June 6, 2025 • 50 mins
More info on Peter Wilson’s wrongful conviction. Follow up on The Killing Fields Documentary of Robert Able, Clyde Hedrick, and Tim Miller from 2022. Following Jack’s movements as he goes back and forth between California and Texas. Jack’s presence at Hewlett Packard as a Seargent in the security department making a whopping $312.00 bi-weekly almost suggests that this is a part-time job at best leaving a lot of free time for Jack. Meanwhile, murders are ramping up in Texas.
Hit the Road Jack: Finding the Zodiac is broadcast live Fridays at 10AM PT on K4HD Radio - Hollywood Talk Radio (www.k4hd.com) part of Talk 4 Radio (www.talk4radio.com) on the Talk 4 Media Network (www.talk4media.com). Hit the Road Jack: Finding the Zodiac TV Show is viewed on Talk 4 TV (www.talk4tv.com).
Hit the Road Jack: Finding the Zodiac Podcast is also available on Talk 4 Media (www.talk4media.com), Talk 4 Podcasting (www.talk4podcasting.com), iHeartRadio, Amazon Music, Pandora, Spotify, Audible, and over 100 other podcast outlets.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/hit-the-road-jack-finding-the-zodiac--5297837/support.
Hit the Road Jack: Finding the Zodiac is broadcast live Fridays at 10AM PT on K4HD Radio - Hollywood Talk Radio (www.k4hd.com) part of Talk 4 Radio (www.talk4radio.com) on the Talk 4 Media Network (www.talk4media.com). Hit the Road Jack: Finding the Zodiac TV Show is viewed on Talk 4 TV (www.talk4tv.com).
Hit the Road Jack: Finding the Zodiac Podcast is also available on Talk 4 Media (www.talk4media.com), Talk 4 Podcasting (www.talk4podcasting.com), iHeartRadio, Amazon Music, Pandora, Spotify, Audible, and over 100 other podcast outlets.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/hit-the-road-jack-finding-the-zodiac--5297837/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This program is designed to provide general information with regards
to the subject matters covered. This information is given with
the understanding that neither the hosts, guests, sponsors, or station
are engaged in rendering any specific and personal medical, financial,
legal counseling, professional service, or any advice.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
You should seek the services.
Speaker 1 (00:23):
Of competent professionals before applying or trying any suggested ideas.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
Good Morning, True Seekers and true crime junkies. Welcome back
to another episode of Hit the Roadjack Finding the Zodiac
to Welcome to the show today, Harriet Soousche, Good morning.
I felt like Caat, I felt like Kat and a
hat there and almost rhymed, let's welcome to the show today,
Harriet Soouche. Anyways, I know Nolan said he was going
(01:18):
to be here, although I did have a good conversation
with him yesterday in regards to the follow up we're
going to discuss so if no one comes in, we'll
we'll introduce him to the show. At that point, he
did say he'd be here, But I'm actually leaving off
on last week's follow up with the Tim Miller situation
and the Texas killing fields, so I wanted to kind
(01:40):
of just recap the docuseries that I saw with Tim
Miller in regards to the different suspects and victims, because
it actually yielded some good information. It helped to actually
take a couple of murders off the books. So I'm
just gonna briefly go through that, and then we're going
to climb right back into the follow up for the
Peter Wilson wrongful conviction because that got exponentially more interesting.
Speaker 3 (02:07):
For you too for that case.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Yay, okay, all right, well, so let me let me
get through this real quick, and then we're going to
hop right into that. So on the it's on Netflix,
and it's crime scene the Texas Killing Fields in Galveston,
Leed City, Dickinson and I forty five killer, So basically
on Calder Road on an oil field. As Harriet had stated,
(02:30):
I believe you said that you thought that that was
a former Phillip sixty six station.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
Yeah, yeah, that was a former Phillip sixty six pump
Jack station. So when I started coding that, I said,
once I saw that Jack has got some information, that's
what I will.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
See pump Jack. Hmm okay, yes. So so basically the
bodies were laid out under trees as if they were posed.
And that's something that we've talked a lot about in
regards to Black Dahlia, the Oakland County child killer cases,
like these bodies being out in the open and posed
in a certain manner. So this actually set them of
(03:13):
this particular killer for the killing fields. Aside from who
we're going to hear further in what they talk about
on this documentary. So one of the suspects was Clyde Hedrick,
and that is the one that Tim Miller actually sued
for a wrongful death, even though Clyde Hedrick had only
been associated with I think it was abuse of a corpse,
(03:34):
and that was in regards to Ellen Beeson. He supposedly
had gone to the bar and they'd hung out, and
then after that they went to go swimming, and of
course he says that he looks into the water and
there she is floating. He doesn't know what to do
with her. He picks her up, he's going to take
her to the hospital, but then he gets scared and
he ends up dumping her in a field underneath a
(03:56):
couch and some tires. So that is what ultimately gets
him in trouble. For that, I think that they did
actually exume that body and determine that there was a
blow to the head that could not have happened if
she had just dove in the water, so almost as
if to say that he had hit her with something.
But again we won't know the truth of any of that.
So the victims were in the Texas Killing Fields. The
(04:19):
victims were Heidiville real Fi and she went missing October
nineteen eighty three. Found April sixth, nineteen eighty four because
a dog had brought back a skull to its owner.
Victim number two, which is Jane Doe. We now actually
have names. I've been waiting all these years for names,
or for them to finally figure out who Jane Doe
and Janet Doe is from these series, and we have
(04:40):
their names now. So Jane Doe found nineteen eighty six
was they found a twenty two caliber bullet lodged in
her spine. Her name is Audrey Lee Cook and she's
thirty years of age. They did actually find a blue
plaid shirt, as I'd indicated before, that's probably missing. I
think that that's what it said. I've typed it up
as it's missing now, So this shirt used to exists,
(05:00):
but of course no DNA testing can be done on it,
because now that we have the technology, the shirt is gone.
Victim number three was Laura Miller. She went missing September
tenth of nineteen eighty four and found in nineteen eighty six,
basically right where Tim had been trying to coax everybody
to look for her. So here she is in the
Killing Fields. Victim number four is Janet Doe. She's the
(05:23):
second well found in nineteen ninety one. Her name is
Donna Prudehom and she was thirty four years of age.
Now by nineteen ninety one, Robert Abel owns and runs
a trail riding horse business, which I believe is Stardust
Trail Rides, and he owns two properties next to the
Killing Fields at this point, and he does eventually end up,
(05:44):
I think, buying that particular property. So he was responsible
for creating the Saturn Rocket because he worked for NASA,
as Harry stated, And by nineteen ninety one he owned
the Killing Fields, so he didn't technically own those in
the beginning, and that's what I discovered through the documentary.
Victim number five we thought was Laura Smithers. Now, of course,
(06:07):
she was dumped in a completely different location, not where
these other bodies were, and that's what kind of sat
her apart. She went missing on April third, nineteen ninety seven,
in Friendswood, Texas, and she was found near a waterway.
And that's why I had included her in this particular presentation,
because we know the zodiac had a lot of waterway associations. However,
(06:27):
we did actually find out that she is. Now it
has been claimed that where's his name? Bill Reese has
taken responsibility for Laura Smithers, Jessica Kaine, and Kelly Cox.
So these are three murders that I can remove from
the presentation, and I feel fairly secure in doing so
because it isn't just a confession where some of these
(06:48):
individuals will confess to things they didn't do. He actually
was on I think he was looking at the death
penalty for another murder, and it turned out that he
was offered to take the death penalty off the table
if he showed them where the bodies were to these
other victims, and he then did so. He showed them
where Laura's Smothers was and where Jessica Kaine was and
(07:11):
Kelly Coxy accepted responsibility for these murders. So that's kind
of an update here on those. Even though they're much later,
they're in the nineties. Again, that's what sets them apart
from the killing fields. The killing fields were in the eighties.
I really kind of now pay a lot of attention
to this finale letter, the two thousand and five one,
because it specifically said there was other people killing in
(07:33):
the eighties. It wasn't definitely. Now we're actually seeing yeah,
now we're actually seeing proof that there were other killers
operating at the same time. But they weren't dumping in
the same manner. They were hiding the bodies just like
Clyde Hedgerock did so our killer. I believe for these three,
the Heidiville Real, well, actually it's four, so it's the
(07:56):
two Jane and Janet Doe, Laura Miller, and Villa Real
five were all actually dumped in the killing fields, whereas
everybody else was in different locations. But around that area.
Let's see, there was a push to get fingerprints. And
one of the things I did notice is that they
stated at this time when they found Laura Smithers, is
(08:17):
that it created a huge push for the school systems,
and for everybody to take DNA samples and swabs. I
remember this, like vaguely remember this back in the late nineties,
the big push to get your children's finger prants, to
get a DNA swab, to have all of these things
on hand in case something happened to them, you could
provide that git to law enforcement in hopes to find them.
(08:38):
So there was a huge push for that. The murders
then take off again in nineteen ninety seven. I really
thought that this was a shoe in for Jack, because
we know Jack returned in nineteen ninety seven. I believe
that's when his mom died Floa or he had gone
back to start taking care of her again ninety six hish,
ninety seven ish before she passed away, So he was
actually back in Texas. And there may be some there
(09:00):
that we're going to talk about that he can be held,
you know, or the proximity says that it's possible that
he is the killer of those individuals and we'll get
to them at that time. It looks like Tim Miller
also he started with Clyde Hedrick as a suspect, and
then he moved on to Robert Abel and evidently he
was pounding the crap out of at least mentally pounding
(09:21):
the crap out of Robert Abel and he ends up,
actually Robert Abel ends up having to file a restraining
order against Tim Miller to leave him alone. He's not
the killer, He's not I'm not who you're looking for.
And at some point in time, Tim Miller actually apologizes
to Robert Abel. I believe this is in two thousand
and five. I believe. I'm not sure if it's before
(09:42):
or after. I would love to talk to Tim in
regards to some of this, but he hasn't responded as
whether or not that letter for the finale letter in
two thousand and five came in before or after his
apology to Robert Abel, and maybe after. And that's why
he apologized, because the letter now coming from the suspect
or killer of his daughter, is indicating that Robert abeles
(10:05):
not the devil, that the blue sid you know, Blue Fuzz,
is looking for kind of thing. So let's see here.
Speaker 3 (10:14):
And that we could get some more when I start,
when I send you some of this stuff, then you'll
understand a little bit more about how the evidence is
telling the story. Yeah, I got eighty six. The names
that you're saying were determined later. They apparently the government
people already knew who was.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
There who Jane and Jeda done, Oh yeah, what you're saying, Okay, okay.
Speaker 3 (10:39):
Yeah, I'll send that to you because I don't want
to confuse the listeners. I've already got gotcha, So let's
just move, you know, guys, I don't want to because
you're bringing up so much pertinent information here and this
this is how you do this, right when you line
out everything and then go and start for me, it's
(11:01):
going to start decoding right well.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
In Mayam nineteen ninety seven is when all of this
kind of came together. Sandra S. Paul was abducted by knife.
Her car was acting up after a strange as she
ran after she ran into a strange man at a
convenience store, and all of that sounded very zodiac like, right,
you know, manipulation of the car, the convenience store, all
of these things seemed to run in tandem. So it
(11:25):
was it was it was purposeful that they made the
actual presentation. And so at any at any point, I
guess that he says, you've got a flat tire, Can
I help you. So again, we know that the Kathleen
John's situation was a tire that had been loosened. The
wheel had been loosened from the car, so she was
(11:45):
actually put into this guy's truck, jumped out, and on
October sixteenth of nineteen ninety seven, she identifies Bill Reese. So,
now Bill Reese is the one I said that he
had got off of the death penalty by showing them
where the bodies were of Laura Smithers, Jessica Kane, and
Kelly Cox. Now I'm not sure he actually showed him
where Kelly Cox was or just accepting culpability for it,
(12:06):
but he did show him where Lauris Smithers and Jessica
Kaine was. Now Bill also leads PD to her body
in exchange for death penalty. In an unrelated murder case,
police view views something like sixty two hundred pictures belonging
to Abel, so they've literally done a search on him
quite like they did with Arthur Lee Allen and found
(12:27):
nothing in all of his messes stuff. They and one
of the guys commented that he had looked through sixty
two hundred pictures and nothing showed anything. Nefarius on Robert
Abel's end in.
Speaker 3 (12:39):
Two anyways, keep going.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
I know, I know, I know, I'm just putting out
I'm not saying that the media is always correct and
what they're saying. This is just what the media is
leading us to believe at this point.
Speaker 3 (12:53):
That he then even trying to get help. Robert Abel
is so that's why he's allowing all this to happen,
you know, And in hindsight when I see this, he's
allowing all this to happen, like please rest me, stop me.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
No, he's actually he's trying to help them, and of course.
Speaker 3 (13:10):
Exactly and inviting himself out there.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
But not everybody who offers to help is somebody that's
a killer. There are good people out there that can
take an interest. I saw the investigative reporter on this
Texas killing fields. She kept clippings, she followed everything, she
ran around injecting herself into the case. Nobody called her
a murderer. So that's what I'm saying. People can't keep
using the fact that just because he assisted gave his
(13:35):
courses and gave him, you know, freedom to his property,
to say that that makes him a killer. I really
just don't honestly believe yes, some do inject themselves into
the case so that they can follow what's going on.
There are people who do that have no relation to
the murder whatsoever. Ooh, let's welcome Nolan to the show.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Hello, Nolan, I see the site.
Speaker 4 (13:57):
Good morning everybody, sir.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
That's okay. We're we're just finishing up with the killing
fields and then we're going to hop over to the
follow up on Peter Wilson. So basically, in two thousand
and five, Tim Miller apologizes to Able and then and
then Able for whatever reason, purportedly commits either suicide or
his or his quad breaks down on the train tracks
and he is hit by a training killed. So again
(14:22):
we're not sure was that self homicide or was that
just mechanical failure? Right right, I mean, there's got to
be something going on there, would let mine? Yeah, Carols,
it is fluffy. It is rather fluffy. So in July
(14:45):
nineteen to two thousand and five is when the accident
happens with Robert Abel and by September two thousand and
five the finale letter. I think I just answered that myself. Now,
So the apology was given obviously in two thousand and five,
but previous to him dying, and then September two thousand
and five is when the finale letter comes. It ruled
out Clyde Hedrick as a possible author. Okay, so I'm
(15:07):
sorry Clyde Hedrick. At one point in time, Tim Miller
had a private investigator, I believe his name was Bill Young,
who came out and visited and spent a couple days
with me going over the presentation that I have on
the Zodiac versus Tim Miller's letter. And then he asked
me to do a handwriting analysis of Clyde Hedrick's handwriting,
(15:29):
and that was provided by Clyde's ex wife, So I
did have access to look at Clyde's handwriting and I
could rule Clyde out as the Zodiac. And I think
that once I made the connections between the two thousand
and five finale letter and the Zodiac, that's when Tim
started trying to figure out if he could put Clyde
Hedrick here in California, which I don't know that he
(15:49):
ultimately could by any means. But after doing the handwriting,
I know that I can rule Clyde out as the
possible author of the Zodiac letters. But you cannot rule
out Zodiac wrote Tim tim Finale letter, which I honestly
believed that he really did. There was also Triple X
I'm gonna call it Triple X videos or DVDs. Found
that Laura Miller's Laura Miller's makeshift grave in the Killing Fields,
(16:12):
and I found similar similar DVDs. At least I thought
somebody actually brought to my attention that I'm we might
have been sitting on CDs, not DVDs, and that's why
we couldn't get them to play in the computer. We
would have had to have put them. Yeah, So, and
I am now I'm upset because I never tried playing
it as a CD. But it could be very likely
(16:32):
that that's what we were sitting on and it may
have had information on it that we could have used
to some degree.
Speaker 3 (16:39):
I still have Denis the stuff that I ended up
getting back, you know, twice. I'm gonna have to look
in that again, see what I can find with the
with the CDs or DVDs, because I'm wondering if that's
there or some of the files that I know Dennis
said shared with me. So I'm gonna just look, okay, because.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
Yeah, I know that Dennis how died.
Speaker 3 (17:03):
I know.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
We tried to run it through a couple of different
computers at mynmals. He tried running it too, and we
couldn't get anything to play. So that is a valid
Either our technology had surpassed that particular CD DVD or
we were literally sitting on something that was just a
vocal recording. It was just audio, it wasn't actually a video.
Who knows. I know that till Miller turned his over
(17:25):
with the letter I believe to law enforcement a League
City PD, and all of that stuff has gone missing.
So let's la. Yeah. Uh now I'm going to go
in here and I'm going to stop this share and share.
Our next screen is that share.
Speaker 3 (17:47):
Share hello again, just in case I went off the
screen for a second.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
Right, I need it up for myself. There we go,
and let's go with that one. Wooooo all right. It
is a whole lot of information.
Speaker 4 (18:06):
Boy.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
I got two packages from mister Wilson in regards to
his face, and everything just got extremely more interesting. And
I'm thinking to myself, like, what is going on in
our world that people can get away with this? Anyways,
we have identified him as Peter E. Wilson. I've just
asked him for his middle name to find out what
his middle name is. It could very well be I'm
(18:27):
in lau right. I mean, we'll see how it comes out.
But he was thirty one years of age in nineteen
ninety six, from what I could tell he was working.
He was working for hospitals as a laboratory assisted while
going to Stanford University. His date of birth nine thirty,
nineteen sixty four, he claims, And I asked him specifically
(18:48):
about the different name changes and the legal name change
and the different birthdates that were being produced in the media,
because I thought maybe the media had been the ones
to get that wrong. But it turns out that he
said that claims. He claims that Officer, you're intentionally fabricated
half a dozen stories using different names and birthdates. You're
claim that the County Jail used an old computer system
(19:08):
that would not accept changes, so the birthdate was entered
incorrectly to reflect nineteen fifty four, and because the system
did not accept changes, that that placed his birth date
as nineteen fifty four and could not be changed at
that point in one of the what's that That.
Speaker 4 (19:27):
Doesn't sound right?
Speaker 2 (19:29):
No, but you've got a police officer who's telling the
courts that the courts don't know the difference, right, they
don't know what's going on in the police department. He
could say anything he wanted, but yeah, he tried to
say that it accidentally got entered incorrectly and now it
can't be changed because the system doesn't allow for changes.
That makes no sense at all to me.
Speaker 4 (19:47):
Right, You would think you could update all the.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Time, right, right. So basically, one of the interviews that
I saw by the private investigator was a friend of
Wilson's name Claude. I actually saw too, a Sharif and
a Claude. Both of these individuals lived at the previous house.
They rented rooms in a previous house to Hawk Duke
(20:10):
Kim's house, but kept in contact with each other even afterwards,
so they would still hang out, get together for food,
and they were still good friends even after they've parted
ways or good acquaintances as one would have put it.
And one of those friends, Claude, had indicated that he
believes that Wilson is from Canada, or at least that
was the perception. So we don't have him coming from
(20:32):
a foreign country, as you know suggested, which would now
make sense as to why he claims a race as
being white. Now, William MOREL. Coleman is not black per Coleman,
per Wilson, but didn't look white either, even though the
police report indicates that he was a white male and
it's any Wilson said he could be any other race,
(20:53):
but he was approximately fifty five years of age. His
background was a former dishwasher at Messluno in Mountaine, California,
and he rented a room from Kim for four hundred
and fifty dollars a month. They did take a rape kit,
blood and DNA from Coleman. It was tested and after
testing it for whatever reason Lynda Ruth Condron filed a
(21:14):
motion in court to exclude the evidence of finding semen
and sperm on Kim and withheld the test results of
the DNA testing on the specimen and the sperm from
the defense, as well as the as the test results
on Coleman, which just make absolutely no sense. I mean,
we should be quitting. That's an ethical, completely onethough call.
(21:35):
I mean, your whole job is to present a good case,
not a what you want to case. And it appears
as though she was looking to remove the thought or
idea from the jury altogether that there could be a
third party involved with this. And I just don't even
see on the evidence that they have how they could
have came to a conclusion that Wilson was guilty, because
(21:57):
none of it is really making sense after going back
to that, and I'm going to show you, guys how.
So Coleman denied saying Kim had been dead for four
to five hours on the nine to one to one
call until the tape was played. Then he lied several
times about why he said that. So I found that interesting.
I have read his transcripts. It is in here. I
will flash through them so that you can pause your
(22:18):
video as we go through in lieu of trying to
read all twenty eight pages. But you will find that
the testimony from Coleman didn't really it didn't really insinuate
at all that Wilson was the killer. All it really
insinuated was that he knocked on my door once and
said he found Kim. But Coleman was home before Wilson was.
(22:42):
So Wilson comes home, finds her, tries to get Coleman's attention.
Coleman isn't answering the door Wilson basically barges in and
opens the door up and there's Coleman standing fully dressed shoes, pants, shirt,
sweatshirt in a house where he's not allowed to wear shoes.
Got to remember, she's Asian. There's no shoes allowed in
the house. But he's standing in his bedroom fully dressed
with shoes on, after what he claimed was one single
(23:05):
knock with no words from Coleman or from Wilson. Sorry,
so that gets even more interesting. Uh?
Speaker 4 (23:14):
Yes, why is Coleman on ankle bracelet?
Speaker 2 (23:18):
I think that he went on an ankle bracelet in
order to track him while the trial or while the
investigation was going on.
Speaker 4 (23:26):
So evidently he still was kind of a suspect then.
Speaker 2 (23:29):
I think so. And I think when they lost that
opportunity when he cut that bracelet and ran off to Mexico,
that they now lost their other alternative. They needed to
pend it on somebody. Basically, yeah, they don't have the
other suspect. Yeah, it would be interesting.
Speaker 5 (23:46):
McNab's wife killed herself in Florida. They had to pin
it on someone, so they pinned on Sarah.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
Gutra, gotcha. Yeah, they're they're looking for somebody to settle
that case out on either way. I mean, it doesn't
scream justice, it doesn't scream the truth to manipulate things
to get that case to have an end resolve that
you that you want versus the truth.
Speaker 3 (24:10):
To interject at this point, if you like, go for it. Okay,
you ask me to just try to do my thing
like I would do, and no offense. Pretend you're Dennis,
and then entered the names that I do and try
to see what I come up with. I kept on
coming up with William Morrow as in a company, a
(24:33):
publisher company that ends up being bought by the first
people in eighty and I sorry, nineteen eighty one. I
got eighteen eighty one in my head. Long story, but anyways,
in nineteen eighty one and so I said, okay, why
is this coming up over and over and over again
when I'm trying to do my searches. Then I find
(24:53):
out that they had a zodiac Arthur trying to get
their versions of who the zodiac is is around when
Dennis and you and I are on line trying to
get their books sold. So I said, this is weird. Okay,
I'm trying to remember who the author is. So let's
just get past that. I said, Okay, I think I'm
(25:15):
seeing something that there's you know, just like this guy
officer your has been on TV numerous times for being
wrong and you know, doing shows on cases from that area.
I've seen them. So anyways, now the other update is,
since the place of Canada is brought up and Wilson
(25:40):
thinks something about the guy the friend to Canada, I put.
Speaker 2 (25:44):
Now, Wilson Wilson is from Canada. Yes, he believes Wilson
is from Canada.
Speaker 3 (25:51):
Okay, that's what I came up with. Okay, my apologies
to the families. But there is a William I'm sorry,
William Coleman who's who had who had been in Canada,
was living in Canada but was also having something now
in the United States. And his wife is with a
(26:13):
very Korean sounding name. But both of than my believer,
are now deceased.
Speaker 2 (26:18):
No, no, no, Wilson Wilson is from Canada, not Coleman.
I have no knowledge where Coleman comes from.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
Okay Coleman, Okay, So, so Wilson is supposed to be
from Canada.
Speaker 2 (26:34):
Yes, and that was based on an interview that a
private investigator had with his friend Claude because it was
years This was actually years after I want to say,
this might even have been on the second trial that
this investigator actually got involved and spoke to him. And
Claude had no idea. He hadn't talked to Wilson in
a very long time and had no idea that he
was up on murder charges. But both Claude and Sharif said,
(26:57):
there's absolutely no way he could kill somebody. He's like
very docile, very amiable. He's very nice, quiet individual that
doesn't get angry about pretty much anything. And that's quite
the opposite of Hawk Jew Kim, who we here, you know,
is jumping on the sides of truck and screaming at men.
Speaker 5 (27:18):
Okay, Wilson thirty one, but he was still in school.
Was he a graduate student?
Speaker 2 (27:25):
I did. I haven't asked that question. I just know
that he was. He might have been finishing up whatever
his studies were at that point in time, or maybe
he went to college late in the day, late in
the game. I have no idea.
Speaker 5 (27:36):
Yeah, that's pretty young, I mean old for a Stanford student.
Most people that go to Stanford go there right out
of high school and graduate within four or five years.
Speaker 2 (27:47):
Well, most people, but that doesn't mean all people. I
mean I went back to college at thirty five. Not everybody.
Not everybody plays the socialistic game of school before going
and getting their careers. But all right, So Officer Yorge
told the prosecutor that Coleman fled the country, that he
(28:08):
cut off his ankle bracelet and fled to Mexico. And
again I'm not sure that maybe another follow up question
that I need to ask if that was just pertaining
to the investigation and they wanted to be able to
track him, or if he was on parole or had
some other type of arrests that required him to wear
a bracelet. Wilson's court appointed attorney, Gregory Parisco, retired in
(28:32):
two thousand and Mister Wilson claims that he was ineffective because,
number one, he failed to present expert testimony on the
forensics in Wilson's behalf by hiring independent pathologists instead relying
on cross examination of the prosecutor's witnesses. So he did
no favors to his client because he didn't have any
independent testing done to refute what it was that the
(28:55):
DA came up with. It says that Kim's nude body
should have been and the central point of examination and
investigation for a proper defense. Kim, a fifty nine year
old divorced for twenty years, never dated. A man found
half naked close an underclose torn seminal fluid on her
upper thighsand sperm in a vagina, was killed and raped,
(29:15):
and Paris gu refused to petition the court to test
the untested rape kit, which would have yielded the male DNA.
So there's his second failure. He should have petitioned the
court to have that DNA ran. Yes, that's crazy, I know,
I'm trying.
Speaker 4 (29:32):
To tell of the prosecution or lame.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
Think you? And number three, he failed to investigate the
state's blood evidence and have an independent testing of the
DNA collected from Wilson in the DNA from the crime scene,
which would have yielded the degradation levels of the DNA
to show it was from a single source, that it
was taken from a vile and planted at the scene,
which is something that he later found out through independent
(30:00):
on his own by sending the results both of his
Because of course, the DA ran these profiles and found
that it was a match, but failed to even mention
I'm assuming they're forensic experts, failed to even mentioned that
the degradation was identical, and this wasn't something that mister
Wilson found out until I want to say, twenty seventeen
(30:20):
or twenty eighteen that it was actually identical, and that's impossible,
all right, exclusion of the raate kid. I do want
to read some of the trial transcripts from the exclusionary
stuff that Linda Condrin or the DA because I find
this stuff absolutely astonishing. So it starts out, Miss Condrin, Yes,
your honor, the people's first motion pertains to the exclusion
(30:43):
of evidence relating to a swab and the finding of
a single sperm on the body of the victim. We're
moving to exclude this evidence because it's irrelevant. It's what,
it's what the right through that I said no, And
it gets it gets interesting because I've got the court's
response as well. It says it doesn't tend to prove
(31:06):
any matter in issue in this trial, or to even
make any matter more or less likely. The reason I
suggest this is for the following the evidence will be
and this is by way of offer of proof that
the sperm could be from the defendant or any other
person on the planet. Listen, right, just in case, right, well,
(31:29):
presumably male person on the planet. That it could also
be the result of contamination. What are people just walking
around fleeing sperm and seamen everywhere?
Speaker 4 (31:40):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (31:40):
Come on, I am absolutely floored reading this. There is
no evidence of sexual assault in this case, okay, okay,
and that the lack of other sperm, the lack of
other sperm, that this sperm could have been deposited before
the assault which led to the victim's death, that is
(32:01):
by a day or more. And there's no logical nexus
at all which connects this to the murder in this case,
or that suggests that someone other than the defendant apposited
the sperm and was the killer. So why didn't you
test it?
Speaker 4 (32:14):
That would admitted.
Speaker 2 (32:17):
You'd want it admitted? Yeah, I didn't match your suspect.
Speaker 4 (32:20):
Say it's going to be to help your case exactly.
Speaker 2 (32:25):
It says, if relevant at all, the relevance is absolutely
minimal and under three fifty two exclusion would be ooh,
what's a three fifty two exclusion? Because I just told
you about the article that I found. She did the
exclusionary rule or some Okay, I'm going to come back
to that. I'm glad I decided.
Speaker 4 (32:43):
Exclusion rules in regard to a serge.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
Okay, yes, yeah, this is.
Speaker 5 (32:50):
The exclusion in its dictionary, meaning not under the legal
exclusionary rule meaning gotcha. Okay, yeah, But so she she's
normally his defense that tries to exclude evidence, but she's
a ross theater trying to exclude evidence which intend to
incriminate the incrimination either way. Yeah, but she doesn't want
(33:18):
it in because it is potentially exculpatory, and that's why
she doesn't want it in.
Speaker 4 (33:22):
So what's the how does the judges one?
Speaker 2 (33:24):
Well, it says and this is what she says, if
relevant at all, The relevance is absolutely minimal, and under
three fifty two, exclusion would be appropriate because it would
lead to true confusion and diverting the attention of the
jury and exorbitant consumption of time. It's going to take
too much time to tell the truth.
Speaker 5 (33:44):
I can't believe she's thrown that. That's a it's a
really weak argument.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
It's not even an arguments.
Speaker 4 (33:52):
It would probably be the Califuary Evidence Code.
Speaker 2 (33:55):
Gotcha. Well, so the court's response is defense position mister Masco. Well,
I don't think it is an exorbitant amount of time,
but I would like to have the opportunity to defer
this till until Wednesday. So that's the only objection that
this public defender makes. I'd like to reserve the thought
on that until Wednesday. This is what the court orders.
(34:17):
So I go to page seven and the exclusion of
the evidence of the sperm that will be deferred. Now
the second one is motion for the jury to view it.
That's been granted. Wow, I don't even know what to say.
I like you, and he actually the judge goes on
at one point to say that this isn't a matter
(34:39):
of time. I have all the time in the world
to hear the proper evidence on this case. So if
your argument is time, that's not valid, he says in
one of his in one of the transcripts. But that's
her argument is a it's going to it's going to
divert the attention of the jury, it's going to take
too much time, and it's going to be confusing. What
I don't even get it. I I can't put words
(35:01):
to this right now. I'm just feeling like this is
probably one of the most corrupt individuals I've ever met
in my entire life, well, not even met the.
Speaker 4 (35:07):
Judge on it. This is that's the defensive jury.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
Or both exactly. Somebody should have said, my client has
rights to know. These things should be known. Now this
is too because the.
Speaker 4 (35:22):
Judge, he doesn't want to get over jured on appeal.
Speaker 2 (35:25):
Right, But if everybody's got it locked up, if it
lock it, stuff it in your pocket.
Speaker 5 (35:31):
That's why I want to know if there was an
actual appeal, because that's that's an appealable issue right there.
The decision to not let the jury see that evidence,
that's red flag.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
I think that the inclusion and maybe in the nineteen
ninety eight trial they did talk about a third party
culpability is what caused the hung jury. So now she's
just trying to avoid another hung jury by saying, let's
not confuse them. That's not confusing them. That was half
the people believing that he was innocent in the first
trial hungurie. Right. That means that they all couldn't agree, right.
Speaker 5 (36:06):
It doesn't. It doesn't have to be half. It could
be just one jerk. But unless we actually saw the
verdict or you know, the.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
Vote, how would I go about looking up.
Speaker 4 (36:19):
This series refuse to convict.
Speaker 2 (36:24):
Would or should these files be made be available public
this trial, these proceedings.
Speaker 4 (36:30):
Yeah, the transcript should be of the trial.
Speaker 2 (36:32):
Yeah, you just have to obviously pay for them and
get them to go find them for you. Right. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (36:38):
Reporter is one department we do. The department.
Speaker 2 (36:41):
I have the court reporter's name at the bottom of
all these transcripts.
Speaker 4 (36:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 5 (36:45):
So the question is that person still alive and still
working as a court reporter if they're archived to so
these must.
Speaker 2 (36:56):
They have to keep it until all until all options
for trial are done. They have to keep all these files,
right yeah, Okay, So this now, this is the next
exclusion being done by the District Attorney's office. And it's
a cigarette that's found a cigarette butt that's found in
the basement near Kim's body. Now, I have just reached
(37:18):
out to mister Wilson to find out if anybody in
the house smoked. I wouldn't be shocked if he came
back and said Coleman did. But obviously for that cigarette
to be mentioned, that means that it wasn't Hawkdow Kim
that was smoking, and they her family probably would have
testified that she didn't. But this is excluded once again
because it may possibly prove third party involvement. So the
(37:40):
court says, next issue, Miss Condron, your honor, there is
evidence that there is a cigarette butt found in the cellar.
It has no probative value. I don't know if counsel
intends to introduce it, but it is the people's motion
to exclude this evidence. God, I'm I'm I'm yeah, I'm
totally beside myself. Miss Condron says, exclude evidence of a cigarette.
(38:01):
But that was found in the cellar of the home.
That's the area where the victim's body was found. And
mister Pariscu says, well, I think it's relevant, and again
I think it's connected to the sperm thing. I mean,
there's evidence of potential third party involvement, whether there is
evidence of culpability of some other person who maybe have
been responsible, And I think we can take it all
up on discussion on Wednesday. Did he not come yes?
(38:25):
Did he not come to court prepared like.
Speaker 4 (38:32):
Excluded and it's clear the victim.
Speaker 2 (38:35):
Correct say that again. No, it's clear that.
Speaker 4 (38:38):
Wilson didn't smoke, and it's clear that the victim didn't smoke.
Speaker 2 (38:42):
Correct, it's either or a third party or a third party, yes,
So go ahead, Harriet, oh the cigarette.
Speaker 3 (38:51):
But I think we're all making that point. This would
definitely have DNA on it, so you know, and see
whose DNA is there is either Kim's or Wilson's or
Coleman's or somebody else's part. Yeah, yeah, and that well,
(39:15):
I get rid of that.
Speaker 4 (39:16):
That's going to.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
It could prove one way or another.
Speaker 4 (39:21):
The missing car that was in the driveway.
Speaker 5 (39:24):
Did weren't there any neighbors or anyone that saw who
came and went in that vehicle?
Speaker 4 (39:30):
And did I don't in that vehicle?
Speaker 2 (39:34):
Yes, And and that's something I don't know when we're
gonna hit it, but I'll talk talk about it now
since you brought that up. So basically, when mister Wilson
gets home at approximately two minutes to two and he
finds out that the taxi cab drivers on the wrong
side of town gets that re routed and shows up
at two or four pm or whatever it is to
pick mister Wilson up. Mister Wilson indicated when he got home,
(39:56):
he saw a vehicle parked in the driveway with a
car cover over the top of it, and Miss Kim's car,
her BMW, was gone, so that would suggest that somebody
came to Miss Kim's house, they got into her vehicle,
and they left, but he did not see her when
he entered the back door, which comes into his room directly.
He doesn't have to go through the house. He comes
into his into his room, he gathers his stuff up,
(40:19):
he leaves out the same door he came in, so
he never actually entered the main part of the house
to know whether or not Kim was home, but he
believed she wasn't because her car was not in the driveway.
Further testimony of Coleman indicates that when he gets home
at eight thirty at night that evening, which would have
been Saturday night at eight thirty pm. Now, mind you,
(40:40):
Wilson's he's being treated in a hospital right now for
the damage done to his hand by the taxi cab
driver in San Francisco, so he is not even home
when Coleman shows up. Coleman testifies when he got home
that the car, Miss Kim's BMW was in the driveway.
So now the only two people while Kim is alive
are purportedly alive because she may have been killed by
(41:01):
somebody else and not Coleman at all. We don't know this, right,
She gone yes, yes, And in the trial transcripts of
Coleman in the first in the first trial, Coleman indicates
that Miss Kim did not have a car cover, never
covered a car. You could look at the paint and
see that it's sun damaged. That she never covered a car.
(41:22):
And in the family and everybody else testified to the
fact that Miss Kim did not have a car cover.
So we definitely have a third person that is there
on that particular day in the presence of Miss Kim,
and her car is back by the time, so she's
I would think that we could naturally presume that when
Wilson got home and saw that car covered in the driveway,
(41:42):
which other people had seen, including the cab driver. So
the cab driver testified to the fact that when he
arrived that the car was covered in the driveway. So
now we know that it wasn't her BMW, but the
BMW was gone. Wilson is gone until two o'clock in
the morning before he finally makes it home, so it
wasn't like he manipulated anything. By covering her car to
(42:04):
make it look suspiciously like somebody else's or something, because
he wouldn't have been there in time to remove that
when the BMW was seen by Coleman at eight thirty pm.
That evening right, absolutely insane. So paris goof. Let's go
back to the public defender. He fails to argue significance adequately.
So he says, I've read and reviewed the points and
(42:26):
authorities and supported the admissibility of the third party culpability evidence,
and I can add to the list of physical items.
I presume, excuse me, this leaf is included in the
and I think this is coming from Miss Condren at
this point. She's wanting to include the leaf that is
stuck to Kim's buttocks. Miss Condron says, the leaf is
not included in the motion to exclude your honor because
(42:48):
the lead has other significance independent of third party culpability.
Independent of third party culpability. The court says, all right, So,
in other words, the people plan to introduce the leaf.
Misscondren absolutely, the Court all right, so that issue is
not before me. You understand that, mister Pariscue. Mister Pariscue says,
I assumed it was just the cigarette button sperm evidence
(43:10):
that was being excluded. The court, I am just reading
your moving papers, and it has quite a few statements
on this leaf. And mister Pariscue says, well, because I
think that's part and parcel of why the other items
are all important. In other words, when you put the
whole package of evidence together. The court says, all right,
I understand, mister Pariscu. I was trying to illustrate to
the court the significance. The court all right, I didn't
(43:33):
understand that issue. All right, you've read and reviewed the defendants.
Let's see the motion, Miss Condron, and the court is
actually asking Miss Condron if she's read it. Let's see,
Miss conduring. I have, indeed, and the Court let me
say that I do not believe that it's appropriate to
(43:54):
exclude it on the basis of time consumption. There's no
need to argue that if it's admissible, how long it
takes is totally irrelevant, and obviously the court will make
whatever time it takes to receive that evidence. That's not
the issue. The issue is whether or not it is
going to be confusing and therefore lead to issues that
the jury shouldn't be properly concerning itself with Now what
(44:17):
is your response, Miss Condrone? She says, yes, your honor,
and I have apparently some pages have fallen out of
my transcript because it popped open in the box. If
you'll just give me a moment. Oh, anyways, she says,
your honor, I need to respond briefly to some of
the factual assertions. First of all, the council argues, or
excuse me, council suggests that the evidence is that belief
(44:38):
suggests that she may have been disrobed and dressed during
the assault or before her death. In fact, the evidence
is uncontradicted that her shirt was removed after physical assault,
causing the blood evidence which we have. So there's really
no basis in any of the evidence for that assertion.
Now that doesn't make sense to me because who cares
about her shirt it's found on her butt?
Speaker 5 (45:00):
And also why is the leaf so much more important
than the sperm and the cigarette butt?
Speaker 2 (45:07):
Well, what they what they are trying to say is
that and I think it played into the DA's game
in regards to the leaf and how it ended up
attached to Miss Kim's body before or after as if
it slipped down her underwear and her pants while she
was struggling with these people, rather than her pants were
pulled down, underwear pulled down, a leaf stuck to the bottom,
(45:30):
then her pants and underwere pulled back up. So I
don't know where that goes to as far as the
transcripts are concerned, because I'm just getting to read. This
is like what the preliminary motions, the motions and lemonade
that they're discussing.
Speaker 3 (45:42):
Yeah, can I say something real quick, Yes, when I
hear stuff like that about leaves on the butt and
et cetera. To me, and I've done so many of
these types of cases, it's suggesting that something happened to
her out.
Speaker 2 (46:01):
Now she was and then no, no, no, no, no
no no. The leaf that was attached to her but
matches leaves that are found in the basement, So it's
just a lack of a cleanup. It's an old basement
with a bunch of junk in it, and it matches
the other leaves that are in the basement. So the
act and the crime happened in the basement, and and
so did the rape. And that's where that leaf was collected.
(46:23):
When her pants and underwear were pulled down and then
pulled back up. It even said that her her pants
and her underwear were torn, her shirt was torn. Well,
her shirt was removed and gone get in the basement,
and well it could be in a window.
Speaker 4 (46:42):
Indoors and off a tree. They tend to dry up.
Speaker 5 (46:44):
Rather quickly, right or whatever they crumple up.
Speaker 2 (46:50):
Yeah, I don't know. I did read some of the
evidence in regards to the leaves, and it stated, first off,
it was very interesting to note that the leaf found
on her buttocks was a match to other leaves found
in the basement. Then the DA sends out an investigator
to go back to the property, but long after it's
(47:11):
now owned by somebody else, and he takes two samples
of leaves, one of them from a tree on the property,
another one from a bush. But as he's taking that
sample from the bush, the owner actually says to him,
I planted that myself. That's not something you want to take.
But he took that anyways, and then tried to claim
that the leaf found on her butt had no match
(47:33):
to any leaves on the property, when a he only
took two types of leaves, when he didn't test all
the rest of the other trees and bushes around, and
he took leaves from something he was specifically told by
the new owner that she had planted, and it wouldn't
have been there or existed at the time of the murder.
Who does this? I don't understand what their game is
(47:53):
here or what they're trying to play with that do
the fact right well after this judgement, That's what I'm saying.
I'm not sure what their angle is for this. I
got one minute. I'm going to finish off this slide
real quick. But it says. It says. First of all,
(48:14):
the council argues, or excuse me, council suggests that the
evidence is that the leaf suggests that she may have
been disrobed and dressed during the assault on her or
before her death. In fact, the evidence is uncontradicted that
her shirt was removed after the physical assault, causing the
blood evidence which we have, so there's really no basis
in any of the evidence for that assertion. Second one,
which was the most concern to the people, which was
(48:36):
he says that further evidence circumstantial evidence of a third
party presence, if you will, and the court says that's
the key Miss Pondren says, right, the court says, that's
where I want you to focus. The court wants you
to focus on the third party culpability. But she's doing
everything she can to exclude any information that's going to
be helpful in that manner. So claims irrefutable evidence that
(48:57):
the shirt was removed after physical assault. But to hide
evidence rather than do to rape. I don't even know
how to take that. Taking her shirt to hide evidence
when there's a dead body seems rather stupid unless the
killer bled on her shirt, right, I mean, why why
take her shirt to conceal evidence when there's a dead
body laying there? You didn't take the major part of
(49:17):
the evidence, which is the dead body.
Speaker 3 (49:22):
So again, rush to judgment. They're trying to hurry up.
And that's what it is.
Speaker 2 (49:27):
She's doing everything she can to play a dirty game.
Here is all I see.
Speaker 3 (49:31):
So why.
Speaker 2 (49:34):
A third party is a number one defense to most
people who are arrested for a crime. If they didn't
do it, obviously, that means there's a third person and
that's your only defense. I didn't do it. Look at
the forensics. It's going to lead you to somebody else,
not to me.
Speaker 3 (49:50):
It's just adding up to there is the third party.
Speaker 4 (49:53):
But we are understand how you can exclude the sperm
and the cigarette.
Speaker 2 (49:58):
But I don't underst I don't understand any of it.
But this is it. You guys were at our fifty
minute mark here. I want to thank you guys. Will
pick this up next week and continue on with this
follow up because there's lots more to come. It gets
even better. Everybody, have a wonderful weekend and thank you
guys for being here.
Speaker 4 (50:14):
Okay, goodbye,
This program is designed to provide general information with regards
to the subject matters covered. This information is given with
the understanding that neither the hosts, guests, sponsors, or station
are engaged in rendering any specific and personal medical, financial,
legal counseling, professional service, or any advice.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
You should seek the services.
Speaker 1 (00:23):
Of competent professionals before applying or trying any suggested ideas.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
Good Morning, True Seekers and true crime junkies. Welcome back
to another episode of Hit the Roadjack Finding the Zodiac
to Welcome to the show today, Harriet Soousche, Good morning.
I felt like Caat, I felt like Kat and a
hat there and almost rhymed, let's welcome to the show today,
Harriet Soouche. Anyways, I know Nolan said he was going
(01:18):
to be here, although I did have a good conversation
with him yesterday in regards to the follow up we're
going to discuss so if no one comes in, we'll
we'll introduce him to the show. At that point, he
did say he'd be here, But I'm actually leaving off
on last week's follow up with the Tim Miller situation
and the Texas killing fields, so I wanted to kind
(01:40):
of just recap the docuseries that I saw with Tim
Miller in regards to the different suspects and victims, because
it actually yielded some good information. It helped to actually
take a couple of murders off the books. So I'm
just gonna briefly go through that, and then we're going
to climb right back into the follow up for the
Peter Wilson wrongful conviction because that got exponentially more interesting.
Speaker 3 (02:07):
For you too for that case.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Yay, okay, all right, well, so let me let me
get through this real quick, and then we're going to
hop right into that. So on the it's on Netflix,
and it's crime scene the Texas Killing Fields in Galveston,
Leed City, Dickinson and I forty five killer, So basically
on Calder Road on an oil field. As Harriet had stated,
(02:30):
I believe you said that you thought that that was
a former Phillip sixty six station.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
Yeah, yeah, that was a former Phillip sixty six pump
Jack station. So when I started coding that, I said,
once I saw that Jack has got some information, that's
what I will.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
See pump Jack. Hmm okay, yes. So so basically the
bodies were laid out under trees as if they were posed.
And that's something that we've talked a lot about in
regards to Black Dahlia, the Oakland County child killer cases,
like these bodies being out in the open and posed
in a certain manner. So this actually set them of
(03:13):
this particular killer for the killing fields. Aside from who
we're going to hear further in what they talk about
on this documentary. So one of the suspects was Clyde Hedrick,
and that is the one that Tim Miller actually sued
for a wrongful death, even though Clyde Hedrick had only
been associated with I think it was abuse of a corpse,
(03:34):
and that was in regards to Ellen Beeson. He supposedly
had gone to the bar and they'd hung out, and
then after that they went to go swimming, and of
course he says that he looks into the water and
there she is floating. He doesn't know what to do
with her. He picks her up, he's going to take
her to the hospital, but then he gets scared and
he ends up dumping her in a field underneath a
(03:56):
couch and some tires. So that is what ultimately gets
him in trouble. For that, I think that they did
actually exume that body and determine that there was a
blow to the head that could not have happened if
she had just dove in the water, so almost as
if to say that he had hit her with something.
But again we won't know the truth of any of that.
So the victims were in the Texas Killing Fields. The
(04:19):
victims were Heidiville real Fi and she went missing October
nineteen eighty three. Found April sixth, nineteen eighty four because
a dog had brought back a skull to its owner.
Victim number two, which is Jane Doe. We now actually
have names. I've been waiting all these years for names,
or for them to finally figure out who Jane Doe
and Janet Doe is from these series, and we have
(04:40):
their names now. So Jane Doe found nineteen eighty six
was they found a twenty two caliber bullet lodged in
her spine. Her name is Audrey Lee Cook and she's
thirty years of age. They did actually find a blue
plaid shirt, as I'd indicated before, that's probably missing. I
think that that's what it said. I've typed it up
as it's missing now, So this shirt used to exists,
(05:00):
but of course no DNA testing can be done on it,
because now that we have the technology, the shirt is gone.
Victim number three was Laura Miller. She went missing September
tenth of nineteen eighty four and found in nineteen eighty six,
basically right where Tim had been trying to coax everybody
to look for her. So here she is in the
Killing Fields. Victim number four is Janet Doe. She's the
(05:23):
second well found in nineteen ninety one. Her name is
Donna Prudehom and she was thirty four years of age.
Now by nineteen ninety one, Robert Abel owns and runs
a trail riding horse business, which I believe is Stardust
Trail Rides, and he owns two properties next to the
Killing Fields at this point, and he does eventually end up,
(05:44):
I think, buying that particular property. So he was responsible
for creating the Saturn Rocket because he worked for NASA,
as Harry stated, And by nineteen ninety one he owned
the Killing Fields, so he didn't technically own those in
the beginning, and that's what I discovered through the documentary.
Victim number five we thought was Laura Smithers. Now, of course,
(06:07):
she was dumped in a completely different location, not where
these other bodies were, and that's what kind of sat
her apart. She went missing on April third, nineteen ninety seven,
in Friendswood, Texas, and she was found near a waterway.
And that's why I had included her in this particular presentation,
because we know the zodiac had a lot of waterway associations. However,
(06:27):
we did actually find out that she is. Now it
has been claimed that where's his name? Bill Reese has
taken responsibility for Laura Smithers, Jessica Kaine, and Kelly Cox.
So these are three murders that I can remove from
the presentation, and I feel fairly secure in doing so
because it isn't just a confession where some of these
(06:48):
individuals will confess to things they didn't do. He actually
was on I think he was looking at the death
penalty for another murder, and it turned out that he
was offered to take the death penalty off the table
if he showed them where the bodies were to these
other victims, and he then did so. He showed them
where Laura's Smothers was and where Jessica Kaine was and
(07:11):
Kelly Coxy accepted responsibility for these murders. So that's kind
of an update here on those. Even though they're much later,
they're in the nineties. Again, that's what sets them apart
from the killing fields. The killing fields were in the eighties.
I really kind of now pay a lot of attention
to this finale letter, the two thousand and five one,
because it specifically said there was other people killing in
(07:33):
the eighties. It wasn't definitely. Now we're actually seeing yeah,
now we're actually seeing proof that there were other killers
operating at the same time. But they weren't dumping in
the same manner. They were hiding the bodies just like
Clyde Hedgerock did so our killer. I believe for these three,
the Heidiville Real, well, actually it's four, so it's the
(07:56):
two Jane and Janet Doe, Laura Miller, and Villa Real
five were all actually dumped in the killing fields, whereas
everybody else was in different locations. But around that area.
Let's see, there was a push to get fingerprints. And
one of the things I did notice is that they
stated at this time when they found Laura Smithers, is
(08:17):
that it created a huge push for the school systems,
and for everybody to take DNA samples and swabs. I
remember this, like vaguely remember this back in the late nineties,
the big push to get your children's finger prants, to
get a DNA swab, to have all of these things
on hand in case something happened to them, you could
provide that git to law enforcement in hopes to find them.
(08:38):
So there was a huge push for that. The murders
then take off again in nineteen ninety seven. I really
thought that this was a shoe in for Jack, because
we know Jack returned in nineteen ninety seven. I believe
that's when his mom died Floa or he had gone
back to start taking care of her again ninety six hish,
ninety seven ish before she passed away, So he was
actually back in Texas. And there may be some there
(09:00):
that we're going to talk about that he can be held,
you know, or the proximity says that it's possible that
he is the killer of those individuals and we'll get
to them at that time. It looks like Tim Miller
also he started with Clyde Hedrick as a suspect, and
then he moved on to Robert Abel and evidently he
was pounding the crap out of at least mentally pounding
(09:21):
the crap out of Robert Abel and he ends up,
actually Robert Abel ends up having to file a restraining
order against Tim Miller to leave him alone. He's not
the killer, He's not I'm not who you're looking for.
And at some point in time, Tim Miller actually apologizes
to Robert Abel. I believe this is in two thousand
and five. I believe. I'm not sure if it's before
(09:42):
or after. I would love to talk to Tim in
regards to some of this, but he hasn't responded as
whether or not that letter for the finale letter in
two thousand and five came in before or after his
apology to Robert Abel, and maybe after. And that's why
he apologized, because the letter now coming from the suspect
or killer of his daughter, is indicating that Robert abeles
(10:05):
not the devil, that the blue sid you know, Blue Fuzz,
is looking for kind of thing. So let's see here.
Speaker 3 (10:14):
And that we could get some more when I start,
when I send you some of this stuff, then you'll
understand a little bit more about how the evidence is
telling the story. Yeah, I got eighty six. The names
that you're saying were determined later. They apparently the government
people already knew who was.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
There who Jane and Jeda done, Oh yeah, what you're saying, Okay, okay.
Speaker 3 (10:39):
Yeah, I'll send that to you because I don't want
to confuse the listeners. I've already got gotcha, So let's
just move, you know, guys, I don't want to because
you're bringing up so much pertinent information here and this
this is how you do this, right when you line
out everything and then go and start for me, it's
(11:01):
going to start decoding right well.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
In Mayam nineteen ninety seven is when all of this
kind of came together. Sandra S. Paul was abducted by knife.
Her car was acting up after a strange as she
ran after she ran into a strange man at a
convenience store, and all of that sounded very zodiac like, right,
you know, manipulation of the car, the convenience store, all
of these things seemed to run in tandem. So it
(11:25):
was it was it was purposeful that they made the
actual presentation. And so at any at any point, I
guess that he says, you've got a flat tire, Can
I help you. So again, we know that the Kathleen
John's situation was a tire that had been loosened. The
wheel had been loosened from the car, so she was
(11:45):
actually put into this guy's truck, jumped out, and on
October sixteenth of nineteen ninety seven, she identifies Bill Reese. So,
now Bill Reese is the one I said that he
had got off of the death penalty by showing them
where the bodies were of Laura Smithers, Jessica Kane, and
Kelly Cox. Now I'm not sure he actually showed him
where Kelly Cox was or just accepting culpability for it,
(12:06):
but he did show him where Lauris Smithers and Jessica
Kaine was. Now Bill also leads PD to her body
in exchange for death penalty. In an unrelated murder case,
police view views something like sixty two hundred pictures belonging
to Abel, so they've literally done a search on him
quite like they did with Arthur Lee Allen and found
(12:27):
nothing in all of his messes stuff. They and one
of the guys commented that he had looked through sixty
two hundred pictures and nothing showed anything. Nefarius on Robert
Abel's end in.
Speaker 3 (12:39):
Two anyways, keep going.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
I know, I know, I know, I'm just putting out
I'm not saying that the media is always correct and
what they're saying. This is just what the media is
leading us to believe at this point.
Speaker 3 (12:53):
That he then even trying to get help. Robert Abel
is so that's why he's allowing all this to happen,
you know, And in hindsight when I see this, he's
allowing all this to happen, like please rest me, stop me.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
No, he's actually he's trying to help them, and of course.
Speaker 3 (13:10):
Exactly and inviting himself out there.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
But not everybody who offers to help is somebody that's
a killer. There are good people out there that can
take an interest. I saw the investigative reporter on this
Texas killing fields. She kept clippings, she followed everything, she
ran around injecting herself into the case. Nobody called her
a murderer. So that's what I'm saying. People can't keep
using the fact that just because he assisted gave his
(13:35):
courses and gave him, you know, freedom to his property,
to say that that makes him a killer. I really
just don't honestly believe yes, some do inject themselves into
the case so that they can follow what's going on.
There are people who do that have no relation to
the murder whatsoever. Ooh, let's welcome Nolan to the show.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Hello, Nolan, I see the site.
Speaker 4 (13:57):
Good morning everybody, sir.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
That's okay. We're we're just finishing up with the killing
fields and then we're going to hop over to the
follow up on Peter Wilson. So basically, in two thousand
and five, Tim Miller apologizes to Able and then and
then Able for whatever reason, purportedly commits either suicide or
his or his quad breaks down on the train tracks
and he is hit by a training killed. So again
(14:22):
we're not sure was that self homicide or was that
just mechanical failure? Right right, I mean, there's got to
be something going on there, would let mine? Yeah, Carols,
it is fluffy. It is rather fluffy. So in July
(14:45):
nineteen to two thousand and five is when the accident
happens with Robert Abel and by September two thousand and
five the finale letter. I think I just answered that myself. Now,
So the apology was given obviously in two thousand and five,
but previous to him dying, and then September two thousand
and five is when the finale letter comes. It ruled
out Clyde Hedrick as a possible author. Okay, so I'm
(15:07):
sorry Clyde Hedrick. At one point in time, Tim Miller
had a private investigator, I believe his name was Bill Young,
who came out and visited and spent a couple days
with me going over the presentation that I have on
the Zodiac versus Tim Miller's letter. And then he asked
me to do a handwriting analysis of Clyde Hedrick's handwriting,
(15:29):
and that was provided by Clyde's ex wife, So I
did have access to look at Clyde's handwriting and I
could rule Clyde out as the Zodiac. And I think
that once I made the connections between the two thousand
and five finale letter and the Zodiac, that's when Tim
started trying to figure out if he could put Clyde
Hedrick here in California, which I don't know that he
(15:49):
ultimately could by any means. But after doing the handwriting,
I know that I can rule Clyde out as the
possible author of the Zodiac letters. But you cannot rule
out Zodiac wrote Tim tim Finale letter, which I honestly
believed that he really did. There was also Triple X
I'm gonna call it Triple X videos or DVDs. Found
that Laura Miller's Laura Miller's makeshift grave in the Killing Fields,
(16:12):
and I found similar similar DVDs. At least I thought
somebody actually brought to my attention that I'm we might
have been sitting on CDs, not DVDs, and that's why
we couldn't get them to play in the computer. We
would have had to have put them. Yeah, So, and
I am now I'm upset because I never tried playing
it as a CD. But it could be very likely
(16:32):
that that's what we were sitting on and it may
have had information on it that we could have used
to some degree.
Speaker 3 (16:39):
I still have Denis the stuff that I ended up
getting back, you know, twice. I'm gonna have to look
in that again, see what I can find with the
with the CDs or DVDs, because I'm wondering if that's
there or some of the files that I know Dennis
said shared with me. So I'm gonna just look, okay, because.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
Yeah, I know that Dennis how died.
Speaker 3 (17:03):
I know.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
We tried to run it through a couple of different
computers at mynmals. He tried running it too, and we
couldn't get anything to play. So that is a valid
Either our technology had surpassed that particular CD DVD or
we were literally sitting on something that was just a
vocal recording. It was just audio, it wasn't actually a video.
Who knows. I know that till Miller turned his over
(17:25):
with the letter I believe to law enforcement a League
City PD, and all of that stuff has gone missing.
So let's la. Yeah. Uh now I'm going to go
in here and I'm going to stop this share and share.
Our next screen is that share.
Speaker 3 (17:47):
Share hello again, just in case I went off the
screen for a second.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
Right, I need it up for myself. There we go,
and let's go with that one. Wooooo all right. It
is a whole lot of information.
Speaker 4 (18:06):
Boy.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
I got two packages from mister Wilson in regards to
his face, and everything just got extremely more interesting. And
I'm thinking to myself, like, what is going on in
our world that people can get away with this? Anyways,
we have identified him as Peter E. Wilson. I've just
asked him for his middle name to find out what
his middle name is. It could very well be I'm
(18:27):
in lau right. I mean, we'll see how it comes out.
But he was thirty one years of age in nineteen
ninety six, from what I could tell he was working.
He was working for hospitals as a laboratory assisted while
going to Stanford University. His date of birth nine thirty,
nineteen sixty four, he claims, And I asked him specifically
(18:48):
about the different name changes and the legal name change
and the different birthdates that were being produced in the media,
because I thought maybe the media had been the ones
to get that wrong. But it turns out that he
said that claims. He claims that Officer, you're intentionally fabricated
half a dozen stories using different names and birthdates. You're
claim that the County Jail used an old computer system
(19:08):
that would not accept changes, so the birthdate was entered
incorrectly to reflect nineteen fifty four, and because the system
did not accept changes, that that placed his birth date
as nineteen fifty four and could not be changed at
that point in one of the what's that That.
Speaker 4 (19:27):
Doesn't sound right?
Speaker 2 (19:29):
No, but you've got a police officer who's telling the
courts that the courts don't know the difference, right, they
don't know what's going on in the police department. He
could say anything he wanted, but yeah, he tried to
say that it accidentally got entered incorrectly and now it
can't be changed because the system doesn't allow for changes.
That makes no sense at all to me.
Speaker 4 (19:47):
Right, You would think you could update all the.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Time, right, right. So basically, one of the interviews that
I saw by the private investigator was a friend of
Wilson's name Claude. I actually saw too, a Sharif and
a Claude. Both of these individuals lived at the previous house.
They rented rooms in a previous house to Hawk Duke
(20:10):
Kim's house, but kept in contact with each other even afterwards,
so they would still hang out, get together for food,
and they were still good friends even after they've parted
ways or good acquaintances as one would have put it.
And one of those friends, Claude, had indicated that he
believes that Wilson is from Canada, or at least that
was the perception. So we don't have him coming from
(20:32):
a foreign country, as you know suggested, which would now
make sense as to why he claims a race as
being white. Now, William MOREL. Coleman is not black per Coleman,
per Wilson, but didn't look white either, even though the
police report indicates that he was a white male and
it's any Wilson said he could be any other race,
(20:53):
but he was approximately fifty five years of age. His
background was a former dishwasher at Messluno in Mountaine, California,
and he rented a room from Kim for four hundred
and fifty dollars a month. They did take a rape kit,
blood and DNA from Coleman. It was tested and after
testing it for whatever reason Lynda Ruth Condron filed a
(21:14):
motion in court to exclude the evidence of finding semen
and sperm on Kim and withheld the test results of
the DNA testing on the specimen and the sperm from
the defense, as well as the as the test results
on Coleman, which just make absolutely no sense. I mean,
we should be quitting. That's an ethical, completely onethough call.
(21:35):
I mean, your whole job is to present a good case,
not a what you want to case. And it appears
as though she was looking to remove the thought or
idea from the jury altogether that there could be a
third party involved with this. And I just don't even
see on the evidence that they have how they could
have came to a conclusion that Wilson was guilty, because
(21:57):
none of it is really making sense after going back
to that, and I'm going to show you, guys how.
So Coleman denied saying Kim had been dead for four
to five hours on the nine to one to one
call until the tape was played. Then he lied several
times about why he said that. So I found that interesting.
I have read his transcripts. It is in here. I
will flash through them so that you can pause your
(22:18):
video as we go through in lieu of trying to
read all twenty eight pages. But you will find that
the testimony from Coleman didn't really it didn't really insinuate
at all that Wilson was the killer. All it really
insinuated was that he knocked on my door once and
said he found Kim. But Coleman was home before Wilson was.
(22:42):
So Wilson comes home, finds her, tries to get Coleman's attention.
Coleman isn't answering the door Wilson basically barges in and
opens the door up and there's Coleman standing fully dressed shoes, pants, shirt,
sweatshirt in a house where he's not allowed to wear shoes.
Got to remember, she's Asian. There's no shoes allowed in
the house. But he's standing in his bedroom fully dressed
with shoes on, after what he claimed was one single
(23:05):
knock with no words from Coleman or from Wilson. Sorry,
so that gets even more interesting. Uh?
Speaker 4 (23:14):
Yes, why is Coleman on ankle bracelet?
Speaker 2 (23:18):
I think that he went on an ankle bracelet in
order to track him while the trial or while the
investigation was going on.
Speaker 4 (23:26):
So evidently he still was kind of a suspect then.
Speaker 2 (23:29):
I think so. And I think when they lost that
opportunity when he cut that bracelet and ran off to Mexico,
that they now lost their other alternative. They needed to
pend it on somebody. Basically, yeah, they don't have the
other suspect. Yeah, it would be interesting.
Speaker 5 (23:46):
McNab's wife killed herself in Florida. They had to pin
it on someone, so they pinned on Sarah.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
Gutra, gotcha. Yeah, they're they're looking for somebody to settle
that case out on either way. I mean, it doesn't
scream justice, it doesn't scream the truth to manipulate things
to get that case to have an end resolve that
you that you want versus the truth.
Speaker 3 (24:10):
To interject at this point, if you like, go for it. Okay,
you ask me to just try to do my thing
like I would do, and no offense. Pretend you're Dennis,
and then entered the names that I do and try
to see what I come up with. I kept on
coming up with William Morrow as in a company, a
(24:33):
publisher company that ends up being bought by the first
people in eighty and I sorry, nineteen eighty one. I
got eighteen eighty one in my head. Long story, but anyways,
in nineteen eighty one and so I said, okay, why
is this coming up over and over and over again
when I'm trying to do my searches. Then I find
(24:53):
out that they had a zodiac Arthur trying to get
their versions of who the zodiac is is around when
Dennis and you and I are on line trying to
get their books sold. So I said, this is weird. Okay,
I'm trying to remember who the author is. So let's
just get past that. I said, Okay, I think I'm
(25:15):
seeing something that there's you know, just like this guy
officer your has been on TV numerous times for being
wrong and you know, doing shows on cases from that area.
I've seen them. So anyways, now the other update is,
since the place of Canada is brought up and Wilson
(25:40):
thinks something about the guy the friend to Canada, I put.
Speaker 2 (25:44):
Now, Wilson Wilson is from Canada. Yes, he believes Wilson
is from Canada.
Speaker 3 (25:51):
Okay, that's what I came up with. Okay, my apologies
to the families. But there is a William I'm sorry,
William Coleman who's who had who had been in Canada,
was living in Canada but was also having something now
in the United States. And his wife is with a
(26:13):
very Korean sounding name. But both of than my believer,
are now deceased.
Speaker 2 (26:18):
No, no, no, Wilson Wilson is from Canada, not Coleman.
I have no knowledge where Coleman comes from.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
Okay Coleman, Okay, So, so Wilson is supposed to be
from Canada.
Speaker 2 (26:34):
Yes, and that was based on an interview that a
private investigator had with his friend Claude because it was
years This was actually years after I want to say,
this might even have been on the second trial that
this investigator actually got involved and spoke to him. And
Claude had no idea. He hadn't talked to Wilson in
a very long time and had no idea that he
was up on murder charges. But both Claude and Sharif said,
(26:57):
there's absolutely no way he could kill somebody. He's like
very docile, very amiable. He's very nice, quiet individual that
doesn't get angry about pretty much anything. And that's quite
the opposite of Hawk Jew Kim, who we here, you know,
is jumping on the sides of truck and screaming at men.
Speaker 5 (27:18):
Okay, Wilson thirty one, but he was still in school.
Was he a graduate student?
Speaker 2 (27:25):
I did. I haven't asked that question. I just know
that he was. He might have been finishing up whatever
his studies were at that point in time, or maybe
he went to college late in the day, late in
the game. I have no idea.
Speaker 5 (27:36):
Yeah, that's pretty young, I mean old for a Stanford student.
Most people that go to Stanford go there right out
of high school and graduate within four or five years.
Speaker 2 (27:47):
Well, most people, but that doesn't mean all people. I
mean I went back to college at thirty five. Not everybody.
Not everybody plays the socialistic game of school before going
and getting their careers. But all right, So Officer Yorge
told the prosecutor that Coleman fled the country, that he
(28:08):
cut off his ankle bracelet and fled to Mexico. And
again I'm not sure that maybe another follow up question
that I need to ask if that was just pertaining
to the investigation and they wanted to be able to
track him, or if he was on parole or had
some other type of arrests that required him to wear
a bracelet. Wilson's court appointed attorney, Gregory Parisco, retired in
(28:32):
two thousand and Mister Wilson claims that he was ineffective because,
number one, he failed to present expert testimony on the
forensics in Wilson's behalf by hiring independent pathologists instead relying
on cross examination of the prosecutor's witnesses. So he did
no favors to his client because he didn't have any
independent testing done to refute what it was that the
(28:55):
DA came up with. It says that Kim's nude body
should have been and the central point of examination and
investigation for a proper defense. Kim, a fifty nine year
old divorced for twenty years, never dated. A man found
half naked close an underclose torn seminal fluid on her
upper thighsand sperm in a vagina, was killed and raped,
(29:15):
and Paris gu refused to petition the court to test
the untested rape kit, which would have yielded the male DNA.
So there's his second failure. He should have petitioned the
court to have that DNA ran. Yes, that's crazy, I know,
I'm trying.
Speaker 4 (29:32):
To tell of the prosecution or lame.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
Think you? And number three, he failed to investigate the
state's blood evidence and have an independent testing of the
DNA collected from Wilson in the DNA from the crime scene,
which would have yielded the degradation levels of the DNA
to show it was from a single source, that it
was taken from a vile and planted at the scene,
which is something that he later found out through independent
(30:00):
on his own by sending the results both of his
Because of course, the DA ran these profiles and found
that it was a match, but failed to even mention
I'm assuming they're forensic experts, failed to even mentioned that
the degradation was identical, and this wasn't something that mister
Wilson found out until I want to say, twenty seventeen
(30:20):
or twenty eighteen that it was actually identical, and that's impossible,
all right, exclusion of the raate kid. I do want
to read some of the trial transcripts from the exclusionary
stuff that Linda Condrin or the DA because I find
this stuff absolutely astonishing. So it starts out, Miss Condrin, Yes,
your honor, the people's first motion pertains to the exclusion
(30:43):
of evidence relating to a swab and the finding of
a single sperm on the body of the victim. We're
moving to exclude this evidence because it's irrelevant. It's what,
it's what the right through that I said no, And
it gets it gets interesting because I've got the court's
response as well. It says it doesn't tend to prove
(31:06):
any matter in issue in this trial, or to even
make any matter more or less likely. The reason I
suggest this is for the following the evidence will be
and this is by way of offer of proof that
the sperm could be from the defendant or any other
person on the planet. Listen, right, just in case, right, well,
(31:29):
presumably male person on the planet. That it could also
be the result of contamination. What are people just walking
around fleeing sperm and seamen everywhere?
Speaker 4 (31:40):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (31:40):
Come on, I am absolutely floored reading this. There is
no evidence of sexual assault in this case, okay, okay,
and that the lack of other sperm, the lack of
other sperm, that this sperm could have been deposited before
the assault which led to the victim's death, that is
(32:01):
by a day or more. And there's no logical nexus
at all which connects this to the murder in this case,
or that suggests that someone other than the defendant apposited
the sperm and was the killer. So why didn't you
test it?
Speaker 4 (32:14):
That would admitted.
Speaker 2 (32:17):
You'd want it admitted? Yeah, I didn't match your suspect.
Speaker 4 (32:20):
Say it's going to be to help your case exactly.
Speaker 2 (32:25):
It says, if relevant at all, the relevance is absolutely
minimal and under three fifty two exclusion would be ooh,
what's a three fifty two exclusion? Because I just told
you about the article that I found. She did the
exclusionary rule or some Okay, I'm going to come back
to that. I'm glad I decided.
Speaker 4 (32:43):
Exclusion rules in regard to a serge.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
Okay, yes, yeah, this is.
Speaker 5 (32:50):
The exclusion in its dictionary, meaning not under the legal
exclusionary rule meaning gotcha. Okay, yeah, But so she she's
normally his defense that tries to exclude evidence, but she's
a ross theater trying to exclude evidence which intend to
incriminate the incrimination either way. Yeah, but she doesn't want
(33:18):
it in because it is potentially exculpatory, and that's why
she doesn't want it in.
Speaker 4 (33:22):
So what's the how does the judges one?
Speaker 2 (33:24):
Well, it says and this is what she says, if
relevant at all, The relevance is absolutely minimal, and under
three fifty two, exclusion would be appropriate because it would
lead to true confusion and diverting the attention of the
jury and exorbitant consumption of time. It's going to take
too much time to tell the truth.
Speaker 5 (33:44):
I can't believe she's thrown that. That's a it's a
really weak argument.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
It's not even an arguments.
Speaker 4 (33:52):
It would probably be the Califuary Evidence Code.
Speaker 2 (33:55):
Gotcha. Well, so the court's response is defense position mister Masco. Well,
I don't think it is an exorbitant amount of time,
but I would like to have the opportunity to defer
this till until Wednesday. So that's the only objection that
this public defender makes. I'd like to reserve the thought
on that until Wednesday. This is what the court orders.
(34:17):
So I go to page seven and the exclusion of
the evidence of the sperm that will be deferred. Now
the second one is motion for the jury to view it.
That's been granted. Wow, I don't even know what to say.
I like you, and he actually the judge goes on
at one point to say that this isn't a matter
(34:39):
of time. I have all the time in the world
to hear the proper evidence on this case. So if
your argument is time, that's not valid, he says in
one of his in one of the transcripts. But that's
her argument is a it's going to it's going to
divert the attention of the jury, it's going to take
too much time, and it's going to be confusing. What
I don't even get it. I I can't put words
(35:01):
to this right now. I'm just feeling like this is
probably one of the most corrupt individuals I've ever met
in my entire life, well, not even met the.
Speaker 4 (35:07):
Judge on it. This is that's the defensive jury.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
Or both exactly. Somebody should have said, my client has
rights to know. These things should be known. Now this
is too because the.
Speaker 4 (35:22):
Judge, he doesn't want to get over jured on appeal.
Speaker 2 (35:25):
Right, But if everybody's got it locked up, if it
lock it, stuff it in your pocket.
Speaker 5 (35:31):
That's why I want to know if there was an
actual appeal, because that's that's an appealable issue right there.
The decision to not let the jury see that evidence,
that's red flag.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
I think that the inclusion and maybe in the nineteen
ninety eight trial they did talk about a third party
culpability is what caused the hung jury. So now she's
just trying to avoid another hung jury by saying, let's
not confuse them. That's not confusing them. That was half
the people believing that he was innocent in the first
trial hungurie. Right. That means that they all couldn't agree, right.
Speaker 5 (36:06):
It doesn't. It doesn't have to be half. It could
be just one jerk. But unless we actually saw the
verdict or you know, the.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
Vote, how would I go about looking up.
Speaker 4 (36:19):
This series refuse to convict.
Speaker 2 (36:24):
Would or should these files be made be available public
this trial, these proceedings.
Speaker 4 (36:30):
Yeah, the transcript should be of the trial.
Speaker 2 (36:32):
Yeah, you just have to obviously pay for them and
get them to go find them for you. Right. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (36:38):
Reporter is one department we do. The department.
Speaker 2 (36:41):
I have the court reporter's name at the bottom of
all these transcripts.
Speaker 4 (36:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 5 (36:45):
So the question is that person still alive and still
working as a court reporter if they're archived to so
these must.
Speaker 2 (36:56):
They have to keep it until all until all options
for trial are done. They have to keep all these files,
right yeah, Okay, So this now, this is the next
exclusion being done by the District Attorney's office. And it's
a cigarette that's found a cigarette butt that's found in
the basement near Kim's body. Now, I have just reached
(37:18):
out to mister Wilson to find out if anybody in
the house smoked. I wouldn't be shocked if he came
back and said Coleman did. But obviously for that cigarette
to be mentioned, that means that it wasn't Hawkdow Kim
that was smoking, and they her family probably would have
testified that she didn't. But this is excluded once again
because it may possibly prove third party involvement. So the
(37:40):
court says, next issue, Miss Condron, your honor, there is
evidence that there is a cigarette butt found in the cellar.
It has no probative value. I don't know if counsel
intends to introduce it, but it is the people's motion
to exclude this evidence. God, I'm I'm I'm yeah, I'm
totally beside myself. Miss Condron says, exclude evidence of a cigarette.
(38:01):
But that was found in the cellar of the home.
That's the area where the victim's body was found. And
mister Pariscu says, well, I think it's relevant, and again
I think it's connected to the sperm thing. I mean,
there's evidence of potential third party involvement, whether there is
evidence of culpability of some other person who maybe have
been responsible, And I think we can take it all
up on discussion on Wednesday. Did he not come yes?
(38:25):
Did he not come to court prepared like.
Speaker 4 (38:32):
Excluded and it's clear the victim.
Speaker 2 (38:35):
Correct say that again. No, it's clear that.
Speaker 4 (38:38):
Wilson didn't smoke, and it's clear that the victim didn't smoke.
Speaker 2 (38:42):
Correct, it's either or a third party or a third party, yes,
So go ahead, Harriet, oh the cigarette.
Speaker 3 (38:51):
But I think we're all making that point. This would
definitely have DNA on it, so you know, and see
whose DNA is there is either Kim's or Wilson's or
Coleman's or somebody else's part. Yeah, yeah, and that well,
(39:15):
I get rid of that.
Speaker 4 (39:16):
That's going to.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
It could prove one way or another.
Speaker 4 (39:21):
The missing car that was in the driveway.
Speaker 5 (39:24):
Did weren't there any neighbors or anyone that saw who
came and went in that vehicle?
Speaker 4 (39:30):
And did I don't in that vehicle?
Speaker 2 (39:34):
Yes, And and that's something I don't know when we're
gonna hit it, but I'll talk talk about it now
since you brought that up. So basically, when mister Wilson
gets home at approximately two minutes to two and he
finds out that the taxi cab drivers on the wrong
side of town gets that re routed and shows up
at two or four pm or whatever it is to
pick mister Wilson up. Mister Wilson indicated when he got home,
(39:56):
he saw a vehicle parked in the driveway with a
car cover over the top of it, and Miss Kim's car,
her BMW, was gone, so that would suggest that somebody
came to Miss Kim's house, they got into her vehicle,
and they left, but he did not see her when
he entered the back door, which comes into his room directly.
He doesn't have to go through the house. He comes
into his into his room, he gathers his stuff up,
(40:19):
he leaves out the same door he came in, so
he never actually entered the main part of the house
to know whether or not Kim was home, but he
believed she wasn't because her car was not in the driveway.
Further testimony of Coleman indicates that when he gets home
at eight thirty at night that evening, which would have
been Saturday night at eight thirty pm. Now, mind you,
(40:40):
Wilson's he's being treated in a hospital right now for
the damage done to his hand by the taxi cab
driver in San Francisco, so he is not even home
when Coleman shows up. Coleman testifies when he got home
that the car, Miss Kim's BMW was in the driveway.
So now the only two people while Kim is alive
are purportedly alive because she may have been killed by
(41:01):
somebody else and not Coleman at all. We don't know this, right,
She gone yes, yes, And in the trial transcripts of
Coleman in the first in the first trial, Coleman indicates
that Miss Kim did not have a car cover, never
covered a car. You could look at the paint and
see that it's sun damaged. That she never covered a car.
(41:22):
And in the family and everybody else testified to the
fact that Miss Kim did not have a car cover.
So we definitely have a third person that is there
on that particular day in the presence of Miss Kim,
and her car is back by the time, so she's
I would think that we could naturally presume that when
Wilson got home and saw that car covered in the driveway,
(41:42):
which other people had seen, including the cab driver. So
the cab driver testified to the fact that when he
arrived that the car was covered in the driveway. So
now we know that it wasn't her BMW, but the
BMW was gone. Wilson is gone until two o'clock in
the morning before he finally makes it home, so it
wasn't like he manipulated anything. By covering her car to
(42:04):
make it look suspiciously like somebody else's or something, because
he wouldn't have been there in time to remove that
when the BMW was seen by Coleman at eight thirty pm.
That evening right, absolutely insane. So paris goof. Let's go
back to the public defender. He fails to argue significance adequately.
So he says, I've read and reviewed the points and
(42:26):
authorities and supported the admissibility of the third party culpability evidence,
and I can add to the list of physical items.
I presume, excuse me, this leaf is included in the
and I think this is coming from Miss Condren at
this point. She's wanting to include the leaf that is
stuck to Kim's buttocks. Miss Condron says, the leaf is
not included in the motion to exclude your honor because
(42:48):
the lead has other significance independent of third party culpability.
Independent of third party culpability. The court says, all right, So,
in other words, the people plan to introduce the leaf.
Misscondren absolutely, the Court all right, so that issue is
not before me. You understand that, mister Pariscue. Mister Pariscue says,
I assumed it was just the cigarette button sperm evidence
(43:10):
that was being excluded. The court, I am just reading
your moving papers, and it has quite a few statements
on this leaf. And mister Pariscue says, well, because I
think that's part and parcel of why the other items
are all important. In other words, when you put the
whole package of evidence together. The court says, all right,
I understand, mister Pariscu. I was trying to illustrate to
the court the significance. The court all right, I didn't
(43:33):
understand that issue. All right, you've read and reviewed the defendants.
Let's see the motion, Miss Condron, and the court is
actually asking Miss Condron if she's read it. Let's see,
Miss conduring. I have, indeed, and the Court let me
say that I do not believe that it's appropriate to
(43:54):
exclude it on the basis of time consumption. There's no
need to argue that if it's admissible, how long it
takes is totally irrelevant, and obviously the court will make
whatever time it takes to receive that evidence. That's not
the issue. The issue is whether or not it is
going to be confusing and therefore lead to issues that
the jury shouldn't be properly concerning itself with Now what
(44:17):
is your response, Miss Condrone? She says, yes, your honor,
and I have apparently some pages have fallen out of
my transcript because it popped open in the box. If
you'll just give me a moment. Oh, anyways, she says,
your honor, I need to respond briefly to some of
the factual assertions. First of all, the council argues, or
excuse me, council suggests that the evidence is that belief
(44:38):
suggests that she may have been disrobed and dressed during
the assault or before her death. In fact, the evidence
is uncontradicted that her shirt was removed after physical assault,
causing the blood evidence which we have. So there's really
no basis in any of the evidence for that assertion.
Now that doesn't make sense to me because who cares
about her shirt it's found on her butt?
Speaker 5 (45:00):
And also why is the leaf so much more important
than the sperm and the cigarette butt?
Speaker 2 (45:07):
Well, what they what they are trying to say is
that and I think it played into the DA's game
in regards to the leaf and how it ended up
attached to Miss Kim's body before or after as if
it slipped down her underwear and her pants while she
was struggling with these people, rather than her pants were
pulled down, underwear pulled down, a leaf stuck to the bottom,
(45:30):
then her pants and underwere pulled back up. So I
don't know where that goes to as far as the
transcripts are concerned, because I'm just getting to read. This
is like what the preliminary motions, the motions and lemonade
that they're discussing.
Speaker 3 (45:42):
Yeah, can I say something real quick, Yes, when I
hear stuff like that about leaves on the butt and
et cetera. To me, and I've done so many of
these types of cases, it's suggesting that something happened to
her out.
Speaker 2 (46:01):
Now she was and then no, no, no, no, no
no no. The leaf that was attached to her but
matches leaves that are found in the basement, So it's
just a lack of a cleanup. It's an old basement
with a bunch of junk in it, and it matches
the other leaves that are in the basement. So the
act and the crime happened in the basement, and and
so did the rape. And that's where that leaf was collected.
(46:23):
When her pants and underwear were pulled down and then
pulled back up. It even said that her her pants
and her underwear were torn, her shirt was torn. Well,
her shirt was removed and gone get in the basement,
and well it could be in a window.
Speaker 4 (46:42):
Indoors and off a tree. They tend to dry up.
Speaker 5 (46:44):
Rather quickly, right or whatever they crumple up.
Speaker 2 (46:50):
Yeah, I don't know. I did read some of the
evidence in regards to the leaves, and it stated, first off,
it was very interesting to note that the leaf found
on her buttocks was a match to other leaves found
in the basement. Then the DA sends out an investigator
to go back to the property, but long after it's
(47:11):
now owned by somebody else, and he takes two samples
of leaves, one of them from a tree on the property,
another one from a bush. But as he's taking that
sample from the bush, the owner actually says to him,
I planted that myself. That's not something you want to take.
But he took that anyways, and then tried to claim
that the leaf found on her butt had no match
(47:33):
to any leaves on the property, when a he only
took two types of leaves, when he didn't test all
the rest of the other trees and bushes around, and
he took leaves from something he was specifically told by
the new owner that she had planted, and it wouldn't
have been there or existed at the time of the murder.
Who does this? I don't understand what their game is
(47:53):
here or what they're trying to play with that do
the fact right well after this judgement, That's what I'm saying.
I'm not sure what their angle is for this. I
got one minute. I'm going to finish off this slide
real quick. But it says. It says. First of all,
(48:14):
the council argues, or excuse me, council suggests that the
evidence is that the leaf suggests that she may have
been disrobed and dressed during the assault on her or
before her death. In fact, the evidence is uncontradicted that
her shirt was removed after the physical assault, causing the
blood evidence which we have, so there's really no basis
in any of the evidence for that assertion. Second one,
which was the most concern to the people, which was
(48:36):
he says that further evidence circumstantial evidence of a third
party presence, if you will, and the court says that's
the key Miss Pondren says, right, the court says, that's
where I want you to focus. The court wants you
to focus on the third party culpability. But she's doing
everything she can to exclude any information that's going to
be helpful in that manner. So claims irrefutable evidence that
(48:57):
the shirt was removed after physical assault. But to hide
evidence rather than do to rape. I don't even know
how to take that. Taking her shirt to hide evidence
when there's a dead body seems rather stupid unless the
killer bled on her shirt, right, I mean, why why
take her shirt to conceal evidence when there's a dead
body laying there? You didn't take the major part of
(49:17):
the evidence, which is the dead body.
Speaker 3 (49:22):
So again, rush to judgment. They're trying to hurry up.
And that's what it is.
Speaker 2 (49:27):
She's doing everything she can to play a dirty game.
Here is all I see.
Speaker 3 (49:31):
So why.
Speaker 2 (49:34):
A third party is a number one defense to most
people who are arrested for a crime. If they didn't
do it, obviously, that means there's a third person and
that's your only defense. I didn't do it. Look at
the forensics. It's going to lead you to somebody else,
not to me.
Speaker 3 (49:50):
It's just adding up to there is the third party.
Speaker 4 (49:53):
But we are understand how you can exclude the sperm
and the cigarette.
Speaker 2 (49:58):
But I don't underst I don't understand any of it.
But this is it. You guys were at our fifty
minute mark here. I want to thank you guys. Will
pick this up next week and continue on with this
follow up because there's lots more to come. It gets
even better. Everybody, have a wonderful weekend and thank you
guys for being here.
Speaker 4 (50:14):
Okay, goodbye,
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Herd with Colin Cowherd
The Herd with Colin Cowherd is a thought-provoking, opinionated, and topic-driven journey through the top sports stories of the day.