December 27, 2022 • 32 mins
Up to this point, you've heard about multiple interactions with the NOPD regarding this case, including body cam footage with Justin at their home following Jessica's disappearance, and most recently Jessica V.'s experience with the police and the coroner. In this bonus episode, Jessica and Todd discuss the investigation and where it should be at this point with Todd's expertise and insight into protocol and procedure as a former detective with decades of experience.
To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey listeners, just a quick note to let you know
that this week we are taking a break from our
regular release schedule to bring you a special bonus episode.
Be sure to tune in next week when we return
with episode five. If you miss past episodes, you can
binge them ad free on Tenderfoot Plus. Hey listeners, Jessica here,
(00:24):
be sure to check out new episodes of undetermined every
Tuesday for free wherever you get your podcasts. For early
and ad free listening, check out Tenderfoot Plus on Apple Podcasts.
The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are solely
those of the individuals interviewed and participating in the show,
(00:46):
and do not represent those of Tenderfoot TV and resonate recordings.
All individuals described or mentioned in the podcast should be
considered innocent until found guilty in a court of law.
This podcast contains subject matter such as violence and graphic descriptions,
which may not be suitable for all audiences. Listener discretion
(01:09):
is advised. Hey everybody, Jessica here. In this special bonus episode,
(01:37):
we're continuing our behind the scenes analysis of Jessica Easterly
Derning's case. Now that we're a few episodes in we're
starting to hear more about some of the events that
happened before and after Jessica's death. In this episode, we
want to provide some insider perspective on what it looks
like to investigate a case like this, as well as
offer an overview of what we know about how NPD's
(01:59):
investmenttigation has been going up to this point in the podcast.
Joining me here to offer an experience perspective on investigations
is of course, our own former detective Todd Macoma's Hey Todd.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
Hey Jessica, thanks for having me so.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Todd, There's one thing that I want to know right
off the bat before we go deep into this investigation.
Tell me what it's like to investigate a case like
this for a true crime podcast as opposed to what
it was like investigating it as a police detective.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
I really like it.
Speaker 3 (02:37):
I wondered initially what it was going to be like
compared to being a police detective. But what I'm finding
is now I get to focus one hundred percent of
my energy, time and effort on just one case, one
investigation right now. When you're a police detective, you have
(02:59):
a stack of other cases that compete with the one
you're trying to devote your efforts to and there's all
the other things that come with working for a government agency,
the bureaucracy of it, you training, the interrupts things.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
All the time that you have to attend.
Speaker 3 (03:12):
You might have to stop a criminal investigation because they
need you to do an applicant background investigation. So all
those things I really really like. I like that we
can go so in depth and just focus our efforts
in one direction.
Speaker 1 (03:29):
And something that I have always had to deal with
being a journalist is not having necessarily access to everything
that has to do with the case. And so that's
kind of different for you. And maybe one of the
drawbacks in this type of investigation, Oh.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
Man, it tries to be bonkers not to have all
the tools and resources that I had while I was
a police detective, you know, being able to just quickly
run on someone's driver's record, their criminal history, you know,
just to call another police department and them openly share
any information they have on someone that you're looking into.
(04:11):
All those things are hampering and they do handcuff.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Us a bit.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
But again it's it's a new challenge also, right, so
to have to navigate the challenges of that is stimulating.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
I find I also think it forces us to get
creative and take our investigation to a different level and
then bring it back to the whole storytelling aspect of this, right,
you know, focusing on the victim's story. And also I
have found as a journalist we can sometimes get people
(04:45):
to talk that may not want to talk to law enforcement.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
Those interviews it's a different dynamic because You're right, it
can be scary talking to the police. So we're just
talking to people that are potential witnesses, or that we
know are witnesses, or we're just trying to gather that
initial round of information. A lot of times we can
get them to open up more so than when I
walk in with a badge on my belt and a
gun on my hip. And I've learned a lot from
(05:10):
you in that regard, because you've been interviewing people under
these circumstances your entire career, and I'm really enjoying that
aspect as well. And listen, I now compare this to
because I like to use my experience, I'm really going
to kick out of using my experience to be able
to analyze a police investigation now, So I very much
(05:33):
find myself in a position now like Troy Aikman, you
know who used to play in the NFL and now
he's going to armchair quarterback instead of quarterback and be
an analyst.
Speaker 2 (05:46):
Of the game.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
Or Tony Romo or Tony Romo.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
Ah, I'm an Akman fanily can I say?
Speaker 3 (05:52):
And you know, I think because when I first started podcasting,
there were literally no cops podcasting. Now again, I started
in the comedy realm, in the sports realm, but as
I started to gravitate back toward that law enforcement world
and eventually into true crime, there were very few cops podcasting.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
If any.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
And now just in a matter of three four years,
it's flooded. The podcast industry is flooded with former forensic experts,
lab personnel, police, former prosecutors or current prosecutors. And I'm
happy to see it because I know for you, it
was initially kind of an investigative journalist thing. But now
(06:35):
that we have people like you and people like me
that can mesh together, it's a well rounded, in depth
look into these cases.
Speaker 2 (06:43):
And I think it's only.
Speaker 3 (06:45):
Improving the quality of the podcast in regards to how
effective they are with helping these.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
Families right, let's talk a little bit about We just
came out of the Jessica V episode. We've heard the
caam footage from the first two episodes, so we have
a lot of police interaction with THEPD so far with
characters within this story. So I want to kind of
(07:13):
go into a little bit of depth with you of
things that should have been done from the moment she
went missing, from the moment she was found. We had
talked a little bit about investigating not just from that
moment she was missing, but starting to look back at
her life prior to that day she went missing. So
(07:34):
talk to me a little bit about as a detective,
how you go into this case from ground zero.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
Okay, So, what the listener so far has been able
to experience in witness is the initial taking of a
missing person's report. That's what the bodycam footage was about.
That's what Officer Gantner was doing. What they haven't been
privy to yet, and to beyond, we're not privy too
(08:01):
because we have not been handed the case file is
what happens after that. So we heard Officer Gantner speak
over the phone with Detective One. Detective One at that
time was a detective assign to the missing person's unit.
So his job from that point is to do some
(08:24):
of the things you just touched on. The main focus
is going to be trying to fill in gaps in
Jessica's timeline.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
The officers that.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
Initially responded to take the missing person's report, they did
a good job of filling in the timeline for the
most part, hours prior day of her disappearance. Now it's
the detective's job to go back further, go back weeks,
maybe even months, to try to determine if there was
(08:56):
a significant change in her life, if there was a
signal an event that occurred that could possibly be directly
related to why she is now deceased.
Speaker 1 (09:09):
And one of those things that we already know from
the bodycam footage and from Maria herself is there was
some turmoil in Jessica's life the day before and leading
up to the day she went missing.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
They have that knowledge, sure, So now he's going to
take an in depth dive, or he should take an
in depth dive in filling in that timeline and maybe
what led up to the events that Maria touches upon
when she relays that information to the police to cause
the missing person's report to even occur. So he's going
(09:46):
to start with the husband. Most cases like this do
most cases like this, where you have a missing person
under suspicious circumstances, you have some suspicious information or at
least concerning information coming in from the initial reporting party Maria.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
So now you.
Speaker 3 (10:03):
Start with that husband because that's the person, for one,
as far as you know, was the last.
Speaker 2 (10:09):
Person to see her before she went missing.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
And also he's going to have the most intimate knowledge
of what's happening in her life day to day, so
you expect him to immediately touch base that next morning,
if not an hour or two after the report is generated,
and really explore with him what was going on in
(10:33):
the last couple months. Did you see anything, did you
get suspicious of anything significant that was going on with
her that would cause her to want to leave or
could cause someone to have done something horrible to her.
Speaker 2 (10:49):
It starts there, and then you go to other.
Speaker 3 (10:51):
People that are intimately involved in her life, family, very
close friends. All this an attempt to create that timeline.
Now you don't have to rely on people's word either,
right because we're in the technological.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Age that we are.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
One are the very first steps you're going to do
to help complete that timeline. Is you going to send
or you should send a preservation request to the service
provider of her cellular device, as well as probably the
husband's anyone else who could be very intimately connected with
her in.
Speaker 2 (11:25):
The time period preceding her disappearance.
Speaker 1 (11:28):
Stepping away a little bit from the technology side of things,
boots on the ground, I mean, canvassing the neighborhood. You
and I we spoke to people in that neighborhood who
had no idea that someone had gone missing, someone had
been found dead. In fact, someone we spoke to didn't
know for a year until he saw flyer up asking
(11:51):
for information. He had no idea that in his own neighborhood,
what was it, a block away from his home, there
was a body found.
Speaker 3 (12:00):
Well, this is where the detective is going to elicit
the help of the uniform side of the house officers
that work that area. He's going to reach out to them.
He's going to say, hey, I'm going to be doing
some stuff. I'm going to be sending out preservation requests
all these cellular providers, and then the same thing for
you know, Facebook accounts, social media stuff. Because, for one,
(12:20):
if you ever want to go back to actually view
texts from her device in particular, that's going to disappear
in a matter of days, that gets purged.
Speaker 2 (12:29):
By the phone company.
Speaker 3 (12:30):
But if you send that preservation request, the cellular provider
will freeze that from happening until they hear back from
you and you say it's okay to go ahead and purge,
So that will always be there in case you need
to subpoena or get a court order or search.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
Weren't for it.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
Later, even if someone were to delete it from the
actual device.
Speaker 3 (12:50):
Yeah, that doesn't matter, right, It's going to be on
the server. So two things, You'll be able to get
some insight on communications she was having preceding her disappearing.
It's if not the content of it, who she was
communicating with. You also be able to check for geolocation
where she physically was in that timeline. So those things
are happening, they're going to tie you down to a
(13:11):
desk for a while. So let's reach out now to
the uniform side of the house officers that work that
district and say I need a thorough canvas right away
of that Lakeview neighborhood. Okay, Now at this point she's
not found yet, she's still a missing person, So you
really want to focus heavy on that neighborhood. Do houses
nearby have cameras on them, blink systems, whatever, And if
(13:36):
they find those, then get permission from the homeowner to
maybe dump that footage and start to review it. Do
we see her walk off, Do we see a car
pull up at the intersection near her home and pick
her up after she walks off? Any of these things
that could be important to help fill in that timeline.
And here's something else to keep in mind right when
(13:57):
we're looking for maybe eyewitness within the neighborhood during this
canvas or hopefully some video footage, is that we know
she left items at her home that a person would
normally take with them. She didn't leave in her own car.
She left her wallet, her ID, all these things, her phone,
(14:19):
things that a normal person would take with them if
they were just going to go run an errand, or
even if you were going to run off with the
intention of never coming back, you would want to have
those things on you. So officers and detectives should not
be afraid to use common sense in the absence of evidence. Yet,
or to follow their gut. When you're armed with that information,
(14:43):
you have to immediately use common sense and think, well,
she left that home on foot.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
I do want to point out, though we also don't
know if she left by foot.
Speaker 3 (14:54):
What if there's camera footage from a neighbor's house the
covers the front her house, and another camera from another
neighbor's house that covers the rear exit or the side exit,
and during this timeframe you never see that door open.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
That could be important.
Speaker 3 (15:12):
Right we have video of every exit from that house
and we never see her leave. Wouldn't that be important
information because that would contradict probably what you were told
initially when this missing person's report was taken.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
I mean, think about this.
Speaker 3 (15:29):
I worked at a time well before body camps as
a detective. So if I wasn't the first person at
the scene to take the initial report, which many times
I was not, I had to rely on that first
responding officer's report, which is going to be a summary
as best that officer can recall by the time they
(15:51):
sit down to actually type out that report. Now, why
would I want to rely on that when I could
visually and audibly win witness the interaction with the person live,
I'm going to hear exactly how it happened.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Not only that, because I can see it visually.
Speaker 3 (16:08):
Not only can I hear exactly what the person was reporting,
but I can visually see body languids, facial expression, all
those nonverbal behaviors that are important when trying to determine
if you're getting truthful information from them. So it's an
invaluable tool, and it is standard practice today for detectives
(16:31):
to pull that bodycam footage and then thoroughly look through
it to aid them in their investigation.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
Just to be fair, we don't know because we don't
have access to the case file or any investigative notes
from Detective lun or anyone else with the n OPD.
Maybe they did use the bodycamp footage as part of
that investigation. Maybe they did thoroughly canvass the neighborhood, albeit
not with neighbors we spoke to. But let's talk a
(17:01):
little bit about how police have had this case for
ten days and her family from out of state who
comes in to do a search uncovers her body.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
Okay, so let's think in these terms everything that I
just talked about. We don't know obviously, whether or not
those were things that were done by detective Want or
anyone else for that matter. We just know that these
are things that should be done. So everything I just
listed off should let the listener know. At this point
(17:35):
this case potentially had a lot of positive things working
for it. Now it's in the hands initially for somewhere
between seven and ten days of a missing person's detective
and the family is not hearing anything back. According to them,
that leads them to believe that any sort of physical
(17:56):
search in the nearby and surrounding area of her home
is going to be conducted by police or anyone via police.
So they're organizing their own search. They're going to go
scalt best locations in that area to form a search
party and conduct.
Speaker 2 (18:13):
Their own search. That shouldn't have to be done.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
Not to say that police have time on every missing
person's case to pull in a bunch of bodies and
conduct searches everywhere that they can find in the surrounding
area of where the person went missing. What they have
to do is take a look at the circumstances surrounding
that person's disappearance in its totality, is it suspicious, Does
(18:39):
it lead me to believe in my gut and using
my common sense that it's likely this person fell victim
to foul play of some sort, and then decide from there.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
Okay, I know I can't.
Speaker 3 (18:52):
Do this in every case, but this is a case
that I think likely is going to elevate into something
much worse. So I'm going into help as much as
I can with that. Not that I can pull thirty
or forty cops off the street from what they're doing.
We know New Orleans is a very busy city and
there's a lot of violent crime there and a lot
of things actively to be worked on that you don't
(19:13):
want to pull that many people away from being able
to respond to. But there are resources within the area
of New Orleans in every big city to lead a
search and get community involvement. You know, you can use
the National Guard. There are these other private resources that
you can access to bring you bodies to search, and
(19:35):
all you got to do is help manage it.
Speaker 1 (19:38):
I'm going to jump ahead a little bit to this
encounter that Jessica Vee had and the letter that she received.
I think the episode flushed that out enough, but I
do want to talk about the interactions that she had
with NPD and get your take on how they could
have used Jessica v as more of a re source
(20:01):
than they did.
Speaker 3 (20:02):
So a couple of things with Jessica Vee. Without reiterating
all the details of the interaction she had with Justin,
we do know that she was concerned enough that she
reached out to police and whoever it was on the
police and told her there was not a homicide investigator
assigned to this investigation. So they direct her to the
(20:26):
coroner's office because from other things that she is telling them,
they are concerned that this might be a mental health crisis,
so they direct her the coroner's office because that's the
first stage and initiating maybe a seventy two hour mental
health hold, an involuntary hold of someone for mental health concerns.
Speaker 2 (20:47):
So she goes.
Speaker 3 (20:48):
There and despite the lack of professionalism and some of
the things that happened, protocol wise, things are done correctly.
What I don't like about it was that a copy
of made of this letter and then prepares her paperwork
and then puts it in an envelope along with possibly
the original letter, seals it up and then gives it
(21:10):
back to Jessica Vie and says, what you need to
do now is go hand deliver this to this office
within the police department. So now she's acting as kind
of an employee herself of this process, like she's an
employee of the City of New Orleans and has to
go do this. The reason I don't like that is
it's very discouraging for people.
Speaker 2 (21:32):
To bring forward information.
Speaker 3 (21:34):
It's scary enough to interject yourself into this situation if
you're Jessica Vee, But now that just adds further discouragement
of her or anyone else ever wanting to do the
right thing and insert themselves in such a situation.
Speaker 2 (21:49):
And then she gets to the police.
Speaker 3 (21:50):
Department, and you know, they do properly what they should
to help initiate a seventy two our mental health hold.
Speaker 2 (21:58):
On an individual.
Speaker 3 (21:59):
But there are other circumstances involved here. This is wrapped
within now at this point, a death investigation that is
considered suspicious.
Speaker 2 (22:11):
There are suspicious circumstances.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
The police department knows that a detective currently assigned to
that case knows that, and whether or not this particular
person she dealt with has any kind of direct knowledge
of this.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
They are now being informed.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
By Jessica Vee of the parties, and after a quick
little CAD search, you would see that this is in place.
So then you might want to get a hold of
the detective that is assigned jess Caasereely during death investigation, right,
whether that be a district detective or whoever has it
at that point, reach out to them and let them
know what's going on, so at least they have the
(22:48):
chance to decide whether or not Jessicavi's intervention now is
of use to that investigation if you decide it is.
There are a couple creative outside the things that are
simple to do, and I have done very similar things
in my career, and I've witnessed it done by other
people in investigations similar to this before. And that is
(23:10):
simply I have a person here who had what they
deem as an uncomfortable interaction with the husband of Jessica
Easterly Journey.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
That's my victim.
Speaker 3 (23:22):
That person seems very forthcoming in conversation with information about
the death of his wife to this person, Jessica V.
Maybe I could explore the possibility of using Jessica V
as a means of recording conversations either over telephone or
(23:44):
in person with Justin Dearney.
Speaker 2 (23:47):
Now, at this point, we don't.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
Know obviously if Justin is considered a suspect or if
he is not considered a suspect. But what we know
is that there are some suspicious things surrounding her disappearance
and her death. So it's possible that they're considering that
option or they're not ready to dismiss him as a
(24:10):
person of interest.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
Story suspect yet.
Speaker 3 (24:12):
So this could be a mechanism to help you get
off or on the fence about this with Justin to
decide once and for all if he's someone who should
be considered a person of interest or a suspect or.
Speaker 1 (24:25):
Not not necessarily information that's going to implicate him, but
just additional information that had not been gathered yet from police.
Speaker 3 (24:35):
Honestly, I will be looking to see if he provides
information that contradicts information that he reported to my officers.
If so, you know, that's going to be of concern.
You know, I just think it's an opportunity. And again,
I've done this before in past investigations I was involved with,
So it's something that's easily done. And I'm not saying
Jessica vee would even be willing to do it, But
(24:56):
you know it's worth exploring beyond this seventy two our
mental health hoold.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
We don't know if once she was found then that
investigation was then handed off to another investigator. What we
do know is that there was a homicide detective on
the scene when her body was discovered, but we don't
know from that point on who may have been investigating it.
Talk to me a little todd about why it would
(25:23):
be so harmful if there was a gap in the
investigation while they're waiting on a manner of death. And
what I mean by that is we go from missing
person to death investigation. Meanwhile, six months later, her cause
and manner death is ruled as undetermined.
Speaker 3 (25:45):
Let's explore that, and maybe this is a good way
to wrap up this conversation.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
Let's thoroughly look into just.
Speaker 3 (25:52):
What happens in cases like this when missing person's report
is first made. Obviously that and immediately gets assigned to
a detective within the missing person's unit. If your agency
has such a thing, Larger agencies do, so let's just
stick with protocol at these large agencies, so it goes
immediately to a missing person's detective, and it will stay
(26:17):
with that missing person's detective until that person is no
longer missing, meaning they are found alive or deceased. In
this instance, she's found deceased seven or ten days later.
So at that point it leaves the hands of the
missing person's detective. It gets transferred to a detective at.
Speaker 2 (26:38):
The district level.
Speaker 3 (26:39):
So once we know this is a death investigation, you're
going to have a homicide detective and a district detective
show up when that body's found, and there's a conversation
that takes place. Both just kind of way I've seen this.
Both are like chomping at the bed. You know, am
I going to get to work this case? Or am
I going to get to work this case? Well, you
hope for that because you want detectives to be passionate
(27:02):
about solving these cases. So both will be there and
then there will be an initial determination of is this
going to most likely be a homicide or not. So
if the determination is made, we can't say that this
is probably going to be a homicide, So right now
we're going to assign a district detective to it. If
(27:23):
something changes because of the medical examiners examination, and as
classified as a homicide, then that district detective will hand
it off to the homicide detective.
Speaker 2 (27:34):
Now, all this I.
Speaker 3 (27:36):
Could give a shit less about from an investigation standpoint,
because there should be no gaps, as you mentioned, in
investigating this case, and everybody should be working it in
the same manner, regardless of the title of the unit
that you work with. In so everything the detective lun
is doing would be the same things that the district
(27:57):
detective and that the homicide detective would be if they
were working this from the ground up. So once it's
handed off, it should be a seamless transition for the
missing person's detective to hand this off to the district detective.
The district detective now has all the information. They will
work in concert with the missing person's detective for a
period of time long enough that they feel comfortable Okay,
(28:20):
I am up to speed to where you are. I
can now take it over, and then the missing person's
detective is freed up to work other missing person's cases.
So the district detective has it and picks up where
they left off. Hopefully everything that we discussed earlier has
already been done. That's the advantage this district detective has,
(28:42):
so now his job is to follow up from there. Okay,
help solidify that timeline. If there are still gaps, I know,
I've got these preservation requests for all this data from
electronic devices and social media accounts. I can now decide
if I want to send subpoenas, court orders or warrants
for that stuff, and continue to try to find more
(29:04):
and more people to talk to. Then when we reach
this point in January where finally a cause and manner
of death is listed, each undetermined, then we know it's
going to stay with that district detective. It's not gonna
be handed off to a homicide detective. But the emphasis
I want to place on this is, let's say it
(29:25):
does at some point change to a homicide, and then
it must be transferred from the district detective to a
homicide detective who gives a shit. It does not change
the way you investigate this. And I will say this,
if within this process at NPD we find out that
(29:47):
there is a gap that someone at some investigative level
is not working it because they're just simply waiting for
the right classification or for the right circumstances to present themselves.
That will be a shame because that's potentially catastrophic to
this investigation.
Speaker 1 (30:05):
Sure, because we're going from the first forty eight to
the first six months, and how much of anything then
is completely gone and lost.
Speaker 3 (30:15):
So we just have to hope that's not the case
here because there would be irreversible damage costs from that.
So we have to hope for the best and that
everybody is doing the right things up to this point,
and that if a handoff must occur, that that happens
seamlessly and it does not burden this investigation at all.
Speaker 1 (30:32):
Well, what you and I can tell listeners at this
point we will be talking to the NOPD to find
out where their investigation stands.
Speaker 2 (30:42):
Stay tuned.
Speaker 1 (30:45):
Thank you for listening to this episode. I want to
remind you again that we'll be back next Tuesday with
episode five. Until then. Is a production of Resonate Recordings
and Tenderfoot TV in conjunction with Cadence thirteen, written and
(31:07):
hosted by me Jessica Nole and produced by Dennis Cooper
and Todd McComas, with additional production by Whitney Bozarth. Executive
producers are Dennis Cooper, Mark Minnery, Jacob Bozarth, Donald Albright,
and Payne Lindsay. Our senior producer is John Street. Editing, mixing,
(31:29):
mastering and sound design by Caleb Melcher, Dayton Cole and
Pat Kicklider of the Resonate Recordings team. If you have
a podcast or are looking to start one, check us
out at Resonate Recordings dot com. Our theme song and
original score is by Dirt Poor Robbins, with additional scoring
(31:50):
by Dayton Cole. Our cover art is by Station sixteen.
You can follow Undetermined Podcast on Facebook and on Twitter
at Undetermined Pod. Show notes as well as bonus content
can be found on our website undeterminedpod dot com. If
you enjoyed this episode, please take time to subscribe, rate,
(32:13):
and review. Your feedback is greatly appreciated. And finally, if
you have any information about this case, call crime Stoppers
at one eight seven seven nine zero three seven eight
sixty seven
Hey listeners, just a quick note to let you know
that this week we are taking a break from our
regular release schedule to bring you a special bonus episode.
Be sure to tune in next week when we return
with episode five. If you miss past episodes, you can
binge them ad free on Tenderfoot Plus. Hey listeners, Jessica here,
(00:24):
be sure to check out new episodes of undetermined every
Tuesday for free wherever you get your podcasts. For early
and ad free listening, check out Tenderfoot Plus on Apple Podcasts.
The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are solely
those of the individuals interviewed and participating in the show,
(00:46):
and do not represent those of Tenderfoot TV and resonate recordings.
All individuals described or mentioned in the podcast should be
considered innocent until found guilty in a court of law.
This podcast contains subject matter such as violence and graphic descriptions,
which may not be suitable for all audiences. Listener discretion
(01:09):
is advised. Hey everybody, Jessica here. In this special bonus episode,
(01:37):
we're continuing our behind the scenes analysis of Jessica Easterly
Derning's case. Now that we're a few episodes in we're
starting to hear more about some of the events that
happened before and after Jessica's death. In this episode, we
want to provide some insider perspective on what it looks
like to investigate a case like this, as well as
offer an overview of what we know about how NPD's
(01:59):
investmenttigation has been going up to this point in the podcast.
Joining me here to offer an experience perspective on investigations
is of course, our own former detective Todd Macoma's Hey Todd.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
Hey Jessica, thanks for having me so.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Todd, There's one thing that I want to know right
off the bat before we go deep into this investigation.
Tell me what it's like to investigate a case like
this for a true crime podcast as opposed to what
it was like investigating it as a police detective.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
I really like it.
Speaker 3 (02:37):
I wondered initially what it was going to be like
compared to being a police detective. But what I'm finding
is now I get to focus one hundred percent of
my energy, time and effort on just one case, one
investigation right now. When you're a police detective, you have
(02:59):
a stack of other cases that compete with the one
you're trying to devote your efforts to and there's all
the other things that come with working for a government agency,
the bureaucracy of it, you training, the interrupts things.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
All the time that you have to attend.
Speaker 3 (03:12):
You might have to stop a criminal investigation because they
need you to do an applicant background investigation. So all
those things I really really like. I like that we
can go so in depth and just focus our efforts
in one direction.
Speaker 1 (03:29):
And something that I have always had to deal with
being a journalist is not having necessarily access to everything
that has to do with the case. And so that's
kind of different for you. And maybe one of the
drawbacks in this type of investigation, Oh.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
Man, it tries to be bonkers not to have all
the tools and resources that I had while I was
a police detective, you know, being able to just quickly
run on someone's driver's record, their criminal history, you know,
just to call another police department and them openly share
any information they have on someone that you're looking into.
(04:11):
All those things are hampering and they do handcuff.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Us a bit.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
But again it's it's a new challenge also, right, so
to have to navigate the challenges of that is stimulating.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
I find I also think it forces us to get
creative and take our investigation to a different level and
then bring it back to the whole storytelling aspect of this, right,
you know, focusing on the victim's story. And also I
have found as a journalist we can sometimes get people
(04:45):
to talk that may not want to talk to law enforcement.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
Those interviews it's a different dynamic because You're right, it
can be scary talking to the police. So we're just
talking to people that are potential witnesses, or that we
know are witnesses, or we're just trying to gather that
initial round of information. A lot of times we can
get them to open up more so than when I
walk in with a badge on my belt and a
gun on my hip. And I've learned a lot from
(05:10):
you in that regard, because you've been interviewing people under
these circumstances your entire career, and I'm really enjoying that
aspect as well. And listen, I now compare this to
because I like to use my experience, I'm really going
to kick out of using my experience to be able
to analyze a police investigation now, So I very much
(05:33):
find myself in a position now like Troy Aikman, you
know who used to play in the NFL and now
he's going to armchair quarterback instead of quarterback and be
an analyst.
Speaker 2 (05:46):
Of the game.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
Or Tony Romo or Tony Romo.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
Ah, I'm an Akman fanily can I say?
Speaker 3 (05:52):
And you know, I think because when I first started podcasting,
there were literally no cops podcasting. Now again, I started
in the comedy realm, in the sports realm, but as
I started to gravitate back toward that law enforcement world
and eventually into true crime, there were very few cops podcasting.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
If any.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
And now just in a matter of three four years,
it's flooded. The podcast industry is flooded with former forensic experts,
lab personnel, police, former prosecutors or current prosecutors. And I'm
happy to see it because I know for you, it
was initially kind of an investigative journalist thing. But now
(06:35):
that we have people like you and people like me
that can mesh together, it's a well rounded, in depth
look into these cases.
Speaker 2 (06:43):
And I think it's only.
Speaker 3 (06:45):
Improving the quality of the podcast in regards to how
effective they are with helping these.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
Families right, let's talk a little bit about We just
came out of the Jessica V episode. We've heard the
caam footage from the first two episodes, so we have
a lot of police interaction with THEPD so far with
characters within this story. So I want to kind of
(07:13):
go into a little bit of depth with you of
things that should have been done from the moment she
went missing, from the moment she was found. We had
talked a little bit about investigating not just from that
moment she was missing, but starting to look back at
her life prior to that day she went missing. So
(07:34):
talk to me a little bit about as a detective,
how you go into this case from ground zero.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
Okay, So, what the listener so far has been able
to experience in witness is the initial taking of a
missing person's report. That's what the bodycam footage was about.
That's what Officer Gantner was doing. What they haven't been
privy to yet, and to beyond, we're not privy too
(08:01):
because we have not been handed the case file is
what happens after that. So we heard Officer Gantner speak
over the phone with Detective One. Detective One at that
time was a detective assign to the missing person's unit.
So his job from that point is to do some
(08:24):
of the things you just touched on. The main focus
is going to be trying to fill in gaps in
Jessica's timeline.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
The officers that.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
Initially responded to take the missing person's report, they did
a good job of filling in the timeline for the
most part, hours prior day of her disappearance. Now it's
the detective's job to go back further, go back weeks,
maybe even months, to try to determine if there was
(08:56):
a significant change in her life, if there was a
signal an event that occurred that could possibly be directly
related to why she is now deceased.
Speaker 1 (09:09):
And one of those things that we already know from
the bodycam footage and from Maria herself is there was
some turmoil in Jessica's life the day before and leading
up to the day she went missing.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
They have that knowledge, sure, So now he's going to
take an in depth dive, or he should take an
in depth dive in filling in that timeline and maybe
what led up to the events that Maria touches upon
when she relays that information to the police to cause
the missing person's report to even occur. So he's going
(09:46):
to start with the husband. Most cases like this do
most cases like this, where you have a missing person
under suspicious circumstances, you have some suspicious information or at
least concerning information coming in from the initial reporting party Maria.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
So now you.
Speaker 3 (10:03):
Start with that husband because that's the person, for one,
as far as you know, was the last.
Speaker 2 (10:09):
Person to see her before she went missing.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
And also he's going to have the most intimate knowledge
of what's happening in her life day to day, so
you expect him to immediately touch base that next morning,
if not an hour or two after the report is generated,
and really explore with him what was going on in
(10:33):
the last couple months. Did you see anything, did you
get suspicious of anything significant that was going on with
her that would cause her to want to leave or
could cause someone to have done something horrible to her.
Speaker 2 (10:49):
It starts there, and then you go to other.
Speaker 3 (10:51):
People that are intimately involved in her life, family, very
close friends. All this an attempt to create that timeline.
Now you don't have to rely on people's word either,
right because we're in the technological.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Age that we are.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
One are the very first steps you're going to do
to help complete that timeline. Is you going to send
or you should send a preservation request to the service
provider of her cellular device, as well as probably the
husband's anyone else who could be very intimately connected with
her in.
Speaker 2 (11:25):
The time period preceding her disappearance.
Speaker 1 (11:28):
Stepping away a little bit from the technology side of things,
boots on the ground, I mean, canvassing the neighborhood. You
and I we spoke to people in that neighborhood who
had no idea that someone had gone missing, someone had
been found dead. In fact, someone we spoke to didn't
know for a year until he saw flyer up asking
(11:51):
for information. He had no idea that in his own neighborhood,
what was it, a block away from his home, there
was a body found.
Speaker 3 (12:00):
Well, this is where the detective is going to elicit
the help of the uniform side of the house officers
that work that area. He's going to reach out to them.
He's going to say, hey, I'm going to be doing
some stuff. I'm going to be sending out preservation requests
all these cellular providers, and then the same thing for
you know, Facebook accounts, social media stuff. Because, for one,
(12:20):
if you ever want to go back to actually view
texts from her device in particular, that's going to disappear
in a matter of days, that gets purged.
Speaker 2 (12:29):
By the phone company.
Speaker 3 (12:30):
But if you send that preservation request, the cellular provider
will freeze that from happening until they hear back from
you and you say it's okay to go ahead and purge,
So that will always be there in case you need
to subpoena or get a court order or search.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
Weren't for it.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
Later, even if someone were to delete it from the
actual device.
Speaker 3 (12:50):
Yeah, that doesn't matter, right, It's going to be on
the server. So two things, You'll be able to get
some insight on communications she was having preceding her disappearing.
It's if not the content of it, who she was
communicating with. You also be able to check for geolocation
where she physically was in that timeline. So those things
are happening, they're going to tie you down to a
(13:11):
desk for a while. So let's reach out now to
the uniform side of the house officers that work that
district and say I need a thorough canvas right away
of that Lakeview neighborhood. Okay, Now at this point she's
not found yet, she's still a missing person, So you
really want to focus heavy on that neighborhood. Do houses
nearby have cameras on them, blink systems, whatever, And if
(13:36):
they find those, then get permission from the homeowner to
maybe dump that footage and start to review it. Do
we see her walk off, Do we see a car
pull up at the intersection near her home and pick
her up after she walks off? Any of these things
that could be important to help fill in that timeline.
And here's something else to keep in mind right when
(13:57):
we're looking for maybe eyewitness within the neighborhood during this
canvas or hopefully some video footage, is that we know
she left items at her home that a person would
normally take with them. She didn't leave in her own car.
She left her wallet, her ID, all these things, her phone,
(14:19):
things that a normal person would take with them if
they were just going to go run an errand, or
even if you were going to run off with the
intention of never coming back, you would want to have
those things on you. So officers and detectives should not
be afraid to use common sense in the absence of evidence. Yet,
or to follow their gut. When you're armed with that information,
(14:43):
you have to immediately use common sense and think, well,
she left that home on foot.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
I do want to point out, though we also don't
know if she left by foot.
Speaker 3 (14:54):
What if there's camera footage from a neighbor's house the
covers the front her house, and another camera from another
neighbor's house that covers the rear exit or the side exit,
and during this timeframe you never see that door open.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
That could be important.
Speaker 3 (15:12):
Right we have video of every exit from that house
and we never see her leave. Wouldn't that be important
information because that would contradict probably what you were told
initially when this missing person's report was taken.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
I mean, think about this.
Speaker 3 (15:29):
I worked at a time well before body camps as
a detective. So if I wasn't the first person at
the scene to take the initial report, which many times
I was not, I had to rely on that first
responding officer's report, which is going to be a summary
as best that officer can recall by the time they
(15:51):
sit down to actually type out that report. Now, why
would I want to rely on that when I could
visually and audibly win witness the interaction with the person live,
I'm going to hear exactly how it happened.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Not only that, because I can see it visually.
Speaker 3 (16:08):
Not only can I hear exactly what the person was reporting,
but I can visually see body languids, facial expression, all
those nonverbal behaviors that are important when trying to determine
if you're getting truthful information from them. So it's an
invaluable tool, and it is standard practice today for detectives
(16:31):
to pull that bodycam footage and then thoroughly look through
it to aid them in their investigation.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
Just to be fair, we don't know because we don't
have access to the case file or any investigative notes
from Detective lun or anyone else with the n OPD.
Maybe they did use the bodycamp footage as part of
that investigation. Maybe they did thoroughly canvass the neighborhood, albeit
not with neighbors we spoke to. But let's talk a
(17:01):
little bit about how police have had this case for
ten days and her family from out of state who
comes in to do a search uncovers her body.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
Okay, so let's think in these terms everything that I
just talked about. We don't know obviously, whether or not
those were things that were done by detective Want or
anyone else for that matter. We just know that these
are things that should be done. So everything I just
listed off should let the listener know. At this point
(17:35):
this case potentially had a lot of positive things working
for it. Now it's in the hands initially for somewhere
between seven and ten days of a missing person's detective
and the family is not hearing anything back. According to them,
that leads them to believe that any sort of physical
(17:56):
search in the nearby and surrounding area of her home
is going to be conducted by police or anyone via police.
So they're organizing their own search. They're going to go
scalt best locations in that area to form a search
party and conduct.
Speaker 2 (18:13):
Their own search. That shouldn't have to be done.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
Not to say that police have time on every missing
person's case to pull in a bunch of bodies and
conduct searches everywhere that they can find in the surrounding
area of where the person went missing. What they have
to do is take a look at the circumstances surrounding
that person's disappearance in its totality, is it suspicious, Does
(18:39):
it lead me to believe in my gut and using
my common sense that it's likely this person fell victim
to foul play of some sort, and then decide from there.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
Okay, I know I can't.
Speaker 3 (18:52):
Do this in every case, but this is a case
that I think likely is going to elevate into something
much worse. So I'm going into help as much as
I can with that. Not that I can pull thirty
or forty cops off the street from what they're doing.
We know New Orleans is a very busy city and
there's a lot of violent crime there and a lot
of things actively to be worked on that you don't
(19:13):
want to pull that many people away from being able
to respond to. But there are resources within the area
of New Orleans in every big city to lead a
search and get community involvement. You know, you can use
the National Guard. There are these other private resources that
you can access to bring you bodies to search, and
(19:35):
all you got to do is help manage it.
Speaker 1 (19:38):
I'm going to jump ahead a little bit to this
encounter that Jessica Vee had and the letter that she received.
I think the episode flushed that out enough, but I
do want to talk about the interactions that she had
with NPD and get your take on how they could
have used Jessica v as more of a re source
(20:01):
than they did.
Speaker 3 (20:02):
So a couple of things with Jessica Vee. Without reiterating
all the details of the interaction she had with Justin,
we do know that she was concerned enough that she
reached out to police and whoever it was on the
police and told her there was not a homicide investigator
assigned to this investigation. So they direct her to the
(20:26):
coroner's office because from other things that she is telling them,
they are concerned that this might be a mental health crisis,
so they direct her the coroner's office because that's the
first stage and initiating maybe a seventy two hour mental
health hold, an involuntary hold of someone for mental health concerns.
Speaker 2 (20:47):
So she goes.
Speaker 3 (20:48):
There and despite the lack of professionalism and some of
the things that happened, protocol wise, things are done correctly.
What I don't like about it was that a copy
of made of this letter and then prepares her paperwork
and then puts it in an envelope along with possibly
the original letter, seals it up and then gives it
(21:10):
back to Jessica Vie and says, what you need to
do now is go hand deliver this to this office
within the police department. So now she's acting as kind
of an employee herself of this process, like she's an
employee of the City of New Orleans and has to
go do this. The reason I don't like that is
it's very discouraging for people.
Speaker 2 (21:32):
To bring forward information.
Speaker 3 (21:34):
It's scary enough to interject yourself into this situation if
you're Jessica Vee, But now that just adds further discouragement
of her or anyone else ever wanting to do the
right thing and insert themselves in such a situation.
Speaker 2 (21:49):
And then she gets to the police.
Speaker 3 (21:50):
Department, and you know, they do properly what they should
to help initiate a seventy two our mental health hold.
Speaker 2 (21:58):
On an individual.
Speaker 3 (21:59):
But there are other circumstances involved here. This is wrapped
within now at this point, a death investigation that is
considered suspicious.
Speaker 2 (22:11):
There are suspicious circumstances.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
The police department knows that a detective currently assigned to
that case knows that, and whether or not this particular
person she dealt with has any kind of direct knowledge
of this.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
They are now being informed.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
By Jessica Vee of the parties, and after a quick
little CAD search, you would see that this is in place.
So then you might want to get a hold of
the detective that is assigned jess Caasereely during death investigation, right,
whether that be a district detective or whoever has it
at that point, reach out to them and let them
know what's going on, so at least they have the
(22:48):
chance to decide whether or not Jessicavi's intervention now is
of use to that investigation if you decide it is.
There are a couple creative outside the things that are
simple to do, and I have done very similar things
in my career, and I've witnessed it done by other
people in investigations similar to this before. And that is
(23:10):
simply I have a person here who had what they
deem as an uncomfortable interaction with the husband of Jessica
Easterly Journey.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
That's my victim.
Speaker 3 (23:22):
That person seems very forthcoming in conversation with information about
the death of his wife to this person, Jessica V.
Maybe I could explore the possibility of using Jessica V
as a means of recording conversations either over telephone or
(23:44):
in person with Justin Dearney.
Speaker 2 (23:47):
Now, at this point, we don't.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
Know obviously if Justin is considered a suspect or if
he is not considered a suspect. But what we know
is that there are some suspicious things surrounding her disappearance
and her death. So it's possible that they're considering that
option or they're not ready to dismiss him as a
(24:10):
person of interest.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
Story suspect yet.
Speaker 3 (24:12):
So this could be a mechanism to help you get
off or on the fence about this with Justin to
decide once and for all if he's someone who should
be considered a person of interest or a suspect or.
Speaker 1 (24:25):
Not not necessarily information that's going to implicate him, but
just additional information that had not been gathered yet from police.
Speaker 3 (24:35):
Honestly, I will be looking to see if he provides
information that contradicts information that he reported to my officers.
If so, you know, that's going to be of concern.
You know, I just think it's an opportunity. And again,
I've done this before in past investigations I was involved with,
So it's something that's easily done. And I'm not saying
Jessica vee would even be willing to do it, But
(24:56):
you know it's worth exploring beyond this seventy two our
mental health hoold.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
We don't know if once she was found then that
investigation was then handed off to another investigator. What we
do know is that there was a homicide detective on
the scene when her body was discovered, but we don't
know from that point on who may have been investigating it.
Talk to me a little todd about why it would
(25:23):
be so harmful if there was a gap in the
investigation while they're waiting on a manner of death. And
what I mean by that is we go from missing
person to death investigation. Meanwhile, six months later, her cause
and manner death is ruled as undetermined.
Speaker 3 (25:45):
Let's explore that, and maybe this is a good way
to wrap up this conversation.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
Let's thoroughly look into just.
Speaker 3 (25:52):
What happens in cases like this when missing person's report
is first made. Obviously that and immediately gets assigned to
a detective within the missing person's unit. If your agency
has such a thing, Larger agencies do, so let's just
stick with protocol at these large agencies, so it goes
immediately to a missing person's detective, and it will stay
(26:17):
with that missing person's detective until that person is no
longer missing, meaning they are found alive or deceased. In
this instance, she's found deceased seven or ten days later.
So at that point it leaves the hands of the
missing person's detective. It gets transferred to a detective at.
Speaker 2 (26:38):
The district level.
Speaker 3 (26:39):
So once we know this is a death investigation, you're
going to have a homicide detective and a district detective
show up when that body's found, and there's a conversation
that takes place. Both just kind of way I've seen this.
Both are like chomping at the bed. You know, am
I going to get to work this case? Or am
I going to get to work this case? Well, you
hope for that because you want detectives to be passionate
(27:02):
about solving these cases. So both will be there and
then there will be an initial determination of is this
going to most likely be a homicide or not. So
if the determination is made, we can't say that this
is probably going to be a homicide, So right now
we're going to assign a district detective to it. If
(27:23):
something changes because of the medical examiners examination, and as
classified as a homicide, then that district detective will hand
it off to the homicide detective.
Speaker 2 (27:34):
Now, all this I.
Speaker 3 (27:36):
Could give a shit less about from an investigation standpoint,
because there should be no gaps, as you mentioned, in
investigating this case, and everybody should be working it in
the same manner, regardless of the title of the unit
that you work with. In so everything the detective lun
is doing would be the same things that the district
(27:57):
detective and that the homicide detective would be if they
were working this from the ground up. So once it's
handed off, it should be a seamless transition for the
missing person's detective to hand this off to the district detective.
The district detective now has all the information. They will
work in concert with the missing person's detective for a
period of time long enough that they feel comfortable Okay,
(28:20):
I am up to speed to where you are. I
can now take it over, and then the missing person's
detective is freed up to work other missing person's cases.
So the district detective has it and picks up where
they left off. Hopefully everything that we discussed earlier has
already been done. That's the advantage this district detective has,
(28:42):
so now his job is to follow up from there. Okay,
help solidify that timeline. If there are still gaps, I know,
I've got these preservation requests for all this data from
electronic devices and social media accounts. I can now decide
if I want to send subpoenas, court orders or warrants
for that stuff, and continue to try to find more
(29:04):
and more people to talk to. Then when we reach
this point in January where finally a cause and manner
of death is listed, each undetermined, then we know it's
going to stay with that district detective. It's not gonna
be handed off to a homicide detective. But the emphasis
I want to place on this is, let's say it
(29:25):
does at some point change to a homicide, and then
it must be transferred from the district detective to a
homicide detective who gives a shit. It does not change
the way you investigate this. And I will say this,
if within this process at NPD we find out that
(29:47):
there is a gap that someone at some investigative level
is not working it because they're just simply waiting for
the right classification or for the right circumstances to present themselves.
That will be a shame because that's potentially catastrophic to
this investigation.
Speaker 1 (30:05):
Sure, because we're going from the first forty eight to
the first six months, and how much of anything then
is completely gone and lost.
Speaker 3 (30:15):
So we just have to hope that's not the case
here because there would be irreversible damage costs from that.
So we have to hope for the best and that
everybody is doing the right things up to this point,
and that if a handoff must occur, that that happens
seamlessly and it does not burden this investigation at all.
Speaker 1 (30:32):
Well, what you and I can tell listeners at this
point we will be talking to the NOPD to find
out where their investigation stands.
Speaker 2 (30:42):
Stay tuned.
Speaker 1 (30:45):
Thank you for listening to this episode. I want to
remind you again that we'll be back next Tuesday with
episode five. Until then. Is a production of Resonate Recordings
and Tenderfoot TV in conjunction with Cadence thirteen, written and
(31:07):
hosted by me Jessica Nole and produced by Dennis Cooper
and Todd McComas, with additional production by Whitney Bozarth. Executive
producers are Dennis Cooper, Mark Minnery, Jacob Bozarth, Donald Albright,
and Payne Lindsay. Our senior producer is John Street. Editing, mixing,
(31:29):
mastering and sound design by Caleb Melcher, Dayton Cole and
Pat Kicklider of the Resonate Recordings team. If you have
a podcast or are looking to start one, check us
out at Resonate Recordings dot com. Our theme song and
original score is by Dirt Poor Robbins, with additional scoring
(31:50):
by Dayton Cole. Our cover art is by Station sixteen.
You can follow Undetermined Podcast on Facebook and on Twitter
at Undetermined Pod. Show notes as well as bonus content
can be found on our website undeterminedpod dot com. If
you enjoyed this episode, please take time to subscribe, rate,
(32:13):
and review. Your feedback is greatly appreciated. And finally, if
you have any information about this case, call crime Stoppers
at one eight seven seven nine zero three seven eight
sixty seven
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.