February 19, 2021 • 31 mins
In the Season 3 finale, Payne summarizes the evidence and debunks one of the FBI’s main theories. And in a story of redemption and hope, Payne jumps in to help his new friend.
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):
Judge, you're not going to believe this. What the money
is missing? What do you mean the money is missing?
Speaker 3 (00:47):
But Jonathan Luna's name was involved in that, Like, really
a prosecutor took the money?
Speaker 4 (00:52):
I don't think so.
Speaker 5 (00:54):
He tried to blame it on the FBI agent and
after that, I think Jonathan was not the most favorite
person on the FBI relationship list.
Speaker 6 (01:05):
But it always did bug me that it was the
FBI office in Baltimore conducting this investigation.
Speaker 7 (01:11):
You know, is this one of the reasons that the
US Attorney's Office doesn't want to make public all of
their findings in this case.
Speaker 8 (01:19):
This is episode nine and the finale of season three
The Phoenix. I'm your host, David Payne. It's been ten
years as a federal prosecutor was found edna Burgh, Lancaster County.
Speaker 9 (01:41):
We will find out who did this. Was he trying
to stage some sort of attack and.
Speaker 10 (01:46):
Went to far.
Speaker 8 (01:59):
When the Baltimore Field Office of the FBI I took
it upon themselves to investigate what happened to the missing money,
the investigation, by definition, was compromised. According to Prosecutor Jackie
Causes sworn statement, one of the FBI's own agents, Tony Campano,
was responsible for the money the entire case.
Speaker 4 (02:19):
That's accurate.
Speaker 6 (02:19):
So the law enforcement agent is always the person in
charge of the evidence. The evidence should never leave the
custody of the law enforcement agency. It's Tony's responsibility to
withdraw the money from the safe and the evidence from
an FBI transferred to our trial prep room where we
would keep whatever evidence we were going to use for trial,
(02:43):
and we had a key to that room. And so
he's able to then later if he had to testify
as to the custody of the evidence, he could say,
you know, it was a secure facility because it's within
the space of the US toorney's office, which has security
levels to begin with, and then within the usttorney's office,
it was on the a secure room because it was
under lock and key, and then trial starts and as
(03:07):
those exhibits are submitted into evidence. Once the exhibit is
admitted into evidence, support keeps the exhibit until the end
of trial. And there was no issue, There was no
happenstance with that.
Speaker 8 (03:24):
But because the FBI was never able to come to
a conclusion on who took the money, and because prosecutors
and FBI agents would be prohibited by DOJ policy from
commenting on what they witnessed, and because the press made
this connection between his death and the missing money, Jonathan's
name was dragged through the mud. And once that suggestion
(03:45):
of shadiness was out there, it wasn't surprising that the
press and the public by extension, would be receptive to
similar suggestions about Jonathan. Gil Gibson of the Baltimore Sun explains.
Speaker 7 (03:58):
There was a whisper campaign about his personal life and
whoever knows anyone right and what their interests are and.
Speaker 11 (04:10):
What they do you know, in their personal time.
Speaker 7 (04:13):
But it was always this odd question of is this
whisper campaign driven because they think they've learned something about
Jonathan's personal life that they would rather not ever be
public as a way to kind of protect his character,
or the reverse right that they want even just the
rumor of it to become public to divert attention away
(04:36):
from what had happened.
Speaker 8 (04:38):
Your job is to report what the sources are saying,
because that's the official story. But I'm just wondering what
your thoughts were around that in the background as you
took all that in.
Speaker 11 (04:49):
Sure, I think that's some of what I'm sharing now
is being outside of journalism now that you sort of
look back and think about all the ways that all
writing and reporting is kind of a recurse process. But
daily journalism doesn't always give breathing space for.
Speaker 12 (05:05):
That, And so facts, rumors, information from sources, you report
it in hopes of assembling over time some closer version
of the truth. And I think Jonathan's story was one
that didn't get a lot closer to a version of
the truth. And that's always been, you know, a real regret,
(05:27):
I would say, And you don't always end up with
something that resembles the whole, I guess.
Speaker 8 (05:38):
And while I have sympathy for Gail Gibson's predicament as
a daily beat reporter, there was no question The Sun's
reporting affected the trajectory of the investigation, and so her
personal regrets about Jonathan's post wartem portrayal. Notwithstanding, there are
some friends of Jonathan, like Barbara Skidmore who aren't so
ready to give the press a pass.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
I mean, it's ridiculous. That's like a rag paper the
Sun for doing that, shame on them. I don't know
if sixth grader could have figured out you should ask
more questions.
Speaker 10 (06:09):
How could that be?
Speaker 8 (06:11):
You know, you get these sources from federal law enforcement,
and then you're only as good as your sources, right,
and so you have to print what they say.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
Well, I mean, it just shows a level of both
inexperience and immaturity, because I don't care who you are.
I mean, I teach my granddaughter. You know, it's hard
today with all the platforms of information, you know, and
when she comes to me with something and she says,
did you know such an nut?
Speaker 4 (06:39):
I said, well, let's talk about what's the source.
Speaker 3 (06:42):
What would be that person's interest in saying that? You know,
what else would you look at to find out the
truthfulness or the completeness of that story. You mean a
journalist doesn't know to do that. I mean, it's it's ridiculous.
Speaker 8 (07:02):
But you know what they say, don't hate the player,
hate the game. But in this game, the traditional rules
about printing what your federal sources have to say seem
downright quaint. As the sources themselves were part of the investigation,
they were spinning and it make matters worse. These same
authorities are hiding behind claims that the investigation remains open
(07:24):
to keep the case files away from the public while
linking the suicide theory to the press. Judge Andre Davis, I.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
Assume the Bureau would never give you their investigative file.
Speaker 8 (07:37):
Exactly, They'll give it to nobody. And so you know,
there's one way to clear this up on whether or
not this was a suicide. Release the autopsy, and that's
been deep sixed.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
You know, I never read about stabs in the back.
I recall very distinctly being very dissatisfied with the reports
of the autopsy, leading something to the effect that, well,
in this county, we don't have an a team when
it comes to forensic work. I don't mean to cast
(08:10):
dispersions on anybody, But I would like to think that
a professional forensic pathologist would be able to say more
definitively what happened to him in his last.
Speaker 8 (08:23):
Minutes, especially when you consider that Jonathan was one of
only two federal prosecutors potentially killed in the line of duty,
and the other guy, Tom Wales, has had a full
time investigative team attached to his case for twenty years,
costing millions of dollars. And on that point, I must
(08:47):
reserve my greatest judgment for a failed investigation on the
investigators themselves, but don't take my word for it. In
two thousand and five, DOJ's Inspector General conducted an investigator
of the FBI's investigation of the murder. This report was
so critical of the FBI's mismanagement of the case that
(09:08):
it drew by partisan ayre from members of the Senate
Judiciary Committee. That report, too, of course, was deep six
by DOJ, and so it has left a journalist and
maybe even former federal prosecutors like Jackie Koss and me
to deduce what we can from back channels. And if
you want to know what I think about what the
evidence tells us, well, Jackie does a pretty good job
(09:31):
channeling my thoughts.
Speaker 6 (09:36):
As prosecutors. You know, I go back to my experience
investigating violent crimes. You have to let the evidence speak
to you. And again, I have an examined photographs. I
haven't seen an autopsy report. They have not gone to
the scene of the crime. But the information that I
have is that he had an extraordinary number of saboms
(09:56):
and some of those were categorized as defensive stab wounds
step ones that you would suffer in your arms, you know,
and then in the four arms and stuff. So that
is completely inconsistent with suicide, particularly someone who doesn't have
a prior history of suicidal tendency or self mutilation or any.
Speaker 8 (10:17):
One of the reasons I was so interested in this
case was exactly your framework for looking at it, which was,
if you look just at the physical evidence, how do
you even start that part of the discussion, right, So
we talked to the guy, an FBI behavioral guy that
was quoted in the paper as saying that this was
not a murder. These thirty six stab wounds were more
(10:39):
indicative of hesitations.
Speaker 4 (10:41):
We talked to that guy and.
Speaker 8 (10:43):
He said, I never saw the evidence that was just
something that was described to me, like, Okay, how did
they get from the crime scene and what happened that
night to this? And when you start unraveling it, what
it looks like, quite frankly, is that those besmirchments about
his character have more to do with than inability to
(11:05):
solve the case and not wanting to have some kind
of case out there that is an open case. Indeed,
there is so much to the crime scene that simply
did not square with a suicide, including the site itself,
that it's hard to know where to start when picking
(11:26):
it apart.
Speaker 6 (11:27):
And why drive to that location?
Speaker 10 (11:29):
Right, if what you're going to do is you're going
to end your life?
Speaker 6 (11:32):
Why drive to that location? What's the significance? Because there
usually is right when somebody and there's just so many
open questions, and you know, when there dollar bills or
something found at the scene inside the car or whatever.
Speaker 5 (11:48):
So it just made no sense.
Speaker 6 (11:49):
And why he decided to float dollar bills around his
vehicle before he went ahead and then crawled under his vehicle,
right because wasn't he faced down under the vehicle or something?
You know, So that theory just never made sense to me,
simply because it was completely inconsistent with the evidence at
the scene.
Speaker 4 (12:07):
And so why is.
Speaker 6 (12:09):
The physical evidence important is because the physical evidence is
not going to change. You know, witnesses perceptions may change,
witnesses accounts may change.
Speaker 10 (12:20):
The physical evidence remains the same. And so if the
physical evidence is indicating.
Speaker 6 (12:25):
That there was an attack, then that's going to supersede
any sort of like theory based on circumstantial evidence, which
is what they're talking about, right, circumstances that might have
put him in a certain mind frame.
Speaker 8 (12:42):
Yeah, I don't know. I know it's personal to you.
It feels it feels personal to us, but it's really
it's truly personal to you. So I can't imagine how
you process that. But it is maddening. It is maddening.
Speaker 6 (12:57):
And I remember a female age and interviewing me again
it was I don't remember if it was her or
someone else who floated the possibility that he might have
committed suicide, and just being like, you know, what, if
this is where you guys are going with this, I don't.
You know, I don't want to partake because I just
think that that's unsustainable. But I would love for the
(13:21):
case to be clarified, you know, I think it's so
important for the family, especially I mean worked by own crime,
that having that closure is so important to the people
left behind, to knowing what happened and being able to
make peace with that. But with an open investigation and
the uncertainty as to what took place or who was responsible,
(13:44):
and I can't imagine the pain that that causes the family.
Speaker 8 (13:57):
And I'm sorry to say that, at least at this point,
we cannot provide that closure. I believe the circumstances of
Jonathan's last few hours and the known physical evidence make
it extremely likely that he was tortured and then killed.
I could spout off on who would have had a
motive for such a heinous act, but you're smart people.
(14:18):
You can connect your own dots. And I don't think
expressing my personal opinions will mitigate the family's pain either. However,
I do believe we have debunk this notion that Jonathan
Luna killed himself or had anything to do with the
missing money, and I hope that knowing that at least
gives his children peace that he did not abandon them.
Speaker 6 (14:41):
He was a super super sweet man, like just a
sweet generous man, was very involved in the care of
his parents. Like I said, he was, he loved loved.
Speaker 4 (14:55):
Being a dad.
Speaker 6 (14:56):
I mean, when I had no idea what I was
going to get my kids for Christmas, Jonathan was already
getting packages in the mail at his office because he
would keep the packages at his office to hide them
from his kids for Christmas.
Speaker 4 (15:11):
And I'm just very proud of his wife.
Speaker 6 (15:14):
I remember always talked about her with such love and
that narration, and it was heartbreaking, you know, heartbreaking what
happened to him.
Speaker 4 (15:26):
He's a good human being.
Speaker 8 (15:38):
And more than anything, what I want for Jonathan's family
is for this audience to bring enough pressure to bear
to appoint a special counsel to take a fresh look
at the evidence, something I would certainly sign up for,
and maybe even a certain former federal District Court judge
might be in for as well.
Speaker 4 (15:57):
You guys got to solve this case.
Speaker 8 (16:00):
As you know, these things, If you let him die,
they die.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Is there someone out there that has information that has
not been disclosed to investigators.
Speaker 4 (16:14):
I kind of believe there is, and I hope, and.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
I'm sure you guys hope anybody would hope that someday
they'll come forward with at least a plausible account of
what actually happened.
Speaker 4 (16:30):
I'm sure his family would desperately like to know.
Speaker 8 (16:35):
And while our collective hopes will remain centered on finding
somebody somewhere who can provide closure for Jonathan's family, before
we leave you this season, we want to share the
closure we sought for the family of another Baltimore man.
(17:00):
When we started looking at the Lunar case, we were
at the precipice of a year the world will never forget.
A pandemic had just begun that would force all of
us to look inward when we couldn't venture out, and
the social unrest, ignited by the George Floyd murder and
amplified by a failing economy, tested this nation like never before.
(17:22):
And through it all, among all the people I spoke with, family, friends,
interviewees for this podcast, the person who had the biggest
heart and the biggest faith was the guy locked in
the smallest of cells. And I couldn't help but want
to learn more about how.
Speaker 4 (17:39):
He did that.
Speaker 8 (17:41):
So I read his books, including a twenty nineteen book
he wrote called twenty twenty Faith that literally prophesied this
terrible year. And as I read his words and reflected
on the circumstances of not only his life but my own.
I think I surprised even the closest people around me.
Speaker 13 (18:00):
It's really interesting how invested you are in this, in
Nako's case in particular, because we are looking at the
Jonathan Luna case. But there's something here, There's more here.
I just have never seen you like this before.
Speaker 8 (18:16):
I mean, I don't think you or I can do
what he has done in prison, in those kind of environments.
I mean, think about it, Jody, to be locked up.
We've been locked down in quarantine, you know, I put
that in huge air quotes, with the hardship of living
in our houses and you know this country has been
(18:38):
Oh woe is me? You know, it's been three months
and we can't get our haircuts or get tattoos. Here's
a man who is locked down twenty three hours a day,
and he has more positivity and he has more productivity
than ninety nine percent of the people. His story is
(18:59):
also a test meant to having a purpose driven life,
and the only way you can stay sane when you're
sentenced to twenty five years in jail is to find
that purpose, and he has found it in creating this ministry,
mentoring all these men, helping people through their struggles. He's
(19:20):
found meaning for his life. You know, we talk a
lot in this country about rehabilitation and redemption, but I
don't think I've ever met anyone before who so personified
the concept. And whether it was the Holy Spirit as
Nako would maintain, or some other force, I don't know.
(19:44):
But I felt compelled to do something about his situation
because even though Nako was wrong about Jonathan Luna, it
wasn't right to lock this or any other man away
in a cell twenty three hours a day.
Speaker 14 (20:01):
Call it from hey, Cole Brown an India, a sort
of record. Then what's colors being recorded? And it's subject
to monitoring?
Speaker 9 (20:10):
All right, I'm with you. I'm with you. Tell me
what's going on there in your facility?
Speaker 15 (20:16):
Well the same. I haven't heard anythink any breakouts in
the facility. We come out watch a day for an hour,
so we had twenty three hours a week on an
hour to take a shower. Fill on the phone.
Speaker 16 (20:29):
Check the email.
Speaker 9 (20:31):
Did you see my note about the letter?
Speaker 15 (20:34):
Yes, I didn't appreciate it.
Speaker 9 (20:36):
Yeah, it's a letter to the judge. The letter says,
in essence, look I'm a journalist looking into this case.
I understand that Naco has several matters pending before you,
including a first step release and a commutation of sentence,
and that in looking at this case, I believe that
you are the ideal candidate, were somebody that should get
(20:58):
early release, whether under the first step, aact, or compassionate
release due to COVID. It's not a legal document, but
as a letter asking her to have a renewed look
at the game.
Speaker 8 (21:12):
Writing a letter on Nako's behalf to the judge overseeing
his case now was both an easy and hard decision
to make. We had never met in person, and I
would typically be reluctant to vouch for someone under these circumstances.
But we had been talking for months, I had been
doing character reference checks, and I believed his teachings were sincere,
(21:33):
And in the end, it wasn't so much as words
that moved me, but his actions. There was no doubt
in my mind that Nako had transformed in prison, and
in so doing had positively impacted the lives of hundreds,
if not thousands, of men. And there was one other
person I had met during this podcast that had likewise
(21:54):
impacted the lives of the men he came in contact with,
and I wondered if Judge Davis would join me in
helping Nako to continue to find his purpose.
Speaker 4 (22:05):
Wow, I would love to see him and talk to him.
Speaker 8 (22:09):
No, his journalists were supposed to be impartial in these
kind of things. But I wrote a letter to the
judge in his most recent pleading as saying, you know,
if you believe in rehabilitation, this is the kind of
guy that doesn't pose a threat to society in my opinion,
and is an example of kind of the inequities in
(22:30):
the system. You know, he was sentenced under these guidelines
that are unconstitutional. He couldn't get relief from that for
a variety of legal reasons. It really just highlights all
the problems.
Speaker 4 (22:41):
I agree. He must be getting close to fifty years.
Speaker 5 (22:44):
Old he is.
Speaker 8 (22:46):
I'm really curious, as you look back on your career,
if you could undo any of that, would you.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
I would never have given Nako twenty five years without
parole the way the guidelines where if you work down
the Y acts and you go out on the X
axis and there's your sentence right there, that's pretty much
what he got. Twenty five years of course, the trauma
on the tellers was real, and I get that, but
nobody was injured. I'm really curious to know whether he's
(23:15):
he ever admitted his involvement.
Speaker 4 (23:18):
Does he admit his involvement to you? He does?
Speaker 2 (23:21):
Okay, okay, Well, I really look forward to the podcast
because might just to test my two decade old theory
about what was going on with him and in his
mind and so on against whatever it is he finally
discloses to you or to others.
Speaker 8 (23:41):
One Saturday morning, as I was getting out of my car,
my phone rang, and I was pleased to enable Judge
Davis to scratch that two decades old Itch.
Speaker 14 (23:52):
College from very cool brow an indol then hang up
to decline the call or to accept dial five now
if you wish to block there?
Speaker 9 (24:04):
Yes, hello, okay, good to hear from you. Do you
want me to see if we can get the judge
on this morning?
Speaker 16 (24:11):
Yes, that's us.
Speaker 9 (24:14):
Yes, macho, I'm worry. I feel honored to be able
to pull you two together, and I just thought it
would be worth having a conversation.
Speaker 16 (24:25):
Well, mister Brown, may I call you nako?
Speaker 15 (24:28):
Yes? Please, sir.
Speaker 16 (24:30):
I was quite pleased to receive David's phone call a
few weeks ago, and it strikes me if you have
really evolved into a person who is more of the
person you always wanted to be. Am I right about that?
Speaker 15 (24:51):
Yes, sir, you are myself myself well.
Speaker 16 (24:56):
I have long believed that none of us us is
defined by the worst thing or things we've ever done,
and I think that the arc of your life seems
to bear that out. I'm told that when we're doing
some really, really great work with young people.
Speaker 8 (25:15):
These days, and at this point, then I think I
will let the discussion between these two men stay between them,
except to amplify one part of the exchange that seemed
to encapsulate the journey that was this season.
Speaker 15 (25:28):
And I reminded what Joseph said when he met his brothers.
He says, what y'all meant for you regardment to a
good to bring the past, that it is to stay
the same many loves. And that's what our purpose is,
is the same lives.
Speaker 16 (25:42):
Yeah my email tagline, As David knows, I quote Tony
Morrison who said, if you are free, then your principal
job is to free others. And if you have power,
then you should empower others. And that's that's how I
(26:05):
try to live my life.
Speaker 15 (26:07):
That's probably Yeah, So.
Speaker 16 (26:10):
We are blass.
Speaker 4 (26:11):
We are very highly blasted.
Speaker 8 (26:19):
Three months to the day after that call, after hundreds
of federal prisoners would die from COVID, I got a
garbled call from Naco and for the first time ever,
it wasn't proceeded with. This call is from a federal prison.
Speaker 9 (26:35):
Okay, now we're on you got me, I'm here.
Speaker 5 (26:40):
How are you?
Speaker 10 (26:41):
I'm really great.
Speaker 5 (26:44):
God is doing his things.
Speaker 10 (26:46):
Take the post and lets the album of night.
Speaker 15 (26:49):
Let me let them seven.
Speaker 9 (26:51):
This is the first time somebody has given you a
break on getting out earlier.
Speaker 10 (26:57):
Wow. Absolutely take care that one.
Speaker 8 (27:02):
What Judge Ellen Hollander had granted NACo's long shot motion
for compassionate release, one of his students would meet him
at the bus stop and drive him twenty hours to
his wife and family in Oklahoma.
Speaker 10 (27:15):
I will say this day.
Speaker 15 (27:17):
The lawyer said, your leather had.
Speaker 10 (27:20):
A significant impact on the judgment. Wow, yeah, a significant
impact on the judges. He said, you're going to call you.
He said, you know, and he asked me, I don't
play the best, you know, so I want to wring
you again.
Speaker 8 (27:42):
And while I was humbled to have a cameo in
the play that is NACo's Life. The truth is I
received a lot of life lessons back from Naco in return,
and when I spoke with him the following day, he
was teaching me one final lesson on gratitude and perspective.
Speaker 9 (27:59):
What does it feel like to be out breathing that
fresh air? Imagine it's like a rebirth.
Speaker 10 (28:05):
Absolutely, that's the perfect way to put it. Absolutely. You know,
one moment you are in the shelf, locked up, and
then the next moment you on the road, driving from
one stick to another, and you appreciate the fresh air,
the birds, the sunrise, sunset. You know, you appreciate a
(28:28):
lot of things that you take for granted.
Speaker 9 (28:30):
What's surprise you the most on the drive just moving, just.
Speaker 10 (28:34):
Mean in motion, you know, and going forward. When you're
in concert it you go in circles. Everything is in circles.
Even when you go out into the yacht, you're walking
around in circles. To be able to go forward and
not going circles a whole lot.
Speaker 17 (28:51):
It was a long road, and you know what inspired
me about your story was that as long as it was,
you still kept your faith which is going to make
you so resilient in the next half of your life,
whatever that looks for, and that's what you.
Speaker 10 (29:09):
Have to do. Imagine myself getting the opportunity to have
a second chances, and I knew that I had to
have faith in order to see that.
Speaker 8 (29:41):
Hey, Somebody Somewhere listeners, I hope you enjoyed this season.
Please stay tuned for a special bonus episode where I
go deeper with Nako on his family, his ministry, and
his decision to Rob Banks. Thank you again for listening.
Speaker 10 (30:01):
Here it goes the devil telling me to lie again,
says I'm around me sales.
Speaker 6 (30:09):
It's all right to Britain.
Speaker 1 (30:16):
That you can get more.
Speaker 6 (30:17):
Don you give?
Speaker 8 (30:20):
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 Paine. If you have any
information regarding the Jonathan Luna case, please contact us via
(30:41):
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 2 (31:00):
God, I hate to say I'm someone would I just
want you?
Speaker 17 (31:10):
Love Eve, don't still love money?
Speaker 10 (31:18):
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):
Judge, you're not going to believe this. What the money
is missing? What do you mean the money is missing?
Speaker 3 (00:47):
But Jonathan Luna's name was involved in that, Like, really
a prosecutor took the money?
Speaker 4 (00:52):
I don't think so.
Speaker 5 (00:54):
He tried to blame it on the FBI agent and
after that, I think Jonathan was not the most favorite
person on the FBI relationship list.
Speaker 6 (01:05):
But it always did bug me that it was the
FBI office in Baltimore conducting this investigation.
Speaker 7 (01:11):
You know, is this one of the reasons that the
US Attorney's Office doesn't want to make public all of
their findings in this case.
Speaker 8 (01:19):
This is episode nine and the finale of season three
The Phoenix. I'm your host, David Payne. It's been ten
years as a federal prosecutor was found edna Burgh, Lancaster County.
Speaker 9 (01:41):
We will find out who did this. Was he trying
to stage some sort of attack and.
Speaker 10 (01:46):
Went to far.
Speaker 8 (01:59):
When the Baltimore Field Office of the FBI I took
it upon themselves to investigate what happened to the missing money,
the investigation, by definition, was compromised. According to Prosecutor Jackie
Causes sworn statement, one of the FBI's own agents, Tony Campano,
was responsible for the money the entire case.
Speaker 4 (02:19):
That's accurate.
Speaker 6 (02:19):
So the law enforcement agent is always the person in
charge of the evidence. The evidence should never leave the
custody of the law enforcement agency. It's Tony's responsibility to
withdraw the money from the safe and the evidence from
an FBI transferred to our trial prep room where we
would keep whatever evidence we were going to use for trial,
(02:43):
and we had a key to that room. And so
he's able to then later if he had to testify
as to the custody of the evidence, he could say,
you know, it was a secure facility because it's within
the space of the US toorney's office, which has security
levels to begin with, and then within the usttorney's office,
it was on the a secure room because it was
under lock and key, and then trial starts and as
(03:07):
those exhibits are submitted into evidence. Once the exhibit is
admitted into evidence, support keeps the exhibit until the end
of trial. And there was no issue, There was no
happenstance with that.
Speaker 8 (03:24):
But because the FBI was never able to come to
a conclusion on who took the money, and because prosecutors
and FBI agents would be prohibited by DOJ policy from
commenting on what they witnessed, and because the press made
this connection between his death and the missing money, Jonathan's
name was dragged through the mud. And once that suggestion
(03:45):
of shadiness was out there, it wasn't surprising that the
press and the public by extension, would be receptive to
similar suggestions about Jonathan. Gil Gibson of the Baltimore Sun explains.
Speaker 7 (03:58):
There was a whisper campaign about his personal life and
whoever knows anyone right and what their interests are and.
Speaker 11 (04:10):
What they do you know, in their personal time.
Speaker 7 (04:13):
But it was always this odd question of is this
whisper campaign driven because they think they've learned something about
Jonathan's personal life that they would rather not ever be
public as a way to kind of protect his character,
or the reverse right that they want even just the
rumor of it to become public to divert attention away
(04:36):
from what had happened.
Speaker 8 (04:38):
Your job is to report what the sources are saying,
because that's the official story. But I'm just wondering what
your thoughts were around that in the background as you
took all that in.
Speaker 11 (04:49):
Sure, I think that's some of what I'm sharing now
is being outside of journalism now that you sort of
look back and think about all the ways that all
writing and reporting is kind of a recurse process. But
daily journalism doesn't always give breathing space for.
Speaker 12 (05:05):
That, And so facts, rumors, information from sources, you report
it in hopes of assembling over time some closer version
of the truth. And I think Jonathan's story was one
that didn't get a lot closer to a version of
the truth. And that's always been, you know, a real regret,
(05:27):
I would say, And you don't always end up with
something that resembles the whole, I guess.
Speaker 8 (05:38):
And while I have sympathy for Gail Gibson's predicament as
a daily beat reporter, there was no question The Sun's
reporting affected the trajectory of the investigation, and so her
personal regrets about Jonathan's post wartem portrayal. Notwithstanding, there are
some friends of Jonathan, like Barbara Skidmore who aren't so
ready to give the press a pass.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
I mean, it's ridiculous. That's like a rag paper the
Sun for doing that, shame on them. I don't know
if sixth grader could have figured out you should ask
more questions.
Speaker 10 (06:09):
How could that be?
Speaker 8 (06:11):
You know, you get these sources from federal law enforcement,
and then you're only as good as your sources, right,
and so you have to print what they say.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
Well, I mean, it just shows a level of both
inexperience and immaturity, because I don't care who you are.
I mean, I teach my granddaughter. You know, it's hard
today with all the platforms of information, you know, and
when she comes to me with something and she says,
did you know such an nut?
Speaker 4 (06:39):
I said, well, let's talk about what's the source.
Speaker 3 (06:42):
What would be that person's interest in saying that? You know,
what else would you look at to find out the
truthfulness or the completeness of that story. You mean a
journalist doesn't know to do that. I mean, it's it's ridiculous.
Speaker 8 (07:02):
But you know what they say, don't hate the player,
hate the game. But in this game, the traditional rules
about printing what your federal sources have to say seem
downright quaint. As the sources themselves were part of the investigation,
they were spinning and it make matters worse. These same
authorities are hiding behind claims that the investigation remains open
(07:24):
to keep the case files away from the public while
linking the suicide theory to the press. Judge Andre Davis, I.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
Assume the Bureau would never give you their investigative file.
Speaker 8 (07:37):
Exactly, They'll give it to nobody. And so you know,
there's one way to clear this up on whether or
not this was a suicide. Release the autopsy, and that's
been deep sixed.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
You know, I never read about stabs in the back.
I recall very distinctly being very dissatisfied with the reports
of the autopsy, leading something to the effect that, well,
in this county, we don't have an a team when
it comes to forensic work. I don't mean to cast
(08:10):
dispersions on anybody, But I would like to think that
a professional forensic pathologist would be able to say more
definitively what happened to him in his last.
Speaker 8 (08:23):
Minutes, especially when you consider that Jonathan was one of
only two federal prosecutors potentially killed in the line of duty,
and the other guy, Tom Wales, has had a full
time investigative team attached to his case for twenty years,
costing millions of dollars. And on that point, I must
(08:47):
reserve my greatest judgment for a failed investigation on the
investigators themselves, but don't take my word for it. In
two thousand and five, DOJ's Inspector General conducted an investigator
of the FBI's investigation of the murder. This report was
so critical of the FBI's mismanagement of the case that
(09:08):
it drew by partisan ayre from members of the Senate
Judiciary Committee. That report, too, of course, was deep six
by DOJ, and so it has left a journalist and
maybe even former federal prosecutors like Jackie Koss and me
to deduce what we can from back channels. And if
you want to know what I think about what the
evidence tells us, well, Jackie does a pretty good job
(09:31):
channeling my thoughts.
Speaker 6 (09:36):
As prosecutors. You know, I go back to my experience
investigating violent crimes. You have to let the evidence speak
to you. And again, I have an examined photographs. I
haven't seen an autopsy report. They have not gone to
the scene of the crime. But the information that I
have is that he had an extraordinary number of saboms
(09:56):
and some of those were categorized as defensive stab wounds
step ones that you would suffer in your arms, you know,
and then in the four arms and stuff. So that
is completely inconsistent with suicide, particularly someone who doesn't have
a prior history of suicidal tendency or self mutilation or any.
Speaker 8 (10:17):
One of the reasons I was so interested in this
case was exactly your framework for looking at it, which was,
if you look just at the physical evidence, how do
you even start that part of the discussion, right, So
we talked to the guy, an FBI behavioral guy that
was quoted in the paper as saying that this was
not a murder. These thirty six stab wounds were more
(10:39):
indicative of hesitations.
Speaker 4 (10:41):
We talked to that guy and.
Speaker 8 (10:43):
He said, I never saw the evidence that was just
something that was described to me, like, Okay, how did
they get from the crime scene and what happened that
night to this? And when you start unraveling it, what
it looks like, quite frankly, is that those besmirchments about
his character have more to do with than inability to
(11:05):
solve the case and not wanting to have some kind
of case out there that is an open case. Indeed,
there is so much to the crime scene that simply
did not square with a suicide, including the site itself,
that it's hard to know where to start when picking
(11:26):
it apart.
Speaker 6 (11:27):
And why drive to that location?
Speaker 10 (11:29):
Right, if what you're going to do is you're going
to end your life?
Speaker 6 (11:32):
Why drive to that location? What's the significance? Because there
usually is right when somebody and there's just so many
open questions, and you know, when there dollar bills or
something found at the scene inside the car or whatever.
Speaker 5 (11:48):
So it just made no sense.
Speaker 6 (11:49):
And why he decided to float dollar bills around his
vehicle before he went ahead and then crawled under his vehicle,
right because wasn't he faced down under the vehicle or something?
You know, So that theory just never made sense to me,
simply because it was completely inconsistent with the evidence at
the scene.
Speaker 4 (12:07):
And so why is.
Speaker 6 (12:09):
The physical evidence important is because the physical evidence is
not going to change. You know, witnesses perceptions may change,
witnesses accounts may change.
Speaker 10 (12:20):
The physical evidence remains the same. And so if the
physical evidence is indicating.
Speaker 6 (12:25):
That there was an attack, then that's going to supersede
any sort of like theory based on circumstantial evidence, which
is what they're talking about, right, circumstances that might have
put him in a certain mind frame.
Speaker 8 (12:42):
Yeah, I don't know. I know it's personal to you.
It feels it feels personal to us, but it's really
it's truly personal to you. So I can't imagine how
you process that. But it is maddening. It is maddening.
Speaker 6 (12:57):
And I remember a female age and interviewing me again
it was I don't remember if it was her or
someone else who floated the possibility that he might have
committed suicide, and just being like, you know, what, if
this is where you guys are going with this, I don't.
You know, I don't want to partake because I just
think that that's unsustainable. But I would love for the
(13:21):
case to be clarified, you know, I think it's so
important for the family, especially I mean worked by own crime,
that having that closure is so important to the people
left behind, to knowing what happened and being able to
make peace with that. But with an open investigation and
the uncertainty as to what took place or who was responsible,
(13:44):
and I can't imagine the pain that that causes the family.
Speaker 8 (13:57):
And I'm sorry to say that, at least at this point,
we cannot provide that closure. I believe the circumstances of
Jonathan's last few hours and the known physical evidence make
it extremely likely that he was tortured and then killed.
I could spout off on who would have had a
motive for such a heinous act, but you're smart people.
(14:18):
You can connect your own dots. And I don't think
expressing my personal opinions will mitigate the family's pain either. However,
I do believe we have debunk this notion that Jonathan
Luna killed himself or had anything to do with the
missing money, and I hope that knowing that at least
gives his children peace that he did not abandon them.
Speaker 6 (14:41):
He was a super super sweet man, like just a
sweet generous man, was very involved in the care of
his parents. Like I said, he was, he loved loved.
Speaker 4 (14:55):
Being a dad.
Speaker 6 (14:56):
I mean, when I had no idea what I was
going to get my kids for Christmas, Jonathan was already
getting packages in the mail at his office because he
would keep the packages at his office to hide them
from his kids for Christmas.
Speaker 4 (15:11):
And I'm just very proud of his wife.
Speaker 6 (15:14):
I remember always talked about her with such love and
that narration, and it was heartbreaking, you know, heartbreaking what
happened to him.
Speaker 4 (15:26):
He's a good human being.
Speaker 8 (15:38):
And more than anything, what I want for Jonathan's family
is for this audience to bring enough pressure to bear
to appoint a special counsel to take a fresh look
at the evidence, something I would certainly sign up for,
and maybe even a certain former federal District Court judge
might be in for as well.
Speaker 4 (15:57):
You guys got to solve this case.
Speaker 8 (16:00):
As you know, these things, If you let him die,
they die.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Is there someone out there that has information that has
not been disclosed to investigators.
Speaker 4 (16:14):
I kind of believe there is, and I hope, and.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
I'm sure you guys hope anybody would hope that someday
they'll come forward with at least a plausible account of
what actually happened.
Speaker 4 (16:30):
I'm sure his family would desperately like to know.
Speaker 8 (16:35):
And while our collective hopes will remain centered on finding
somebody somewhere who can provide closure for Jonathan's family, before
we leave you this season, we want to share the
closure we sought for the family of another Baltimore man.
(17:00):
When we started looking at the Lunar case, we were
at the precipice of a year the world will never forget.
A pandemic had just begun that would force all of
us to look inward when we couldn't venture out, and
the social unrest, ignited by the George Floyd murder and
amplified by a failing economy, tested this nation like never before.
(17:22):
And through it all, among all the people I spoke with, family, friends,
interviewees for this podcast, the person who had the biggest
heart and the biggest faith was the guy locked in
the smallest of cells. And I couldn't help but want
to learn more about how.
Speaker 4 (17:39):
He did that.
Speaker 8 (17:41):
So I read his books, including a twenty nineteen book
he wrote called twenty twenty Faith that literally prophesied this
terrible year. And as I read his words and reflected
on the circumstances of not only his life but my own.
I think I surprised even the closest people around me.
Speaker 13 (18:00):
It's really interesting how invested you are in this, in
Nako's case in particular, because we are looking at the
Jonathan Luna case. But there's something here, There's more here.
I just have never seen you like this before.
Speaker 8 (18:16):
I mean, I don't think you or I can do
what he has done in prison, in those kind of environments.
I mean, think about it, Jody, to be locked up.
We've been locked down in quarantine, you know, I put
that in huge air quotes, with the hardship of living
in our houses and you know this country has been
(18:38):
Oh woe is me? You know, it's been three months
and we can't get our haircuts or get tattoos. Here's
a man who is locked down twenty three hours a day,
and he has more positivity and he has more productivity
than ninety nine percent of the people. His story is
(18:59):
also a test meant to having a purpose driven life,
and the only way you can stay sane when you're
sentenced to twenty five years in jail is to find
that purpose, and he has found it in creating this ministry,
mentoring all these men, helping people through their struggles. He's
(19:20):
found meaning for his life. You know, we talk a
lot in this country about rehabilitation and redemption, but I
don't think I've ever met anyone before who so personified
the concept. And whether it was the Holy Spirit as
Nako would maintain, or some other force, I don't know.
(19:44):
But I felt compelled to do something about his situation
because even though Nako was wrong about Jonathan Luna, it
wasn't right to lock this or any other man away
in a cell twenty three hours a day.
Speaker 14 (20:01):
Call it from hey, Cole Brown an India, a sort
of record. Then what's colors being recorded? And it's subject
to monitoring?
Speaker 9 (20:10):
All right, I'm with you. I'm with you. Tell me
what's going on there in your facility?
Speaker 15 (20:16):
Well the same. I haven't heard anythink any breakouts in
the facility. We come out watch a day for an hour,
so we had twenty three hours a week on an
hour to take a shower. Fill on the phone.
Speaker 16 (20:29):
Check the email.
Speaker 9 (20:31):
Did you see my note about the letter?
Speaker 15 (20:34):
Yes, I didn't appreciate it.
Speaker 9 (20:36):
Yeah, it's a letter to the judge. The letter says,
in essence, look I'm a journalist looking into this case.
I understand that Naco has several matters pending before you,
including a first step release and a commutation of sentence,
and that in looking at this case, I believe that
you are the ideal candidate, were somebody that should get
(20:58):
early release, whether under the first step, aact, or compassionate
release due to COVID. It's not a legal document, but
as a letter asking her to have a renewed look
at the game.
Speaker 8 (21:12):
Writing a letter on Nako's behalf to the judge overseeing
his case now was both an easy and hard decision
to make. We had never met in person, and I
would typically be reluctant to vouch for someone under these circumstances.
But we had been talking for months, I had been
doing character reference checks, and I believed his teachings were sincere,
(21:33):
And in the end, it wasn't so much as words
that moved me, but his actions. There was no doubt
in my mind that Nako had transformed in prison, and
in so doing had positively impacted the lives of hundreds,
if not thousands, of men. And there was one other
person I had met during this podcast that had likewise
(21:54):
impacted the lives of the men he came in contact with,
and I wondered if Judge Davis would join me in
helping Nako to continue to find his purpose.
Speaker 4 (22:05):
Wow, I would love to see him and talk to him.
Speaker 8 (22:09):
No, his journalists were supposed to be impartial in these
kind of things. But I wrote a letter to the
judge in his most recent pleading as saying, you know,
if you believe in rehabilitation, this is the kind of
guy that doesn't pose a threat to society in my opinion,
and is an example of kind of the inequities in
(22:30):
the system. You know, he was sentenced under these guidelines
that are unconstitutional. He couldn't get relief from that for
a variety of legal reasons. It really just highlights all
the problems.
Speaker 4 (22:41):
I agree. He must be getting close to fifty years.
Speaker 5 (22:44):
Old he is.
Speaker 8 (22:46):
I'm really curious, as you look back on your career,
if you could undo any of that, would you.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
I would never have given Nako twenty five years without
parole the way the guidelines where if you work down
the Y acts and you go out on the X
axis and there's your sentence right there, that's pretty much
what he got. Twenty five years of course, the trauma
on the tellers was real, and I get that, but
nobody was injured. I'm really curious to know whether he's
(23:15):
he ever admitted his involvement.
Speaker 4 (23:18):
Does he admit his involvement to you? He does?
Speaker 2 (23:21):
Okay, okay, Well, I really look forward to the podcast
because might just to test my two decade old theory
about what was going on with him and in his
mind and so on against whatever it is he finally
discloses to you or to others.
Speaker 8 (23:41):
One Saturday morning, as I was getting out of my car,
my phone rang, and I was pleased to enable Judge
Davis to scratch that two decades old Itch.
Speaker 14 (23:52):
College from very cool brow an indol then hang up
to decline the call or to accept dial five now
if you wish to block there?
Speaker 9 (24:04):
Yes, hello, okay, good to hear from you. Do you
want me to see if we can get the judge
on this morning?
Speaker 16 (24:11):
Yes, that's us.
Speaker 9 (24:14):
Yes, macho, I'm worry. I feel honored to be able
to pull you two together, and I just thought it
would be worth having a conversation.
Speaker 16 (24:25):
Well, mister Brown, may I call you nako?
Speaker 15 (24:28):
Yes? Please, sir.
Speaker 16 (24:30):
I was quite pleased to receive David's phone call a
few weeks ago, and it strikes me if you have
really evolved into a person who is more of the
person you always wanted to be. Am I right about that?
Speaker 15 (24:51):
Yes, sir, you are myself myself well.
Speaker 16 (24:56):
I have long believed that none of us us is
defined by the worst thing or things we've ever done,
and I think that the arc of your life seems
to bear that out. I'm told that when we're doing
some really, really great work with young people.
Speaker 8 (25:15):
These days, and at this point, then I think I
will let the discussion between these two men stay between them,
except to amplify one part of the exchange that seemed
to encapsulate the journey that was this season.
Speaker 15 (25:28):
And I reminded what Joseph said when he met his brothers.
He says, what y'all meant for you regardment to a
good to bring the past, that it is to stay
the same many loves. And that's what our purpose is,
is the same lives.
Speaker 16 (25:42):
Yeah my email tagline, As David knows, I quote Tony
Morrison who said, if you are free, then your principal
job is to free others. And if you have power,
then you should empower others. And that's that's how I
(26:05):
try to live my life.
Speaker 15 (26:07):
That's probably Yeah, So.
Speaker 16 (26:10):
We are blass.
Speaker 4 (26:11):
We are very highly blasted.
Speaker 8 (26:19):
Three months to the day after that call, after hundreds
of federal prisoners would die from COVID, I got a
garbled call from Naco and for the first time ever,
it wasn't proceeded with. This call is from a federal prison.
Speaker 9 (26:35):
Okay, now we're on you got me, I'm here.
Speaker 5 (26:40):
How are you?
Speaker 10 (26:41):
I'm really great.
Speaker 5 (26:44):
God is doing his things.
Speaker 10 (26:46):
Take the post and lets the album of night.
Speaker 15 (26:49):
Let me let them seven.
Speaker 9 (26:51):
This is the first time somebody has given you a
break on getting out earlier.
Speaker 10 (26:57):
Wow. Absolutely take care that one.
Speaker 8 (27:02):
What Judge Ellen Hollander had granted NACo's long shot motion
for compassionate release, one of his students would meet him
at the bus stop and drive him twenty hours to
his wife and family in Oklahoma.
Speaker 10 (27:15):
I will say this day.
Speaker 15 (27:17):
The lawyer said, your leather had.
Speaker 10 (27:20):
A significant impact on the judgment. Wow, yeah, a significant
impact on the judges. He said, you're going to call you.
He said, you know, and he asked me, I don't
play the best, you know, so I want to wring
you again.
Speaker 8 (27:42):
And while I was humbled to have a cameo in
the play that is NACo's Life. The truth is I
received a lot of life lessons back from Naco in return,
and when I spoke with him the following day, he
was teaching me one final lesson on gratitude and perspective.
Speaker 9 (27:59):
What does it feel like to be out breathing that
fresh air? Imagine it's like a rebirth.
Speaker 10 (28:05):
Absolutely, that's the perfect way to put it. Absolutely. You know,
one moment you are in the shelf, locked up, and
then the next moment you on the road, driving from
one stick to another, and you appreciate the fresh air,
the birds, the sunrise, sunset. You know, you appreciate a
(28:28):
lot of things that you take for granted.
Speaker 9 (28:30):
What's surprise you the most on the drive just moving, just.
Speaker 10 (28:34):
Mean in motion, you know, and going forward. When you're
in concert it you go in circles. Everything is in circles.
Even when you go out into the yacht, you're walking
around in circles. To be able to go forward and
not going circles a whole lot.
Speaker 17 (28:51):
It was a long road, and you know what inspired
me about your story was that as long as it was,
you still kept your faith which is going to make
you so resilient in the next half of your life,
whatever that looks for, and that's what you.
Speaker 10 (29:09):
Have to do. Imagine myself getting the opportunity to have
a second chances, and I knew that I had to
have faith in order to see that.
Speaker 8 (29:41):
Hey, Somebody Somewhere listeners, I hope you enjoyed this season.
Please stay tuned for a special bonus episode where I
go deeper with Nako on his family, his ministry, and
his decision to Rob Banks. Thank you again for listening.
Speaker 10 (30:01):
Here it goes the devil telling me to lie again,
says I'm around me sales.
Speaker 6 (30:09):
It's all right to Britain.
Speaker 1 (30:16):
That you can get more.
Speaker 6 (30:17):
Don you give?
Speaker 8 (30:20):
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 Paine. If you have any
information regarding the Jonathan Luna case, please contact us via
(30:41):
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 2 (31:00):
God, I hate to say I'm someone would I just
want you?
Speaker 17 (31:10):
Love Eve, don't still love money?
Speaker 10 (31:18):
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.