say,
oh my god, isn't it terrible? She goes, yeah, the
(05:44):
FBI talked to me. And I thought, the FBI.
Speaker 3 (05:47):
Talked to you?
Speaker 7 (05:48):
Why would they talk to you? And here's what I thought.
I thought, what did they go to every young girl
in the building and talk to them?
Speaker 3 (05:56):
Did he ever hit on you?
Speaker 7 (05:57):
It was really weird.
Speaker 8 (06:01):
And while you can't fault investigators for casting a wide net,
you can question their judgment and you can judge their
actions because it wasn't just chasing absurd and spurious threads
like the coffee girl. It was that the FBI had
developed a pattern of leaking a series of victim blaming
circumstances that frankly colored the public's perception of what happened.
Speaker 7 (06:24):
He had a case that was going sour.
Speaker 8 (06:26):
He was womanizing with the woman in the camp.
Speaker 7 (06:29):
Women, and there was also you know, not just with women,
but with prostitutes paying for sex, he had credit card.
I mean, all this stuff was swirling around, and you're
like Jonathan, you know, like boy, I guess I don't know.
Speaker 9 (06:44):
People.
Speaker 8 (06:46):
The FBI leaks that made people who knew Jonathan believe
they didn't know him were rampant. They also strained credulity.
For instance, the FBI leak that someone with the name
of Jonathan Luna had posted a message on an Internet
sex message board six years before he died, as if
that could possibly have any relevance, And every drip, drip
(07:09):
drip had a cumulative effect.
Speaker 7 (07:12):
Yeah, it just seems odd given what he did and
the kinds of cases he was involved in. He was
dealing with the worst or the worst. And I don't
even know about his other cases. You know, these were
just the ones that were going on at the time.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Yeah.
Speaker 8 (07:27):
Well, and think about it in the context with the
evidence that they had, which was his throat was slit.
He was stabbed thirty six times, you know, and they're
interviewing the woman in the canteen.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
It's absurd.
Speaker 7 (07:39):
I mean, if you would see her, she was the
sweetest thing. I mean, you know, she was probably like
twenty three years old. I mean, maybe when she told
me that my map just dropped, I said what.
Speaker 8 (07:50):
And so then we're all left with this kind of
just ug feeling and this impression.
Speaker 7 (07:56):
Sometimes they get a fury in their minds, and they
failed to investigate the other potential things. I don't know,
when your job for a living is to prosecute these
bad guys, and that wouldn't have been more robustly explored.
Speaker 8 (08:12):
Is strange In the absence of any credible theory or
evidence that athletically built Jonathan was overpowered by a woman
and stabbed with a pen knife thirty six times, we
will not spend any more time here. And that takes
us back to where we started this episode, when the
(08:35):
idea of a possible connection between the so called missing
money case and Jonathan's death first surface between reporters Gail
Gibson and WBAL's Jane Miller.
Speaker 6 (08:46):
Get about the bank robbery, yes, of course, and the
money missing money.
Speaker 8 (08:50):
Yes, yeah, let's talk about it.
Speaker 2 (08:53):
I actually did that story.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
What is it?
Speaker 2 (08:55):
That story when it happened when thirty six thousand dollars
essentially walked out of the Federal court House and he
was the prosecutor, thirty six thousand dollars in evidence disappeared
when someone in the courthouse told me, and I got
it confirmed through FBI or someone that they had had
a lapse.
Speaker 7 (09:13):
In security.
Speaker 6 (09:18):
Lapse, Yeah, right, correct, And so it came up again,
obviously in the investigation of his death, because it was
in a year of his death that happened, but they
didn't go anywhere.
Speaker 8 (09:33):
Jane is right that technically the investigation into the missing
money never came to a resolution, but the mere coupling
of the two cases by the press had an unquestionable
impact on Jonathan's death investigation a year later, And so.
Speaker 9 (09:48):
When the theory of the suicide first became public, it
was another point to look back at what questions were
still there around the the bankruptery case and the missing evidence,
and could that have driven a person to feel like
they didn't have other choices other than to end their life.
Speaker 8 (10:11):
What do you think about that notion that somehow was
related to this and that led him to commit suicide.
Speaker 9 (10:18):
You know, in all candor, I have never known whether
these two incidents are linked. They are both extraordinarily spectacular
incidents to happen in any federal courthouse in this country,
and that it's impossible to not look at those set
(10:39):
of circumstances side by side. I cannot say that they
were linked, but I know that law enforcement looking into
Jonathan's death was also looking at everything around that other case,
and that neither has been resolved.
Speaker 8 (11:02):
Somebody somewhere will return right after this break. For many
months now, I've been racking my brain trying to find
the missing link that would lead me to the same
conclusion the FBI apparently reached that Jonathan took his own
(11:24):
life by stabbing himself thirty six times. On its face,
it's a preposterous theory and I kind of feel gaslighted
every time I try it on. But there was this
one unresolved issue out there. What exactly happened in the
missing money case? Was there a motive there for someone
to kill Jonathan? Or was there enough shame for him
(11:47):
in what happened that he did himself in? I mean,
was there any connection between the missing thirty six K
and the thirty six wounds.
Speaker 11 (11:58):
In my fourteen year career as a federal district judge,
United States versus Naco Brown.
Speaker 3 (12:04):
Was one of the more remarkable prosecutions.
Speaker 8 (12:08):
It was really quite a remarkable former US District Court
Judge Andre Davis is a legal giant and a pillar
of the Baltimore legal community. After fourteen years as a
trial judge and eight years on the Fourth Circuit, Judge
Davis turned his life's work towards police reform as the
Baltimore City Solicitor before recently retiring for good. And he
(12:29):
was gracious enough to tell us what he remembered about
the missing money case he presided over almost two decades ago.
Thanks for taking time. You enjoying retired life more.
Speaker 3 (12:41):
Than you can imagine.
Speaker 11 (12:43):
My wife is not very happy that I don't get
as much exercise as I should, but I will after it.
Speaker 12 (12:48):
Who gets enough exercise?
Speaker 13 (12:50):
Nobody?
Speaker 3 (12:52):
True? True, So I.
Speaker 8 (12:54):
Wanted toroduce you to Jody. And while Judge Davis's body
may not be in the shape his wife wants, his
mind is as sharp as ever. Despite a storied legal
career where he handled thousands of cases, he has no
problem recalling the most minute details of the United States
versus Naco Brown.
Speaker 11 (13:13):
It's really remarkable that I remember so much detail, and
I think if I've been a good judge, it was
because every case was really about human beings.
Speaker 3 (13:26):
What they wished for what they were striving for.
Speaker 11 (13:29):
And so this particular case, Naco Brown, the facts really
stood out to me, I think in part because of
the work that Ken Ravenel did to personalize Naco.
Speaker 8 (13:41):
What do you remember about the facts around how these
robberies happened, what he did in the bank, and so forth.
Speaker 11 (13:47):
I remember that Nako was active in a church, and
what came to light was that Naco wanted money to
support the metrical productions that Naco was involved in through
the church.
Speaker 3 (14:06):
So Naco fancied.
Speaker 11 (14:09):
Himself as someone who was deeply involved with young people,
deeply involved in a community, was a person of faith.
And here was this paradox that this guy who was
so described chose to fund his incredible charitable and religious
activities through bank robbery. And so it always struck me
(14:31):
as really remarkable.
Speaker 8 (14:36):
The story of Naco Brown is indeed remarkable in more
ways than one, and his trial on four bank robbery
charges would provide just a glimmer of the onion that
is Naco Brown.
Speaker 10 (14:48):
I remember thinking, like, why is this guy going to trial?
Speaker 3 (14:51):
You know? And what was driving the decision?
Speaker 8 (14:54):
I don't know, because I don't know what Even though
she was the more experienced prosecutor of the two, say,
Jackie Rodriguez cost was riding shotgun as Jonathan prosecuted Naco
Brown in Judge Davis's courtroom.
Speaker 10 (15:07):
So I was not involved in the original investigation of
the case or what had transpired. I came in specifically
to assist Jonathan in preparing the case for trial.
Speaker 8 (15:17):
Were you involved in the questioning of witnesses or cross
or how did you guys divide it up?
Speaker 4 (15:22):
Sure?
Speaker 10 (15:23):
So preparing for trial means that we were going to,
you know, interview all of our witnesses again, this time
around with the idea of actually declaring what would be
their testimony at trial. I just remember it being like,
why is this guy going to trial?
Speaker 3 (15:39):
You know, I do remember that, and.
Speaker 8 (15:46):
In fact, Naco Brown must have been thinking the same
thing at some point.
Speaker 11 (15:51):
So Nico Brown was notable because it did go to
child before jury. Although he did attempt to plead guilty
a couple of times before we had trial. He reached
plea agreements with the government twice, and for one reason
or another, he changed his mind. But what was notable
most of all about Naco Brown was that it was
(16:14):
one of two cases I had that were what I
call vault jobs, and the typical bank robbery is a
teller typically places anywhere from nine hundred to twenty two
hundred dollars in a bag, and the person escapes from
the bank. The Naco Brown perpetrators went into the bank
(16:37):
vault and collected cash in a large container, and so
they got away with fifty sixty seventy thousand dollars in
bank funds.
Speaker 8 (16:48):
In the docket, it does say that you ordered three
hundred and seventy eight thousand dollars worth of restitution, So
I'm guessing that was the total amount that was taken
on the bank.
Speaker 11 (16:58):
Actually, the actual would have been more than four hundred thousand,
because the FBI had actually recovered a sizeable amount of money.
Speaker 3 (17:08):
I think something on the order of close to.
Speaker 11 (17:09):
Sixty sixty five thousand, something in that range from the
code defendant Naco Brown's code defendant.
Speaker 8 (17:20):
Judge Davis's memory is as good as he thinks it is.
The FBI sees sixty eight thousand dollars from the home
safe of Brown's code defendant, a guy named Kevin Hilliard,
and just like Warren Grace, a year later, the FBI
would flip Hilliard and turn him states evidence against Naco.
Speaker 11 (17:39):
Kevin Hilliard, what's his name, something of a down and
out kind of guy. And I became quite persuaded that
Naco Brown very deathly manipulated Kevin into his participation. Not
that Kevin wasn't responsible, but I don't think Kevin ever
would have thought about robbing a bank before he came
(18:01):
under the influence of Naco Brown.
Speaker 8 (18:04):
And he is described as the getaway driver, right, is
that your recollection?
Speaker 3 (18:10):
That is my recollection.
Speaker 11 (18:11):
He never entered the bank, He was the wheelman and
waiting outside for Nako to come out of the bank.
Speaker 8 (18:19):
What do you remember about what he did in the
bank and so forth?
Speaker 3 (18:23):
You got to laugh at this.
Speaker 11 (18:24):
Part of Nako's modus operandi was, of course to use
costuming from his theatrical activities at the church in the
bank robberies, and so he would wear false mustaches. He
wore costumes, and I'll never forget that. Today he was arrested,
(18:46):
Nako was dressed in surgical scrubs, and he had a
stethoscope either on his person or certainly in the car.
Speaker 3 (18:57):
You know, I we like to say, you can't make
this stuff.
Speaker 8 (19:00):
Oh indeed, you can't not only the circumstances of the
bank robbery, but the circumstances leading up to the trial
as well.
Speaker 11 (19:09):
He had an escape attempt during his pre child detention,
which was again just remarkable. He had somebody ship him
a hacksaw blade hidden in one of a pair of
Timberland boots. I remember that.
Speaker 8 (19:34):
The attorney who would represent the side show boot shipper
was none other than Arkie Tuminelli, but it would be
Arkie's co council from the Stash Records case, Ken Ravenel,
that would be the lead council in the main tent.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
Ken Ravenel was the defense attorney.
Speaker 11 (19:51):
And I had gotten to know Ken when I was
on the State bench, and I had high regard for
his ability. He always made excellently arguments, and he was
really a mature attorney. And it was always a pleasure
when a good lawyer appeared before a judge, and when
two good lawyers appeared, it was really the best of
(20:13):
all possible worlds.
Speaker 8 (20:15):
And that's what Judge Davis got when he oversaw US v.
Naco Brown, or put another way, Jonathan Luna v. Ken Ravenel.
Speaker 11 (20:25):
Jonathan Luna was a young assistant US attorney that I
had befriended and we formed something of a mentor mentee relationship.
Jonathan Luna, I think did a good job, a really
excellent job, as I recall him pointing out the similarities
in the three robberies, the stature of the perpetrator, and
(20:48):
why this guy sitting there at the trial looking perfectly
harmless and polite was the person depicted in those.
Speaker 3 (20:56):
Videos as the bank robber.
Speaker 11 (20:59):
And for all my affinity for Jonathan, he and the
assistant US attorney who tried the case with him, they
were still a little green, and so Ken was put
in the position of yanking their change from time to
time and making life a little less pleasant for them
(21:20):
than they had hoed.
Speaker 8 (21:23):
Of course, that didn't preclude Naco Brown from doing a
little yanking of his own either.
Speaker 11 (21:30):
I was reminded he tried to fire Ravenue, and I
think he tried to fire Ravenel more than once.
Speaker 3 (21:37):
So there was all of that, There was the overall
in there.
Speaker 8 (21:40):
But for all of that drama, the facts of the
case would ultimately lead to a predictable and pedestrian outcome.
Speaker 11 (21:48):
They convicted on three and the jury couldn't reach a
verdict on the fourth bank robbery.
Speaker 3 (21:54):
So that was the story of.
Speaker 11 (21:56):
The case, that here was this man of faith, devoted
to his community and his church, who committed these bank
robberies and who terrified, absolutely terrified the tellers, but once
he got in the bank, he was in total control.
Speaker 8 (22:17):
In addition to the facts of the bank robberies, the
players involved, and the defendant himself, the trial of Naco
Brown would of course be memorable for one other reason.
Sometime between the time the jury started deliberating and the
final accounting of the evidence after conviction, thirty six thousand
dollars of the cash evidence, about half of the cash
(22:39):
that was recovered from Kevin Hilliard's home, disappeared into thin air.
Speaker 9 (22:44):
I feel like I remember talking with Judge Davis about
that story and his just real astonishment that that could
have happened in his courtroom, and his real concern for
how it was being investigated, and concerned for of them it. Certainly,
as a prosecutor in the case, he bore responsibility for
(23:05):
how evidence had been handled.
Speaker 8 (23:08):
Do you have a recollection of the various theories around
what actually happened?
Speaker 9 (23:13):
I mean, there's a limited number of people who have
access to any federal courtroom, you know, the attorneys on
both sides, the judge and their staff, and sort of
law enforcement court security figures, And so if cash evidence
went missing, there was a really finite set of players
(23:33):
for whom could have been involved in that.
Speaker 8 (23:41):
And the players included not only the FBI and many
of the cast from the Stash House Records case, but
also all of Judge Davis's courtroom personnel.
Speaker 13 (23:51):
I was coming out of court one day and there
were two court clerks there. One of them was the
courtroom clerk the case when the money went missing. This
is like right around a day or a couple of
days after Jonathan is found dead. And I said something
(24:11):
about this whole thing about Jonathan, and the courtroom clerk
said to me something about she was really angry about
because all the court personnel that were around that courtroom
and that money became subjects and who could have taken
the money, and she was really pissedaw that she made
(24:33):
clear that Jonathan jeopardized her and other people when this happened.
Speaker 8 (24:40):
Yeah, they interviewed eighty four people for that.
Speaker 13 (24:42):
Yeah, so there, Well I didn't know that, but that's
consistent with what I thought.
Speaker 8 (24:51):
Oddly, the people doing the interviewing were FBI agents from
the Baltimore Field Office, the same field office that was
certainly as or more responsible than Jonathan for securing the
cash evidence in the case. And with agents talking to
everyone in the courthouse, the tongue started to wag.
Speaker 7 (25:12):
The scuttle butt was that you know who took the
money and where did the money go? But Jonathan Luna's
name was involved in that, like, really a prosecutor took
the money.
Speaker 3 (25:22):
I don't think that.
Speaker 13 (25:23):
Not only did the US Attorney Office, you know, Toabajio,
believed that Jonathan took the money, but so did people
in your.
Speaker 4 (25:31):
Story I heard he tried to blame it on the
FBI agent. From what I heard, and after that, I
think Jonathan was not the most favorite person on the
FBI relationship list.
Speaker 8 (25:49):
With accusations and finger pointing going on, the FBI would
do what the FBI does, ask everyone at the court
to take polygraphs.
Speaker 11 (26:00):
To my knowledge, everybody said yes, and just informally, I
seem to recall hearing that there were a couple of
people around the courthouse who were polygraphed, and I was interviewed.
Everybody in the courthouse, was interviewed, and I noted from
the three to Zho two that you sent me, David,
(26:21):
that Jonathan was asked and agreed to take a lie
detective test. But I don't think they ever developed a
strong suspect. I mean, the FBI was embarrassed beyond description.
That's something that can never happen, should never happen, and
what can you say that should never have happened.
Speaker 8 (26:42):
And there was another thing that may not have happened.
And I say may because the FBI has not officially
released who all took polygraphs and who didn't.
Speaker 12 (26:52):
And I also know secondhand that Jonathan had agreed to
take a polygraph test regarding the money, but at some
point when the time came to do it, he refused
to take the polygraph test. I kind of suspected others.
Speaker 13 (27:09):
Were asked to take a polygraph test and it probably
wound up that he was the only one that wound
up refusing.
Speaker 8 (27:18):
But was that true? Was Jonathan Luna the only person
who refused to take a polygraph when questioned about the
missing money?
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Not?
Speaker 8 (27:26):
According to the man who originally stole the money from
the bank in the first place. The college from Brown
ann this college being recorded and it's subject to monitoring.
Speaker 5 (27:48):
Where when I was the only one that didn't take
a polygraph test, he was the only one I didn't
get interviewed by the AFA. So when I looked at
all of the discovery that I gofinitepl to continue to
get it, he was the only one that wasn't followed
that in the group.
Speaker 8 (28:03):
How do you know that because I haven't seen those.
Speaker 5 (28:06):
I don't have anything. Once again, I have all the
discovery from that investigation, put the inst in evidence investigations.
I have all the discovery of that. And his name
can come up one time in an interview at one time.
Speaker 8 (28:19):
And whether we could deduce anything from this claim of
missing documentation about missing money is an open question. But
the credibility of the FBI, Jonathan Luna, Naco Brown, and
yes Ken Ravenel would not only rest on what could
be factually verified, but also on some more recent events
(28:40):
events that remain, like Brown's claim, merely allegations that have
yet to be proven in a court of law.
Speaker 3 (28:49):
See them on television. You've seen him in the.
Speaker 8 (28:51):
Courtroom, but you haven't seen him like this. What of
Baldember's most.
Speaker 4 (28:53):
Sought after defense attorneys found himself defended in court.
Speaker 8 (28:58):
Today, Ken Ravenel is facing thracreteering, money laundering and drug
charges next time on Somebody Somewhere.
Speaker 7 (29:11):
This is a major league drug trafficking case.
Speaker 6 (29:14):
This wasn't small local, this was nationwide.
Speaker 5 (29:19):
And I see things and they it's the Holy Spirit
tell me to look at certain things. At the end
of the trial, he literally brought another breakcase.
Speaker 10 (29:26):
God is a god of second chances, and so he
definitely recognized that this was his chance to get it right.
Speaker 8 (29:34):
That makes sense, actually more than he went and staffed
himself thirty six times.
Speaker 9 (29:39):
Ain't nobody's buying that bullshit.
Speaker 8 (29:42):
There goes the devil telling me to lie again.
Speaker 1 (29:48):
Says I'm around me.
Speaker 8 (29:51):
Said it's all right to everythin that you can get more.
Speaker 10 (29:59):
Then you get.
Speaker 8 (30:02):
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
(30:23):
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. Thank you
for listening.
Speaker 6 (30:41):
Here.
Speaker 7 (30:41):
God a Hey said, good.
Speaker 2 (30:49):
Word.
Speaker 8 (30:51):
Hellove even still 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.