May 9, 2025 • 50 mins
Follow the story of Peter Wilson whose day went from bad to worse that turn into a 30-year nightmare in prison. Illegal search and seizure, removal of alibi evidence by the State, planted evidence, State’s experts testify to faulty medical data/forensics, and a potential suspect leaves the country in the middle of the whole thing. Follow up questions answered with additional evidence. Deserves Writ of Habeas Corpus 2 Part Series
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 3 (00:52):
Good morning, True seekers and true crime junkies. Welcome back
to another episode of Hit the Roadjack Finding the Zodiac.
We are going to finish off with the balance of
the podcast that I did with David Villa and San
Joaquin Valley Transparency. Once we're completed with that, I'm going
to go ahead and answer many of the questions that
were posed during that podcast so that all of us
(01:13):
get some answers. So, without any hesitation, we're going to
go ahead and put that presentation back on and finish
that off, and I'll see you in about twenty minutes.
Subsequent testimony of medical experts shows that only ten to
thirty percent of rape victims have visible injury that can
be seen by the naked eye under bright light, contrary
to the DA's Medical Examiner's testimony and subsequent testimony of
(01:37):
medical experts shows that intact firm is only motile within
twelve hours of being deposited. Again, that is also based
on you know, heat or cold, and we know that
when her body was taken from the house at eight
thirty pm on Sunday evening, she was placed in a
refrigerator that would have helped things to last a little
bit longer, let's see, and then for the next twelve
(01:59):
hours of tales and the separate rendering them no longer
motile within twenty four hours. So again, this does not
take us all the way back to twelve fifty eight,
twelve forty eight pm, between that twelve and one o'clock
hour that they're claiming the murder occurred. This is another
piece of evidence that mister Wilson asked me to examine,
which was a property log, and there are actually three
(02:22):
property logs that he provided to me, and as you
go through them, you can see for yourself the differences
in the actual handwriting and the entries. Things are being
scratched out, they're being obliterated, they're being whited out. And
the final actual property report, which is on slide number
fourteen is where it contains the officer's handwriting stating removed
(02:45):
one vial, and he removed it on March thirty first,
nineteen ninety six. Why you know, if you took this
to the lab, why would it not go with the
other vial? Why would it not go with the other evidence?
And I would think that this would be something you
would strip strictly keeps separate the arresting officer versus forensic
evidence collected going to a lab, so that the chain
(03:07):
of custody is not not necessarily confused but compromised, you know,
I mean, if the arresting officer has you know, some
grit in this for needing to get out from under
the things he's done, such as an illegal asserts and seizure,
or he's just trying to set the community's mind at
(03:27):
ease that they've caught the killer, when in fact he's
actually doing something that's nefarious and it has cost this
man thirty years of his life. Wow, and that blows
my mind. The property reports should not look like this.
These property reports should not vary, they should not be different.
They should not be having different entries, right Nolan, I
(03:48):
mean you should have one lug.
Speaker 4 (03:51):
I don't on the one guy and on the other guy.
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Right, well, because the other guys they call him the police.
Speaker 4 (04:01):
Well, yeah, do we have a recording of the of
the phone call.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
I have no idea because I'm.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
Curious as to what he told the police. Did he
implicate his roommate.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
I don't believe he did. I believe he I believe
the statement. I think I do have those answers in
the documents. And I want I want to say that
mister Wilson had indicated that he had just told the
police that mister Wilson found her, not necessarily that he
implicated it. But my roommate found her dead in the basement,
(04:38):
you know kind of thing. I would have to go
back to look to see what was exactly about exactly
what said.
Speaker 4 (04:44):
But the next question, why did Wilson call.
Speaker 3 (04:46):
Himself because he was assessing her Okay, so.
Speaker 4 (04:51):
He was down there, he call it I found her dead, Okay.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
Yeah yeah, And he and he, like.
Speaker 5 (04:58):
I said, he was to hear or to find out
if it's out there, what was actually said during the call.
Speaker 3 (05:05):
Right when one.
Speaker 5 (05:09):
Calls were recorded, So his lawyer at some point Ship
requested that recording way back.
Speaker 3 (05:14):
When and it took mister it took mister Coleman eight
minutes to call the police. He was him hauling around.
What's that?
Speaker 5 (05:25):
So he when your client was saying, hold the cops,
he's dead, blah blah blah, he waited eight.
Speaker 4 (05:31):
Minutes and says, if he's doing immediately, is what you're saying?
Speaker 3 (05:34):
Yes, he was basically based on my recollection of what
mister Wilson said in his paperwork, was that mister Coleman
was basically bucking back from wanting to make that call,
and it took him literally eight minutes from the timer
body was discovered to actively make that nine one one call.
Speaker 5 (05:51):
Well, that's kind of weird too. Did he share that
with the cops? He says, Hey, I asked him call
in he waited for why wait.
Speaker 3 (05:58):
I don't know if at that moment in time, when
he was going through what he was going through, that
he had the wherewithal to slow down and think about
mister Coleman's actions. Don't know that if if he relatively
if he really believed he was the murderer at that
moment in time, so he may not have, you know,
remembered to state these particular things to the police.
Speaker 4 (06:20):
Right, But.
Speaker 5 (06:23):
I'm just saying he obviously well sure he didn't do it, Yes,
but he didn't. I don't know I would immediately suspect the.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
Other day, Well we would come on if we know,
we're assumed that I'm going to go in with somebody.
But would you blame somebody else that you particularly knew?
Speaker 4 (06:48):
You know, if why did you not immediately call the
cops when I asked? Right?
Speaker 3 (06:57):
And if Coleman was making out like well I just
got home too, you know what I'm saying, Like he
may very well have believed his roommate, that his roommate
wasn't a part of it either. He just didn't see
him selfie and him up for something he didn't do himself.
Speaker 4 (07:10):
The report evidence that you were reading, doesn't it hardly
anything about cole No, no, he interviews.
Speaker 5 (07:21):
And evidentiary moves, taking investigative moves.
Speaker 4 (07:26):
It just neglects it, basically, right, And maybe.
Speaker 3 (07:29):
And maybe Coleman. Maybe Coleman was bad mouthing mister Wilson, right,
You know.
Speaker 6 (07:36):
I would say, had to have said something right, trying
to throw.
Speaker 5 (07:42):
A direction towards him to where when they came to investigate,
you're already suspecting him.
Speaker 3 (07:49):
Right, And if mister Wilson wasn't suspecting mister Coleman, he
would have no reason to bad mount them or to
point the fear in that direction.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
He didn't know.
Speaker 4 (07:57):
He didn't know anyway either, he didn't know what right right?
Speaker 6 (08:01):
Are there transcripts of the entire trial.
Speaker 3 (08:06):
I believe mister Wilson is in possession of him. I
do have many I don't think I have everything by
any means, but I do believe that he is in possession.
After thirty years of all of the trial transcripts.
Speaker 6 (08:18):
Makes me wonder as far as like mister Wilson right,
because he was obviously convicted by twelve jurors right.
Speaker 3 (08:30):
Who were foresped what the DA wanted them to be
force fed.
Speaker 5 (08:34):
Yes, the police, but at some point someone's going to
have justice. I mean, you're not there just you're there as.
Speaker 4 (08:44):
An officer of the court to promote justice.
Speaker 6 (08:47):
I was watching a documentary regarding Karen Reid and the
officer that was killed with her boyfriend, and the entire
time I'm watching the documentary, yeah, and I can't, right,
I can't help but think, how how can she be
convicted in this case? How could mister Wilson be convicted when,
(09:10):
for instance, and the Karen Reid case, the other female
officer was looking stuff up on Google and then deleting it.
In this case, there is another gentleman that could possibly
have done it. So how could the jerry say guilty?
Speaker 3 (09:28):
Aren't you yeah?
Speaker 6 (09:31):
If there's reasonable doubt? Aren't you supposed to say not guilty?
Speaker 3 (09:36):
If we could, if we could forget the fact that
the police officer planted his blood at the crime scene.
So this is what I believe that they hung their
hat on, was the presence of his blood on miss
Kim at the actual scene of the crime. And that's
where we get into that on slide number so, on
slide number fourteen we see the removal of one file
(09:58):
on the thirty first of March. This may also be
why they hesitated and waited to call out the corner,
and that the forensics was still busy in the middle
of doing whatever they were doing and wouldn't allow the
corner to go downstairs and address the body.
Speaker 4 (10:13):
Is to get there and doing as soon as possible.
Speaker 6 (10:17):
Who crowned correct, who found the blood on the woman?
It was it done?
Speaker 3 (10:22):
That was now the forensic team at the scene of
the crime purportedly found the blood. I have a couple
more I wanted to show just before we get into
the handwriting, a couple more pieces of exculpatory evidence. On
slide number fifteen, which is again the receipt at the
top says taken from the backpack. So I was also
(10:45):
asked to look at this handwriting at the top here
that belongs to I discovered that it belongs to Officer
Michael Yore. So he did, in fact take this receipt
from the backpack before he was granted the right to search.
And then we see to the right of that we
see paper that says non transferable subject to tariff regulations,
(11:05):
and it says I removed. Now, if I could tell
you who this person was, we'd figure out who actually
tampered with this particular file. But this document with this
receipt was never provided to the defense team, and it
subsequently went missing after it had been removed from the backpack.
It had been copied placed into the file as page
number one. Tent Wait, let's see this is page one
(11:27):
twenty six. And then to the right, which is now
page one twenty seven says I removed and I've blown
that up with the signature of the individual who claims
to have removed it. But it says I removed page
one twenty six. So now all that's in the file
is this one that says non transferable subject to tariff regulations?
Do you know what that means? And oman no, either way,
(11:50):
the exculpatory evidence was no longer in the police file.
Terror what's that?
Speaker 5 (11:58):
What do teriff regulations have to do with items in
a police reporter evidence?
Speaker 3 (12:04):
I have no idea, But basically, in two thousand and seven,
Peter Wilson requested a copy of the police report from
Palo Alto Pedi of page one twenty six because he
saw that it was missing in the original documentation that
he was given. He questioned his own defense attorney, who
also said it was missing from his file. He never
had a copy of it either. So mister Wilson requested
(12:25):
this specific page and was given both of these two pages,
the one that actually has the receipt that was not
available at trial, to the one that states I removed
this particular page from the act. Now, same thing with
the actual note. Here again we have a photocopied version
of the note that was found in his backpack that
(12:46):
pertains to the actual out alibi of him being at
the restaurant and finding this woman's purse. That everybody there,
the bus boy and the owner of the restaurant confirmed, yes,
this whole thing happened. And it says to you from
the backpack thirty first of March ninety six, nine to one,
one to oh, which is the case number. But again
to the right, this is another document. So page nine
(13:09):
was also missing. Now we have this page nine A
that's shown up, and it again says I removed page
nine Wow, and the only thing that was in the
file was nine A. So he asks for a copy
of this, and he actually did this, I believe. He
says five ten of twenty nineteen, requests more documents from
police file and receives this particular document on three twenty
(13:31):
five of twenty twenty. Another document that was taken from
the backpack before the warrant was issued was removed from
the file and the availability of the defense.
Speaker 5 (13:40):
So he's actually filed a hebeas right, correct, when did
he file it? I think you only have a year
from the discovery of the new evidence.
Speaker 3 (13:50):
Well, he filed it pretty much immediately after getting the
results back from the DNA lab and from me, and
so he's just sitting in the rotation at this point.
Here's where I actually did the handwriting of mister Yore.
Where are you at? You're on eighteen. I'm on slide
seventeen for your viewers. But basically I was able to
actually map out all of the different characteristics of handwriting,
(14:14):
the way he actually does the connection of the crossbar
from the letter F straight into the R, the form
and shape of the o's and the m's, the starting
and stopping points, the actual the way he forms the
letter case. Everything that I could find in Michael Your's
handwriting was a consistent match, including the numbering system to
(14:34):
Officer Michael Yure. So he is the one that had
taken both the alibi note from Rogers Restaurant the receipt.
Mister Wilson also claims that he also took the four
hundred dollars in cash that was in his backpack that
came up missing that was never returned or given back
to him. So there were several things that were taken
(14:54):
from the backpack that he claims mister Yor had taken
for himself. On side number eighteen. Once again I'm comparing
to the actual removal of the one vial and again
the receipt itself where it says taken from the backpack.
I found that all of the handwriting characteristics were all
consistent with each other. So again I made an identification
(15:17):
that he is the one that removed a vial at
least on March thirty first of nineteen ninety six, a
day before all the forensic evidence actually went to the lab.
And then that brings us into slide number nineteen, which
is really kind of the home run hit here, and
that is the Independent Forensics DNA Testing and Technologies DNA
Lab states that the degradation levels of mister Wilson's DNA
(15:39):
is similar to identical from the crime scene and the
reference sample that was taken by Palo Alto PD. And
what that really means in Layman's terms, is that if
blood is at a crime scene open to the air
to different type of inclement leathers, we are going to
see a type of degradation that occurs and takes place
as this blood dries. The degradation scale on the DNA
(16:04):
that was found at the crime scene was identical to
the degradation level that was found absolutely in the vile
of blood that was taken from mister Wilson's arm, And
so that means that literally, I'm thinking here again, mister
yours down there splashing this blood around while not allowing
this this corner to come down, and then once the
corner comes down, they're immediately collecting it right after throwing
(16:28):
it down. And that's how the degradation is so similar
between what was in the violin what was taken from
mister Wilson. Like that, though secure conviction, you are talking
to the right person here. I mean, David, it is,
(16:50):
but I don't think you understand what David does. David
tell Nolan, because I've not really discussed what it is
that you do.
Speaker 6 (16:57):
I do police accountability. I record police, I asked questions.
I try to find patterns in what they do and
how they police. Six different police chiefs have resigned after
being exposed on my channels, and we're working on the
seventh one right now. This one police chief in Arvin, California,
(17:17):
was fired from a different department for stealing money. He
was charged and convicted against the Attorney General believes it's
okay to allow these cops to do a probissionary period,
become reserve officers for a long period of time until
they can get allowed to get their licenses or be
(17:39):
cops again. And we have one cop in Arvin nearby,
who not only did that get fired, the rest of
charge goes to Americopa, California and harasses people, targeting Hispanic people,
and that entire department. Because of the scandal that happened
(18:00):
out there, that entire department was disbanded and he was
out looking for a job somewhere else, gets hired in Arvin,
becomes a chief of police using a different name, and
now we're exposing him, trying to get him out of there.
And this is what we see, the type of protection,
umbrellas of protection that cops have. And it's unbelievable how
(18:26):
bad cops are allowed to do stuff like this. And
it seems like your it probably isn't the first time
your has ever done anything like this. And I would
like to find out more about him, see if we
can find out where he went, where he was policing,
See if we can get any kind of records, even
though I know they are destroyed so that the people
(18:47):
cannot find anything about these cops.
Speaker 5 (18:51):
It's funny that you mentioned Arvin because I was born
in Bakersfield at My family went to high school in Arvin,
and a lot of connections down there.
Speaker 6 (19:03):
I live in Bakersfield now, but I'm close by.
Speaker 4 (19:06):
Interesting.
Speaker 5 (19:07):
Yeah, my best buddy is uh used to be the
editor of the California newspaper Bob Price.
Speaker 4 (19:14):
Now he does TV feature stories.
Speaker 5 (19:16):
Yeah I know.
Speaker 4 (19:18):
Yeah, he's a local celebrity.
Speaker 6 (19:23):
Yeah he is. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
Well, I think other than that, all that I really
had left was kind of mister Wilson's evidence for the
of Habeas corpus, But I feel like we probably have
covered a majority of that throughout the presentation. It definitely
takes into consideration everything we've discussed, the forensic testimony, what
we do know about forensics testified to by other great
(19:47):
pathologists and corners around you know, the United States. Also,
the fact that the DNA degradation is similar, is similar
to identical to what was taken from his arm, and
that should never happen in a case like this. So
I'm here to hopefully expose this entire system and hopefully
(20:09):
get people to pay attention so that he does get
this right. For a rehearing because this man does I believe,
in my honest opinion, I believe he does not belong
in prison for this murder.
Speaker 5 (20:20):
Sounds like he doesn't and it sounds like a terrible
police work.
Speaker 3 (20:25):
Yeah, it does.
Speaker 6 (20:27):
Well. Thank you Nannette and also Nolan. Thank you guys
for coming on and sharing this. I hope he can
get enough eyes on this and put enough pressure on
them to you know, allow him to have a new trial.
And it sucks to hear that he's ill, and hopefully
(20:50):
he gets to see the light of day again.
Speaker 5 (20:53):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (20:53):
Yeah, And even then, I think that coming out of that,
his mental health is going to take many, many years
to get over what he has probably witnessed and gone
through in prison.
Speaker 4 (21:04):
Being a prisoner of war.
Speaker 5 (21:05):
You know.
Speaker 3 (21:05):
I want to give you here from Chris and I
thank you David for having this again on your show
because I appreciate anybody who can help us get this
out there very Thank you so much, and thank you Nolan.
Speaker 4 (21:20):
Thank you.
Speaker 6 (21:20):
Well, we'll definitely circle back around this. We'll find out
updates and we'll try to present updates as well. And
anybody else that's watching this, please share this story and
let's get some eyes on this. Let's get this man.
If he's innocent, let's get him free. And we're not
supposed to allow cops to do bad stuff like this.
(21:41):
And this is why it's important that we continue the
work that we do. We don't have subscribers, we have supporters,
So thank you, guys, and let's get some eyes on this.
Speaker 4 (21:50):
Well, let's tell on that is.
Speaker 5 (21:52):
I have a criminal matter felling in Bakersfield next month,
so maybe when I'm down there we can maybe have
some launcher or hooked.
Speaker 4 (22:01):
Up or you have a beer or something.
Speaker 6 (22:03):
No doubt, get my number, get my number from the nette.
Speaker 3 (22:07):
Okay, and I will keep everybody updated as I get
more information on the case.
Speaker 6 (22:11):
And everybody, I'm gonna drop the Nett's link in the
description and the pin comment. Make sure you guys go
to show her some support.
Speaker 5 (22:20):
I'm going too, because maybe Bob, you do a feature
story on what you do.
Speaker 6 (22:24):
Yeah, no doubt, no doubt.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
Absolutely, thank you guys. All right, you guys, everyone take care.
We have a great weekend, Happy Eastern. Hope to see
you soon, all right, guys, Yes, bye bye bye. Okay.
So at the completion of that podcast, I do have
additional information and I would also like to show or
(22:49):
share at least my screen. I have a PowerPoint presentation
which we saw David flipping back and forth, but I'm
not sure that anybody got a clear visibility. So as
I scribe and cover the questions, I'm going to slowly
sift through these that'll give everybody an opportunity to pause
and read on your own accord. So what I wanted
to really actually start with was the arriving at home.
(23:12):
So one of the questions was what and how mister
Wilson found Miss kim. It says that at one ten
am on Sunday three thirty one, nineteen ninety six, I
got out of the train at Palo Alto train station
and walked toward the downtown area for about fifteen minutes,
then stopped the Plazon University Avenue where there was a
(23:33):
ceremony and the band started playing, and sat on the
bench for about forty five minutes. At two ten am,
I walked on University Avenue for about ten minutes, then
stopped in front of Walgreen drug Stores for about ten minutes,
then walked on University Avenue toward the house about twenty minutes.
At approximately two point fifty am. I arrived at home
(23:55):
on eleven sixty Fulton Street and was in my room
for about ten minutes. At three am, I walked to
seven eleven on Waverley Street for about twenty minutes and
grabbed a juice and walked back home for about twenty minutes.
Mister Wilson also had a door to his bedroom, so
he could leave through that door to exit to go
(24:16):
wherever he wanted to go without having to walk through
the house, which is why he was not aware at
that point in time that Miss Kim was dead. He says,
at three forty am, I arrived at my room on
eleven sixty foot the Street, and I was in my
room for about five minutes. At three forty five am,
I walked toward the toilet, and I believe that's where
(24:38):
he finds Miss Kim. So he says, at about three
forty five am on Sunday three thirty one, nineteen ninety six,
I walked toward the toilet, and when I passed the
basement door, I noticed the basement door was open and
its light was on. And when I looked down the stairs,
I observed Hawk Jew Kim was lying on her back
at the bottom of the stairs. I slowly walked down
(24:59):
the stairs and saw Hawk you Kim lying on her
back and naked from the waist up, and a very
large wooden board on top of her shoulders. I tried
to move the board, but the board was very heavy.
I couldn't move it, and walked up the stairs and
walked toward William Coleman's room for help and yelled his
name very loud, but he didn't come out. And when
I opened his door, I saw William Coleman standing behind
(25:22):
the door and fully dressed in blue jeans and white
sweater and street shoes. William Coleman knew Hawk jew Kim
was already dead, and he was fully clothed. I knew
he didn't get out of the bed. I told him
I found Jean, hurry up, come with me. I need
his assistance. But he refused to come with me and said,
Hawk you Kim was already dead and there's nothing he
(25:43):
could do for her. I slowly walked down the stairs
again and told William Coleman call the police, and tried
to move the board, but the board was very heavy
and I couldn't move it, and walked up the stairs again.
William Coleman had called the police and we waited outside
the house for the police. So basically, mister Wilson's assertion
(26:05):
of the actual phone call was that let's see at
three fifty three am. So, like I'd indicated, eight minutes
after the notification to mister Coleman is when mister Coleman
actually made that call. And this is going to be
the thoughts of or the testimony basically of mister Wilson
is that William Coleman had called nine one one and
(26:26):
told the operator we just found Hawk Jew Kim in
the basement. She was dead for four to five hours.
She fell down the steps. There was some kind of
dried blood like all over things, and she was laying
like on her back. William Coleman also told the operator
he has been home a little earlier, but he never
goes down. A lot of the time she parks her
(26:47):
car in the driveway, but that doesn't mean that she
is not here. Sometimes she goes with her sister. So
interesting that, you know, mister Coleman claims she was dead
for four to five hours, and if he had never
gone down and didn't know she was dead, how would
he know any type of a timeframe, so that really
didn't make a lot of sense to me. But that
brings us to the actual nine to one to one
(27:08):
transcript which I do now have in possession. So basically,
on March thirty first of nineteen ninety six, the voice
comes on. This is Sandy Gagnan, communications supervisor for the
Communications Division of the Pala Watto Police Department. Today. Today
is Saturday, May eleventh, nineteen ninety six, at ten o'clock
in the morning. The following is all the recorded information
(27:30):
from the master tape for Sunday, March thirty first, nineteen
ninety six, which relates to case number nine six Dash
zero nine one zero one zero Voice three fifty three
twenty eight March thirty first, Beat three fifty three Operator
nine to one one Coleman, Yeah, could you send an
ambulance to eleven sixty Fulton Street, My landlady, she's she's
(27:53):
passed away. She's I think she's dead. Operator, Okay, how
old is she? Coleman? She's a about fifty eight operator,
about fifty eight Coleman. Yep, operator. Did she have any
medical problems? Coleman, Nope, she's in the dot dot dot.
We have a what do you call it? Downstairs? It's
(28:13):
like a basement to the house, you know, like you
come into the kitchen and you go downstairs. Operator, uh
huh Coleman, and she's dot dot dot. I think she
fell down there. She's dot dot dot and oh, Operator Okay,
but you checked her and you can't find any pulse
or anything. Coleman. Nope. I think she's been there for
(28:36):
dot dot dot. Well, sometimes she parks her car in
the driveway and she goes with her sister. Operator. Oh,
so you don't know how long she's been down Coleman. Nope,
but I think she's been there for a long time,
maybe four or five hours or maybe longer. Operator Okay,
are you a neighbor or do you live there? Coleman.
I live there. I rent a room from her. Operator Okay,
(28:58):
you just found her now now, Coleman, Yeah, we just
found her. Dispatcher. I think she fell down the steps. Coleman.
I think she dot dot dot. There's some kind of
dried blood like all over the things, and she's laying
like on her back sort of. Operator Okay, I'm going
to get the medics going, and the other dispatcher is
(29:19):
going to talk to you okay, Coleman, okay, Operator too, okay,
And your name is Coleman, William Coleman, co L E.
M A N. Operator two. Okay, and you just came
home now, Coleman. Now, I've been home a little earlier,
but I never go down in dot dot dot. And
(29:39):
a lot of times she perksed the car on the driveway,
but that don't mean she's not here. Sometimes she goes
with her sister, Operator too, okay. Well, paramedics are on
their way, and so are the police, mister Coleman, and
they should be there momentarily, if you could meet them
out in front. Coleman, okay, I'll meet them out in front.
We live at Fulton and Kingsley. Now, for somebody who
(30:00):
he was so complacent not shocked when his own roommate
attempted to tell him that he had found their landlady dead,
is now seeming to be very confused. He's not directly
answering the questions. He's ending questions or answers short and
then bringing up completely different subjects, such as the vehicle
(30:22):
that was parked in the driveway. I found that the
answers that he's given just don't seem to be indicative
of somebody who was completely unaware of the fact that
she was already dead, and his behavior as well didn't either,
because by indicating that she's dead, there's nothing you can
do for her. That doesn't stop you from calling the police.
That's the first thing you should do. So that helps
(30:43):
to answer the first couple questions. And then we were
asked what county did this occur? In Santa Clara County
is where the actual murder took place, and the trial
was done in San Jose, California. It says what was
the race in the age of the Renters. I'm still
waiting on those answers from mister Wilson. What is Coleman's background.
(31:06):
I'm still waiting on a response from him as in
regards to that as well, and whether or not they
took the same forensic evidence from William Coleman. We're waiting
to see what happens there is there evidence, is there
an evidence log on William Coleman. One of the things
that I noticed when I was going through this, and
in fact I wanted to bring up really quickly before
(31:26):
we go into it, is that one of the officers,
in his own report indicates that he was at work
and he was called to the eleven sixty Fulton Street address.
And as I continued to read this, I got extremely
confused because it says his job is evidence collection and
I was going to assist with the plans, which I'm
not sure what the plans are. I was contacted via
(31:47):
radio by Sergeant d' stefano. He asked me to phone him,
which I did. Sergeant d's stefano instructed us to halt
any activity we were planning and then to return to
the police station. So he indicated that he was He
had not entered the residence yet, but he stood on
the outside assisting with perimeter security. Evidence technician Lynn Dillard
(32:08):
was the was with Officer Di Trechillo and had just
come from inside the house and one of his functions
was to actually with the police department in evidence collection.
He was going to assist with the photography of the scene.
So I think it's very important that we understand this.
This is Officer g. Brooks in his own written report
stating that he was there to photograph the scene but
(32:30):
then was called off and told to return to the
police station. So it makes me kind of wonder was
this also part of what was going to be happening
as far as the setup was concerned. I did talk
to another client of mine who is former law enforcement,
who indicated that Palo Alto is what the cops would
refer to as a FUFU area, and because they're fufu,
(32:52):
they have lots of money in these areas, and these
are not the type of crimes they like to see
go unsolved because it doesn't set the mind at ease
of the people who live there that provide that community
with the type of money that they have there. And
so when somebody had indicated that, you know, they just
needed to secure a conviction, that's exactly what my client
(33:13):
had basically said, was that they needed to pin this
on somebody, They needed to call this murder solved. So
that could have been the motivation, aside from the other
things that Michael You're had actually done by taking out
the culplatory evidence from the backpack and so forth. So
(33:33):
let's see, here is there evidence I'm asking about. Obviously
the evidence log his lawyer. We were asked who was
his lawyer at the time. It was either a mister
or Missus Pariscou, which was likely a public defender, but
I am waiting on the full information and name of
that individual. It asked where mister Peter was currently incarcerated,
(33:55):
and I show that he is at the California health
Care Facility in Stockton, California. He was transferred during the time,
actually when I was completing my examination, he was in
transfer mode. He had requested that transfer because he wasn't
doing well in the state penitentiary and they had set
(34:17):
him up for a transfer. Took about eight months, though
I think he said before he was actually given back
all his boxes and his files so he could continue
working on his writ of habeas corpus. So there was
a long period in between in which I was not
able to speak with him because he didn't have any
of his files. Let's see, and when did mister Wilson
(34:38):
file for the writ of habeas corpus? Are you with us, Harriet?
There you are.
Speaker 5 (34:50):
Down.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
It took me forty five minutes to do that.
Speaker 3 (34:54):
Okay, okay, you're live. You're live. That conversation until laft
It says, when did mister Wilson file for the rid
of habeas corpus? He filed for the rid of habeas
corpus on July seventeenth of twenty twenty four. Now, the
only log that I actually have that mentions mister Coleman's name,
which goes back to whether or not there was any
(35:15):
evidence taken on or forensics taken on mister Coleman. And
it looks like that the statement is placed on the
property report for Peter Wilson, not for one for himself,
for mister Coleman. But it does say that he consents
to search, so consent to search form signed by William
Coleman and consent to search. What and why is it
(35:38):
on a property report for mister Wilson. It's as if
they fingered this guy from the very beginning and had
no intentions of letting any part of it go all right,
So what did you think about all that, Harriet?
Speaker 2 (35:50):
Well, I did check into some of the things, and
my apologies for is I did look into some of
the old news reports on him. Oh Joe, Yeah, that
his that. Then when they went to charge him, they
(36:13):
found out that his name Peter Wilson was his changed name,
but because he was from Iran, they had to charge
him under his Iranian names. So I have questions without
that at all.
Speaker 3 (36:28):
Yeah, No, That's a good question to be asked because
Rayson and age was definitely something that was that was
asked for, and so that might explain why William William
Coleman left the country, because my idea is, if he's
a young guy, how does he have access to just
you know, a visa and getting out. So if these
(36:49):
are students from another country and they collectively changed their
names or americanize their names while they're here, that might
make some sense. So I'm going to ask that. And
what did you find out what that name was?
Speaker 2 (37:02):
Oh my god, it's the last okay, I'm sorry. It
was ham illed or ham made inn. And it really
perplexed me because it was bringing back some memories because
I am from the Bay area of the hold On.
Speaker 3 (37:23):
Okay. So he meade, what how are you spelling the
last name?
Speaker 2 (37:27):
Well, the last name is it starts off with E
I N l O U r wrin. But the first
name is actually spelled h A M L D. And
I said, maybe that's a misspelling, but yeah, but it's
it's h A. It could be h A M I D.
(37:47):
But according s f Gate and other sources, it's with
a nail instead of an I.
Speaker 3 (37:54):
And you said, so the last name e I N
l o U. What was the batance of that?
Speaker 2 (38:01):
Well, I tried to look that up, but it isn't
an Iranian last name. So I had a lot of questions.
How long has he been here?
Speaker 4 (38:09):
How was he?
Speaker 5 (38:10):
You know?
Speaker 3 (38:10):
Harriet, Harriet, Harriet. I've asked three times when I'm just
trying to get the spelling down e I N l ou.
Is there more to it?
Speaker 2 (38:18):
There's a little bit more, but I can't google it
right now, so you don't know what the full last
name is.
Speaker 3 (38:25):
All right, I'm going to be very interested in getting
that from you. And I love that you were so
good on research. All right, So back to what you
were saying, Sorry about that. Oh no in the area
during this time in nineteen definitely.
Speaker 2 (38:41):
And I've heard the news because my parents, especially when
I came home from work, had news going twenty four
to seven, especially the AM radio. And of course that
was a story that was brought up a lot, you know,
for a while in nineteen ninety six. And if I
understand correctly, this person had more than one trial. The
(39:03):
first trial was a hung jury, and then the second
trial was a few years later where they believe they
nailed him correctly. But I had a lot of questions.
I said, but you know what is going on with
this guy? You know?
Speaker 3 (39:22):
Right? Well? I mean when we start to look at
this evidence and we see the things that were done,
and maybe the officer thought he could get away with
this because he was not American. I mean there, I
think when it's a second culture, somebody who doesn't quite
understand the legal system, it's easier for these police officers
to get away with things that are against human rights
(39:44):
obviously when it comes to policing people. But you are
absolutely correct. There has been two trials. I want to say.
The first one was to the early two thousand and
the second one was two thousand and five, if I
believe correctly from what he was stating. So, and he
was in prison the entire time, even with the hung jury,
he still remained in prison. He has not taken a
(40:04):
step out of inhorseiration since he was arrested for this crime.
So did you see anything in any of your research
that made you feel like he was complicit with this crime?
Speaker 2 (40:16):
Just the red flags as to so many questions is
how was he making a living? And according to the
sources that I basically saw, which was I believe polo
alto online. They believed that he was scamming the landlord
to try to make a statement to have her signed
(40:38):
something and she was over fifty five yeah, or three
hundred thousand dollars.
Speaker 3 (40:45):
Now they didn't He hasn't indicated anything to that degree.
He had three rental receipts that the DA tried to
insist that he made her sit down and write in
that hour that she claims that he had killed her.
So that doesn't I mean, at least based on what
I see in what he's telling me. So this would
(41:07):
be interesting to note. And we have to understand that
they're going to sensationalize. The media is weaponized against individuals
when they want it to be, and some of these
things could be just false stories, false leads that were
fed to them. So I do take it with a
little grain of salt in regards to the motives of
the officer. If he would, in fact, you know, remove
(41:28):
exculpable evidence and plant evidence at the crime scene, what
would he say to the media in order to further
victimize this individual.
Speaker 2 (41:40):
Well, I can look into this a little more. I've
at a very busy unusual wake for my situation here,
but it just raised a whole bunch of questions more
than answers.
Speaker 3 (41:53):
Right right, it does, and I would love to collaborate
with you on that, especially if you could get me
that last name. I think that there's some searches that
we can do. I know a few private investigators, and
I know that Nolan and David Villa as well would
be interested and probably have some avenues to be able
to look some of this stuff up. Wow. I don't
(42:13):
know why you didn't call me ahead of time to
tell me you had this information, because I would have
been on that before. Now.
Speaker 2 (42:18):
I had an interesting day yesterday, so it wasn't going
to happen anyways. Well, I aim to get here, you know,
and I have just one wonderful background echo here. But
it's good.
Speaker 3 (42:34):
Are you able to see the show now on your phone?
I can see it.
Speaker 2 (42:36):
Yeah, I got my reading glasses on.
Speaker 3 (42:39):
So nice, nice, So welcome back with us full. But
you still didn't get the video working out right.
Speaker 2 (42:46):
I was going to try that, and I said, after
forty five minutes of trying to unlock this, for some reason,
it was blocked on my phone.
Speaker 3 (42:53):
I had to.
Speaker 2 (42:53):
Dig deep, so I had to be my own it person.
I said, I'm not spending another fight of forty five
minut and it's unlocked the camera.
Speaker 3 (43:02):
Well, and hopefully they would be in the same location,
but I don't know. I've not seen it or viewed
it from the Google telephone.
Speaker 2 (43:10):
This is just unreally, it's it kept on the same life.
It's blocked. It's blocked, and I didn't have an explanation. Anyways,
we'll get to that later.
Speaker 3 (43:18):
Well, and did you find any information on mister William Coleman,
because is there I'm now wondering if there's a possibility
that he changed his name as well.
Speaker 2 (43:28):
All I know is what I started going down a
rabbit hole and there is some person who is with
the last name of Coleman, not this William Coleman, but
that did some wrote some books on the Iranian life
of nineteen seventy nine, and uh, and I thought, is
this person related? Is the person I'm seeing about some book?
(43:52):
You know? His father? I had a lot of questions,
So I was going down some rabbit holes.
Speaker 3 (43:57):
So is it normal? And I don't know if you
know the answer to this. I wish Nolan had joined
us today. But is it normal for them to allow
people here on visas to make changes to their names.
Speaker 2 (44:10):
I think since it's the nineties, you might want to
try asking the Clinton administration.
Speaker 3 (44:16):
I wonder, you mean, the best friends of Trump.
Speaker 2 (44:22):
All I know is I'm seeing things from nineteen seventy nine,
the Iranian Revolution, and I'm wondering, is this person from
before that, which would be actually a good flag if
it was during when there was the Prince and Princess
of Iran and we were under much more better, better
(44:45):
things with him. Did he come here after the collapse
of that civilization and during Carter's the Iranian hostage crisis
and that era. But it is I think logically that
if they did come here under pressure like that, that
(45:06):
they were going to be allowed to change their name.
But I don't see him as as americanized, you know,
like nationalized, And you know, I don't know. That's my question.
Is this person a US citizen with the change name?
Speaker 3 (45:24):
Well?
Speaker 2 (45:24):
Well, I know they went to charge him and they
said we can't charge him under that name. We have
to charge them under am ild and whatever the last
name started out as.
Speaker 3 (45:35):
Well, But then he would have been locked up under
that name that would have I'm yeah, now I get
really confused about the whole name change situation. If this
is if this is correct and we have the right
person now, it really makes me want to kind of
dig into it. Yeah. So, like just in the last
couple of weeks, I'd found out that and I didn't
(45:55):
know this because I don't follow politics for the most part.
I vote for a a party based on beliefs and
how that benefits me as a citizen. And it turns
out that Trump was a former Democrat. And I thought
that to be extremely interesting because I'm getting all of
this you know, throwback from the Dems, my friends that
(46:17):
are Democratic that this is one of their people, this
is their party, this individual that they hate so badly
for being a Republican and putting a foot down in
these areas as a Republican is something he would have
done whether he was a Democratic president or a Republican president. Correct.
Speaker 2 (46:37):
Yeah, And you know, there's a lot of saying now
that today's Republicans are yesterday's Democrats, and you don't want
to really feel people when you say that meant that
Bobby Well, Bobby Kennedy Senior and JFK Senior would be
more on the Trump side right now because of how
(47:00):
their political leanings are so right, yeah, so, and it would.
Speaker 3 (47:06):
Be crazy because we know Hillary Clinton was originally a
Republican during Watergate, while she you know, offended Nixon and
then it becomes a Democrat with her husband. It's almost
as if it's okay with these people to flip sides
based on how it builds there gets them up the ladder, right. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (47:25):
Yeah, she was a Yeah, she was a young Republican
in her teenage years in the school in the Chicago,
Illinois area. I'm trying to remember. So yeah, and then
comes along. Yeah. It does seem to be that you
want to get voted in, you have to go with
(47:45):
what your constituents are, and you, you know, kind of
be like a chameleon and change.
Speaker 3 (47:52):
And that's what was interesting about the conversation I was
having as they indicated that I guess, uh, Barack Obama
and Trump sat together at a dinner, which I've said
many times, you guys, look at them, they're hanging out.
They're friends, and it's now being becoming a little bit
more true. But that Barack Obama said to Trump, you'll
never make it as a Democratic president obviously running against
(48:16):
Barack Obama. He felt that he was a stronger candidate
for being a Democrat, and that's why Trump flips to Republican.
And then in that quest for information, I found out
that Trump also ran early two thousands as a liberal.
Isn't that just proof? Again, we voted him in as
a Republican, but we couldn't get him voted in as
a liberal. And that truly means that they know as
(48:38):
a political society that half of Americans are going to
be Republicans, the other half are going to be Democrats,
and then somewhere in between are these small pools of
independence and liberals and conservatives in an area where we
as a majority of Americans are never going to place
all of our votes towards those type of parties. It's system.
Speaker 2 (49:01):
All I know is I can think back when my
parents were of course in the sixties, seventies and eighties
and nineties, they were considerably conservative, but they voted Democrat,
right because you have to. And then so now you
try to say you're conservative as a Democrat, you're going
to get screened at.
Speaker 3 (49:23):
Well, you have to. You have to vote for the
least detrimental person, and that forces you into a party
like Republican or Democrat, because who you really want from
your own party that you believe and your belief system
follows is not going to likely be voted in. So
now we were at the end of our session, I've
got a couple seconds here just to kind of sign off,
(49:45):
to tell everybody thank you for watching. I would really
like to get more interested in this entire case, and
I will have updates as we go along with the
Zodiac case. Thank you so much Harriet for being here. Everybody,
have a wonderful weekend and we'll see you next Friday.
Speaker 2 (50:00):
Thank you, bye bye bye
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 3 (00:52):
Good morning, True seekers and true crime junkies. Welcome back
to another episode of Hit the Roadjack Finding the Zodiac.
We are going to finish off with the balance of
the podcast that I did with David Villa and San
Joaquin Valley Transparency. Once we're completed with that, I'm going
to go ahead and answer many of the questions that
were posed during that podcast so that all of us
(01:13):
get some answers. So, without any hesitation, we're going to
go ahead and put that presentation back on and finish
that off, and I'll see you in about twenty minutes.
Subsequent testimony of medical experts shows that only ten to
thirty percent of rape victims have visible injury that can
be seen by the naked eye under bright light, contrary
to the DA's Medical Examiner's testimony and subsequent testimony of
(01:37):
medical experts shows that intact firm is only motile within
twelve hours of being deposited. Again, that is also based
on you know, heat or cold, and we know that
when her body was taken from the house at eight
thirty pm on Sunday evening, she was placed in a
refrigerator that would have helped things to last a little
bit longer, let's see, and then for the next twelve
(01:59):
hours of tales and the separate rendering them no longer
motile within twenty four hours. So again, this does not
take us all the way back to twelve fifty eight,
twelve forty eight pm, between that twelve and one o'clock
hour that they're claiming the murder occurred. This is another
piece of evidence that mister Wilson asked me to examine,
which was a property log, and there are actually three
(02:22):
property logs that he provided to me, and as you
go through them, you can see for yourself the differences
in the actual handwriting and the entries. Things are being
scratched out, they're being obliterated, they're being whited out. And
the final actual property report, which is on slide number
fourteen is where it contains the officer's handwriting stating removed
(02:45):
one vial, and he removed it on March thirty first,
nineteen ninety six. Why you know, if you took this
to the lab, why would it not go with the
other vial? Why would it not go with the other evidence?
And I would think that this would be something you
would strip strictly keeps separate the arresting officer versus forensic
evidence collected going to a lab, so that the chain
(03:07):
of custody is not not necessarily confused but compromised, you know,
I mean, if the arresting officer has you know, some
grit in this for needing to get out from under
the things he's done, such as an illegal asserts and seizure,
or he's just trying to set the community's mind at
(03:27):
ease that they've caught the killer, when in fact he's
actually doing something that's nefarious and it has cost this
man thirty years of his life. Wow, and that blows
my mind. The property reports should not look like this.
These property reports should not vary, they should not be different.
They should not be having different entries, right Nolan, I
(03:48):
mean you should have one lug.
Speaker 4 (03:51):
I don't on the one guy and on the other guy.
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Right, well, because the other guys they call him the police.
Speaker 4 (04:01):
Well, yeah, do we have a recording of the of
the phone call.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
I have no idea because I'm.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
Curious as to what he told the police. Did he
implicate his roommate.
Speaker 3 (04:15):
I don't believe he did. I believe he I believe
the statement. I think I do have those answers in
the documents. And I want I want to say that
mister Wilson had indicated that he had just told the
police that mister Wilson found her, not necessarily that he
implicated it. But my roommate found her dead in the basement,
(04:38):
you know kind of thing. I would have to go
back to look to see what was exactly about exactly
what said.
Speaker 4 (04:44):
But the next question, why did Wilson call.
Speaker 3 (04:46):
Himself because he was assessing her Okay, so.
Speaker 4 (04:51):
He was down there, he call it I found her dead, Okay.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
Yeah yeah, And he and he, like.
Speaker 5 (04:58):
I said, he was to hear or to find out
if it's out there, what was actually said during the call.
Speaker 3 (05:05):
Right when one.
Speaker 5 (05:09):
Calls were recorded, So his lawyer at some point Ship
requested that recording way back.
Speaker 3 (05:14):
When and it took mister it took mister Coleman eight
minutes to call the police. He was him hauling around.
What's that?
Speaker 5 (05:25):
So he when your client was saying, hold the cops,
he's dead, blah blah blah, he waited eight.
Speaker 4 (05:31):
Minutes and says, if he's doing immediately, is what you're saying?
Speaker 3 (05:34):
Yes, he was basically based on my recollection of what
mister Wilson said in his paperwork, was that mister Coleman
was basically bucking back from wanting to make that call,
and it took him literally eight minutes from the timer
body was discovered to actively make that nine one one call.
Speaker 5 (05:51):
Well, that's kind of weird too. Did he share that
with the cops? He says, Hey, I asked him call
in he waited for why wait.
Speaker 3 (05:58):
I don't know if at that moment in time, when
he was going through what he was going through, that
he had the wherewithal to slow down and think about
mister Coleman's actions. Don't know that if if he relatively
if he really believed he was the murderer at that
moment in time, so he may not have, you know,
remembered to state these particular things to the police.
Speaker 4 (06:20):
Right, But.
Speaker 5 (06:23):
I'm just saying he obviously well sure he didn't do it, Yes,
but he didn't. I don't know I would immediately suspect the.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
Other day, Well we would come on if we know,
we're assumed that I'm going to go in with somebody.
But would you blame somebody else that you particularly knew?
Speaker 4 (06:48):
You know, if why did you not immediately call the
cops when I asked? Right?
Speaker 3 (06:57):
And if Coleman was making out like well I just
got home too, you know what I'm saying, Like he
may very well have believed his roommate, that his roommate
wasn't a part of it either. He just didn't see
him selfie and him up for something he didn't do himself.
Speaker 4 (07:10):
The report evidence that you were reading, doesn't it hardly
anything about cole No, no, he interviews.
Speaker 5 (07:21):
And evidentiary moves, taking investigative moves.
Speaker 4 (07:26):
It just neglects it, basically, right, And maybe.
Speaker 3 (07:29):
And maybe Coleman. Maybe Coleman was bad mouthing mister Wilson, right,
You know.
Speaker 6 (07:36):
I would say, had to have said something right, trying
to throw.
Speaker 5 (07:42):
A direction towards him to where when they came to investigate,
you're already suspecting him.
Speaker 3 (07:49):
Right, And if mister Wilson wasn't suspecting mister Coleman, he
would have no reason to bad mount them or to
point the fear in that direction.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
He didn't know.
Speaker 4 (07:57):
He didn't know anyway either, he didn't know what right right?
Speaker 6 (08:01):
Are there transcripts of the entire trial.
Speaker 3 (08:06):
I believe mister Wilson is in possession of him. I
do have many I don't think I have everything by
any means, but I do believe that he is in possession.
After thirty years of all of the trial transcripts.
Speaker 6 (08:18):
Makes me wonder as far as like mister Wilson right,
because he was obviously convicted by twelve jurors right.
Speaker 3 (08:30):
Who were foresped what the DA wanted them to be
force fed.
Speaker 5 (08:34):
Yes, the police, but at some point someone's going to
have justice. I mean, you're not there just you're there as.
Speaker 4 (08:44):
An officer of the court to promote justice.
Speaker 6 (08:47):
I was watching a documentary regarding Karen Reid and the
officer that was killed with her boyfriend, and the entire
time I'm watching the documentary, yeah, and I can't, right,
I can't help but think, how how can she be
convicted in this case? How could mister Wilson be convicted when,
(09:10):
for instance, and the Karen Reid case, the other female
officer was looking stuff up on Google and then deleting it.
In this case, there is another gentleman that could possibly
have done it. So how could the jerry say guilty?
Speaker 3 (09:28):
Aren't you yeah?
Speaker 6 (09:31):
If there's reasonable doubt? Aren't you supposed to say not guilty?
Speaker 3 (09:36):
If we could, if we could forget the fact that
the police officer planted his blood at the crime scene.
So this is what I believe that they hung their
hat on, was the presence of his blood on miss
Kim at the actual scene of the crime. And that's
where we get into that on slide number so, on
slide number fourteen we see the removal of one file
(09:58):
on the thirty first of March. This may also be
why they hesitated and waited to call out the corner,
and that the forensics was still busy in the middle
of doing whatever they were doing and wouldn't allow the
corner to go downstairs and address the body.
Speaker 4 (10:13):
Is to get there and doing as soon as possible.
Speaker 6 (10:17):
Who crowned correct, who found the blood on the woman?
It was it done?
Speaker 3 (10:22):
That was now the forensic team at the scene of
the crime purportedly found the blood. I have a couple
more I wanted to show just before we get into
the handwriting, a couple more pieces of exculpatory evidence. On
slide number fifteen, which is again the receipt at the
top says taken from the backpack. So I was also
(10:45):
asked to look at this handwriting at the top here
that belongs to I discovered that it belongs to Officer
Michael Yore. So he did, in fact take this receipt
from the backpack before he was granted the right to search.
And then we see to the right of that we
see paper that says non transferable subject to tariff regulations,
(11:05):
and it says I removed. Now, if I could tell
you who this person was, we'd figure out who actually
tampered with this particular file. But this document with this
receipt was never provided to the defense team, and it
subsequently went missing after it had been removed from the backpack.
It had been copied placed into the file as page
number one. Tent Wait, let's see this is page one
(11:27):
twenty six. And then to the right, which is now
page one twenty seven says I removed and I've blown
that up with the signature of the individual who claims
to have removed it. But it says I removed page
one twenty six. So now all that's in the file
is this one that says non transferable subject to tariff regulations?
Do you know what that means? And oman no, either way,
(11:50):
the exculpatory evidence was no longer in the police file.
Terror what's that?
Speaker 5 (11:58):
What do teriff regulations have to do with items in
a police reporter evidence?
Speaker 3 (12:04):
I have no idea, But basically, in two thousand and seven,
Peter Wilson requested a copy of the police report from
Palo Alto Pedi of page one twenty six because he
saw that it was missing in the original documentation that
he was given. He questioned his own defense attorney, who
also said it was missing from his file. He never
had a copy of it either. So mister Wilson requested
(12:25):
this specific page and was given both of these two pages,
the one that actually has the receipt that was not
available at trial, to the one that states I removed
this particular page from the act. Now, same thing with
the actual note. Here again we have a photocopied version
of the note that was found in his backpack that
(12:46):
pertains to the actual out alibi of him being at
the restaurant and finding this woman's purse. That everybody there,
the bus boy and the owner of the restaurant confirmed, yes,
this whole thing happened. And it says to you from
the backpack thirty first of March ninety six, nine to one,
one to oh, which is the case number. But again
to the right, this is another document. So page nine
(13:09):
was also missing. Now we have this page nine A
that's shown up, and it again says I removed page
nine Wow, and the only thing that was in the
file was nine A. So he asks for a copy
of this, and he actually did this, I believe. He
says five ten of twenty nineteen, requests more documents from
police file and receives this particular document on three twenty
(13:31):
five of twenty twenty. Another document that was taken from
the backpack before the warrant was issued was removed from
the file and the availability of the defense.
Speaker 5 (13:40):
So he's actually filed a hebeas right, correct, when did
he file it? I think you only have a year
from the discovery of the new evidence.
Speaker 3 (13:50):
Well, he filed it pretty much immediately after getting the
results back from the DNA lab and from me, and
so he's just sitting in the rotation at this point.
Here's where I actually did the handwriting of mister Yore.
Where are you at? You're on eighteen. I'm on slide
seventeen for your viewers. But basically I was able to
actually map out all of the different characteristics of handwriting,
(14:14):
the way he actually does the connection of the crossbar
from the letter F straight into the R, the form
and shape of the o's and the m's, the starting
and stopping points, the actual the way he forms the
letter case. Everything that I could find in Michael Your's
handwriting was a consistent match, including the numbering system to
(14:34):
Officer Michael Yure. So he is the one that had
taken both the alibi note from Rogers Restaurant the receipt.
Mister Wilson also claims that he also took the four
hundred dollars in cash that was in his backpack that
came up missing that was never returned or given back
to him. So there were several things that were taken
(14:54):
from the backpack that he claims mister Yor had taken
for himself. On side number eighteen. Once again I'm comparing
to the actual removal of the one vial and again
the receipt itself where it says taken from the backpack.
I found that all of the handwriting characteristics were all
consistent with each other. So again I made an identification
(15:17):
that he is the one that removed a vial at
least on March thirty first of nineteen ninety six, a
day before all the forensic evidence actually went to the lab.
And then that brings us into slide number nineteen, which
is really kind of the home run hit here, and
that is the Independent Forensics DNA Testing and Technologies DNA
Lab states that the degradation levels of mister Wilson's DNA
(15:39):
is similar to identical from the crime scene and the
reference sample that was taken by Palo Alto PD. And
what that really means in Layman's terms, is that if
blood is at a crime scene open to the air
to different type of inclement leathers, we are going to
see a type of degradation that occurs and takes place
as this blood dries. The degradation scale on the DNA
(16:04):
that was found at the crime scene was identical to
the degradation level that was found absolutely in the vile
of blood that was taken from mister Wilson's arm, And
so that means that literally, I'm thinking here again, mister
yours down there splashing this blood around while not allowing
this this corner to come down, and then once the
corner comes down, they're immediately collecting it right after throwing
(16:28):
it down. And that's how the degradation is so similar
between what was in the violin what was taken from
mister Wilson. Like that, though secure conviction, you are talking
to the right person here. I mean, David, it is,
(16:50):
but I don't think you understand what David does. David
tell Nolan, because I've not really discussed what it is
that you do.
Speaker 6 (16:57):
I do police accountability. I record police, I asked questions.
I try to find patterns in what they do and
how they police. Six different police chiefs have resigned after
being exposed on my channels, and we're working on the
seventh one right now. This one police chief in Arvin, California,
(17:17):
was fired from a different department for stealing money. He
was charged and convicted against the Attorney General believes it's
okay to allow these cops to do a probissionary period,
become reserve officers for a long period of time until
they can get allowed to get their licenses or be
(17:39):
cops again. And we have one cop in Arvin nearby,
who not only did that get fired, the rest of
charge goes to Americopa, California and harasses people, targeting Hispanic people,
and that entire department. Because of the scandal that happened
(18:00):
out there, that entire department was disbanded and he was
out looking for a job somewhere else, gets hired in Arvin,
becomes a chief of police using a different name, and
now we're exposing him, trying to get him out of there.
And this is what we see, the type of protection,
umbrellas of protection that cops have. And it's unbelievable how
(18:26):
bad cops are allowed to do stuff like this. And
it seems like your it probably isn't the first time
your has ever done anything like this. And I would
like to find out more about him, see if we
can find out where he went, where he was policing,
See if we can get any kind of records, even
though I know they are destroyed so that the people
(18:47):
cannot find anything about these cops.
Speaker 5 (18:51):
It's funny that you mentioned Arvin because I was born
in Bakersfield at My family went to high school in Arvin,
and a lot of connections down there.
Speaker 6 (19:03):
I live in Bakersfield now, but I'm close by.
Speaker 4 (19:06):
Interesting.
Speaker 5 (19:07):
Yeah, my best buddy is uh used to be the
editor of the California newspaper Bob Price.
Speaker 4 (19:14):
Now he does TV feature stories.
Speaker 5 (19:16):
Yeah I know.
Speaker 4 (19:18):
Yeah, he's a local celebrity.
Speaker 6 (19:23):
Yeah he is. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
Well, I think other than that, all that I really
had left was kind of mister Wilson's evidence for the
of Habeas corpus, But I feel like we probably have
covered a majority of that throughout the presentation. It definitely
takes into consideration everything we've discussed, the forensic testimony, what
we do know about forensics testified to by other great
(19:47):
pathologists and corners around you know, the United States. Also,
the fact that the DNA degradation is similar, is similar
to identical to what was taken from his arm, and
that should never happen in a case like this. So
I'm here to hopefully expose this entire system and hopefully
(20:09):
get people to pay attention so that he does get
this right. For a rehearing because this man does I believe,
in my honest opinion, I believe he does not belong
in prison for this murder.
Speaker 5 (20:20):
Sounds like he doesn't and it sounds like a terrible
police work.
Speaker 3 (20:25):
Yeah, it does.
Speaker 6 (20:27):
Well. Thank you Nannette and also Nolan. Thank you guys
for coming on and sharing this. I hope he can
get enough eyes on this and put enough pressure on
them to you know, allow him to have a new trial.
And it sucks to hear that he's ill, and hopefully
(20:50):
he gets to see the light of day again.
Speaker 5 (20:53):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (20:53):
Yeah, And even then, I think that coming out of that,
his mental health is going to take many, many years
to get over what he has probably witnessed and gone
through in prison.
Speaker 4 (21:04):
Being a prisoner of war.
Speaker 5 (21:05):
You know.
Speaker 3 (21:05):
I want to give you here from Chris and I
thank you David for having this again on your show
because I appreciate anybody who can help us get this
out there very Thank you so much, and thank you Nolan.
Speaker 4 (21:20):
Thank you.
Speaker 6 (21:20):
Well, we'll definitely circle back around this. We'll find out
updates and we'll try to present updates as well. And
anybody else that's watching this, please share this story and
let's get some eyes on this. Let's get this man.
If he's innocent, let's get him free. And we're not
supposed to allow cops to do bad stuff like this.
(21:41):
And this is why it's important that we continue the
work that we do. We don't have subscribers, we have supporters,
So thank you, guys, and let's get some eyes on this.
Speaker 4 (21:50):
Well, let's tell on that is.
Speaker 5 (21:52):
I have a criminal matter felling in Bakersfield next month,
so maybe when I'm down there we can maybe have
some launcher or hooked.
Speaker 4 (22:01):
Up or you have a beer or something.
Speaker 6 (22:03):
No doubt, get my number, get my number from the nette.
Speaker 3 (22:07):
Okay, and I will keep everybody updated as I get
more information on the case.
Speaker 6 (22:11):
And everybody, I'm gonna drop the Nett's link in the
description and the pin comment. Make sure you guys go
to show her some support.
Speaker 5 (22:20):
I'm going too, because maybe Bob, you do a feature
story on what you do.
Speaker 6 (22:24):
Yeah, no doubt, no doubt.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
Absolutely, thank you guys. All right, you guys, everyone take care.
We have a great weekend, Happy Eastern. Hope to see
you soon, all right, guys, Yes, bye bye bye. Okay.
So at the completion of that podcast, I do have
additional information and I would also like to show or
(22:49):
share at least my screen. I have a PowerPoint presentation
which we saw David flipping back and forth, but I'm
not sure that anybody got a clear visibility. So as
I scribe and cover the questions, I'm going to slowly
sift through these that'll give everybody an opportunity to pause
and read on your own accord. So what I wanted
to really actually start with was the arriving at home.
(23:12):
So one of the questions was what and how mister
Wilson found Miss kim. It says that at one ten
am on Sunday three thirty one, nineteen ninety six, I
got out of the train at Palo Alto train station
and walked toward the downtown area for about fifteen minutes,
then stopped the Plazon University Avenue where there was a
(23:33):
ceremony and the band started playing, and sat on the
bench for about forty five minutes. At two ten am,
I walked on University Avenue for about ten minutes, then
stopped in front of Walgreen drug Stores for about ten minutes,
then walked on University Avenue toward the house about twenty minutes.
At approximately two point fifty am. I arrived at home
(23:55):
on eleven sixty Fulton Street and was in my room
for about ten minutes. At three am, I walked to
seven eleven on Waverley Street for about twenty minutes and
grabbed a juice and walked back home for about twenty minutes.
Mister Wilson also had a door to his bedroom, so
he could leave through that door to exit to go
(24:16):
wherever he wanted to go without having to walk through
the house, which is why he was not aware at
that point in time that Miss Kim was dead. He says,
at three forty am, I arrived at my room on
eleven sixty foot the Street, and I was in my
room for about five minutes. At three forty five am,
I walked toward the toilet, and I believe that's where
(24:38):
he finds Miss Kim. So he says, at about three
forty five am on Sunday three thirty one, nineteen ninety six,
I walked toward the toilet, and when I passed the
basement door, I noticed the basement door was open and
its light was on. And when I looked down the stairs,
I observed Hawk Jew Kim was lying on her back
at the bottom of the stairs. I slowly walked down
(24:59):
the stairs and saw Hawk you Kim lying on her
back and naked from the waist up, and a very
large wooden board on top of her shoulders. I tried
to move the board, but the board was very heavy.
I couldn't move it, and walked up the stairs and
walked toward William Coleman's room for help and yelled his
name very loud, but he didn't come out. And when
I opened his door, I saw William Coleman standing behind
(25:22):
the door and fully dressed in blue jeans and white
sweater and street shoes. William Coleman knew Hawk jew Kim
was already dead, and he was fully clothed. I knew
he didn't get out of the bed. I told him
I found Jean, hurry up, come with me. I need
his assistance. But he refused to come with me and said,
Hawk you Kim was already dead and there's nothing he
(25:43):
could do for her. I slowly walked down the stairs
again and told William Coleman call the police, and tried
to move the board, but the board was very heavy
and I couldn't move it, and walked up the stairs again.
William Coleman had called the police and we waited outside
the house for the police. So basically, mister Wilson's assertion
(26:05):
of the actual phone call was that let's see at
three fifty three am. So, like I'd indicated, eight minutes
after the notification to mister Coleman is when mister Coleman
actually made that call. And this is going to be
the thoughts of or the testimony basically of mister Wilson
is that William Coleman had called nine one one and
(26:26):
told the operator we just found Hawk Jew Kim in
the basement. She was dead for four to five hours.
She fell down the steps. There was some kind of
dried blood like all over things, and she was laying
like on her back. William Coleman also told the operator
he has been home a little earlier, but he never
goes down. A lot of the time she parks her
(26:47):
car in the driveway, but that doesn't mean that she
is not here. Sometimes she goes with her sister. So
interesting that, you know, mister Coleman claims she was dead
for four to five hours, and if he had never
gone down and didn't know she was dead, how would
he know any type of a timeframe, so that really
didn't make a lot of sense to me. But that
brings us to the actual nine to one to one
(27:08):
transcript which I do now have in possession. So basically,
on March thirty first of nineteen ninety six, the voice
comes on. This is Sandy Gagnan, communications supervisor for the
Communications Division of the Pala Watto Police Department. Today. Today
is Saturday, May eleventh, nineteen ninety six, at ten o'clock
in the morning. The following is all the recorded information
(27:30):
from the master tape for Sunday, March thirty first, nineteen
ninety six, which relates to case number nine six Dash
zero nine one zero one zero Voice three fifty three
twenty eight March thirty first, Beat three fifty three Operator
nine to one one Coleman, Yeah, could you send an
ambulance to eleven sixty Fulton Street, My landlady, she's she's
(27:53):
passed away. She's I think she's dead. Operator, Okay, how
old is she? Coleman? She's a about fifty eight operator,
about fifty eight Coleman. Yep, operator. Did she have any
medical problems? Coleman, Nope, she's in the dot dot dot.
We have a what do you call it? Downstairs? It's
(28:13):
like a basement to the house, you know, like you
come into the kitchen and you go downstairs. Operator, uh
huh Coleman, and she's dot dot dot. I think she
fell down there. She's dot dot dot and oh, Operator Okay,
but you checked her and you can't find any pulse
or anything. Coleman. Nope. I think she's been there for
(28:36):
dot dot dot. Well, sometimes she parks her car in
the driveway and she goes with her sister. Operator. Oh,
so you don't know how long she's been down Coleman. Nope,
but I think she's been there for a long time,
maybe four or five hours or maybe longer. Operator Okay,
are you a neighbor or do you live there? Coleman.
I live there. I rent a room from her. Operator Okay,
(28:58):
you just found her now now, Coleman, Yeah, we just
found her. Dispatcher. I think she fell down the steps. Coleman.
I think she dot dot dot. There's some kind of
dried blood like all over the things, and she's laying
like on her back sort of. Operator Okay, I'm going
to get the medics going, and the other dispatcher is
(29:19):
going to talk to you okay, Coleman, okay, Operator too, okay,
And your name is Coleman, William Coleman, co L E.
M A N. Operator two. Okay, and you just came
home now, Coleman. Now, I've been home a little earlier,
but I never go down in dot dot dot. And
(29:39):
a lot of times she perksed the car on the driveway,
but that don't mean she's not here. Sometimes she goes
with her sister, Operator too, okay. Well, paramedics are on
their way, and so are the police, mister Coleman, and
they should be there momentarily, if you could meet them
out in front. Coleman, okay, I'll meet them out in front.
We live at Fulton and Kingsley. Now, for somebody who
(30:00):
he was so complacent not shocked when his own roommate
attempted to tell him that he had found their landlady dead,
is now seeming to be very confused. He's not directly
answering the questions. He's ending questions or answers short and
then bringing up completely different subjects, such as the vehicle
(30:22):
that was parked in the driveway. I found that the
answers that he's given just don't seem to be indicative
of somebody who was completely unaware of the fact that
she was already dead, and his behavior as well didn't either,
because by indicating that she's dead, there's nothing you can
do for her. That doesn't stop you from calling the police.
That's the first thing you should do. So that helps
(30:43):
to answer the first couple questions. And then we were
asked what county did this occur? In Santa Clara County
is where the actual murder took place, and the trial
was done in San Jose, California. It says what was
the race in the age of the Renters. I'm still
waiting on those answers from mister Wilson. What is Coleman's background.
(31:06):
I'm still waiting on a response from him as in
regards to that as well, and whether or not they
took the same forensic evidence from William Coleman. We're waiting
to see what happens there is there evidence, is there
an evidence log on William Coleman. One of the things
that I noticed when I was going through this, and
in fact I wanted to bring up really quickly before
(31:26):
we go into it, is that one of the officers,
in his own report indicates that he was at work
and he was called to the eleven sixty Fulton Street address.
And as I continued to read this, I got extremely
confused because it says his job is evidence collection and
I was going to assist with the plans, which I'm
not sure what the plans are. I was contacted via
(31:47):
radio by Sergeant d' stefano. He asked me to phone him,
which I did. Sergeant d's stefano instructed us to halt
any activity we were planning and then to return to
the police station. So he indicated that he was He
had not entered the residence yet, but he stood on
the outside assisting with perimeter security. Evidence technician Lynn Dillard
(32:08):
was the was with Officer Di Trechillo and had just
come from inside the house and one of his functions
was to actually with the police department in evidence collection.
He was going to assist with the photography of the scene.
So I think it's very important that we understand this.
This is Officer g. Brooks in his own written report
stating that he was there to photograph the scene but
(32:30):
then was called off and told to return to the
police station. So it makes me kind of wonder was
this also part of what was going to be happening
as far as the setup was concerned. I did talk
to another client of mine who is former law enforcement,
who indicated that Palo Alto is what the cops would
refer to as a FUFU area, and because they're fufu,
(32:52):
they have lots of money in these areas, and these
are not the type of crimes they like to see
go unsolved because it doesn't set the mind at ease
of the people who live there that provide that community
with the type of money that they have there. And
so when somebody had indicated that, you know, they just
needed to secure a conviction, that's exactly what my client
(33:13):
had basically said, was that they needed to pin this
on somebody, They needed to call this murder solved. So
that could have been the motivation, aside from the other
things that Michael You're had actually done by taking out
the culplatory evidence from the backpack and so forth. So
(33:33):
let's see, here is there evidence I'm asking about. Obviously
the evidence log his lawyer. We were asked who was
his lawyer at the time. It was either a mister
or Missus Pariscou, which was likely a public defender, but
I am waiting on the full information and name of
that individual. It asked where mister Peter was currently incarcerated,
(33:55):
and I show that he is at the California health
Care Facility in Stockton, California. He was transferred during the time,
actually when I was completing my examination, he was in
transfer mode. He had requested that transfer because he wasn't
doing well in the state penitentiary and they had set
(34:17):
him up for a transfer. Took about eight months, though
I think he said before he was actually given back
all his boxes and his files so he could continue
working on his writ of habeas corpus. So there was
a long period in between in which I was not
able to speak with him because he didn't have any
of his files. Let's see, and when did mister Wilson
(34:38):
file for the writ of habeas corpus? Are you with us, Harriet?
There you are.
Speaker 5 (34:50):
Down.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
It took me forty five minutes to do that.
Speaker 3 (34:54):
Okay, okay, you're live. You're live. That conversation until laft
It says, when did mister Wilson file for the rid
of habeas corpus? He filed for the rid of habeas
corpus on July seventeenth of twenty twenty four. Now, the
only log that I actually have that mentions mister Coleman's name,
which goes back to whether or not there was any
(35:15):
evidence taken on or forensics taken on mister Coleman. And
it looks like that the statement is placed on the
property report for Peter Wilson, not for one for himself,
for mister Coleman. But it does say that he consents
to search, so consent to search form signed by William
Coleman and consent to search. What and why is it
(35:38):
on a property report for mister Wilson. It's as if
they fingered this guy from the very beginning and had
no intentions of letting any part of it go all right,
So what did you think about all that, Harriet?
Speaker 2 (35:50):
Well, I did check into some of the things, and
my apologies for is I did look into some of
the old news reports on him. Oh Joe, Yeah, that
his that. Then when they went to charge him, they
(36:13):
found out that his name Peter Wilson was his changed name,
but because he was from Iran, they had to charge
him under his Iranian names. So I have questions without
that at all.
Speaker 3 (36:28):
Yeah, No, That's a good question to be asked because
Rayson and age was definitely something that was that was
asked for, and so that might explain why William William
Coleman left the country, because my idea is, if he's
a young guy, how does he have access to just
you know, a visa and getting out. So if these
(36:49):
are students from another country and they collectively changed their
names or americanize their names while they're here, that might
make some sense. So I'm going to ask that. And
what did you find out what that name was?
Speaker 2 (37:02):
Oh my god, it's the last okay, I'm sorry. It
was ham illed or ham made inn. And it really
perplexed me because it was bringing back some memories because
I am from the Bay area of the hold On.
Speaker 3 (37:23):
Okay. So he meade, what how are you spelling the
last name?
Speaker 2 (37:27):
Well, the last name is it starts off with E
I N l O U r wrin. But the first
name is actually spelled h A M L D. And
I said, maybe that's a misspelling, but yeah, but it's
it's h A. It could be h A M I D.
(37:47):
But according s f Gate and other sources, it's with
a nail instead of an I.
Speaker 3 (37:54):
And you said, so the last name e I N
l o U. What was the batance of that?
Speaker 2 (38:01):
Well, I tried to look that up, but it isn't
an Iranian last name. So I had a lot of questions.
How long has he been here?
Speaker 4 (38:09):
How was he?
Speaker 5 (38:10):
You know?
Speaker 3 (38:10):
Harriet, Harriet, Harriet. I've asked three times when I'm just
trying to get the spelling down e I N l ou.
Is there more to it?
Speaker 2 (38:18):
There's a little bit more, but I can't google it
right now, so you don't know what the full last
name is.
Speaker 3 (38:25):
All right, I'm going to be very interested in getting
that from you. And I love that you were so
good on research. All right, So back to what you
were saying, Sorry about that. Oh no in the area
during this time in nineteen definitely.
Speaker 2 (38:41):
And I've heard the news because my parents, especially when
I came home from work, had news going twenty four
to seven, especially the AM radio. And of course that
was a story that was brought up a lot, you know,
for a while in nineteen ninety six. And if I
understand correctly, this person had more than one trial. The
(39:03):
first trial was a hung jury, and then the second
trial was a few years later where they believe they
nailed him correctly. But I had a lot of questions.
I said, but you know what is going on with
this guy? You know?
Speaker 3 (39:22):
Right? Well? I mean when we start to look at
this evidence and we see the things that were done,
and maybe the officer thought he could get away with
this because he was not American. I mean there, I
think when it's a second culture, somebody who doesn't quite
understand the legal system, it's easier for these police officers
to get away with things that are against human rights
(39:44):
obviously when it comes to policing people. But you are
absolutely correct. There has been two trials. I want to say.
The first one was to the early two thousand and
the second one was two thousand and five, if I
believe correctly from what he was stating. So, and he
was in prison the entire time, even with the hung jury,
he still remained in prison. He has not taken a
(40:04):
step out of inhorseiration since he was arrested for this crime.
So did you see anything in any of your research
that made you feel like he was complicit with this crime?
Speaker 2 (40:16):
Just the red flags as to so many questions is
how was he making a living? And according to the
sources that I basically saw, which was I believe polo
alto online. They believed that he was scamming the landlord
to try to make a statement to have her signed
(40:38):
something and she was over fifty five yeah, or three
hundred thousand dollars.
Speaker 3 (40:45):
Now they didn't He hasn't indicated anything to that degree.
He had three rental receipts that the DA tried to
insist that he made her sit down and write in
that hour that she claims that he had killed her.
So that doesn't I mean, at least based on what
I see in what he's telling me. So this would
(41:07):
be interesting to note. And we have to understand that
they're going to sensationalize. The media is weaponized against individuals
when they want it to be, and some of these
things could be just false stories, false leads that were
fed to them. So I do take it with a
little grain of salt in regards to the motives of
the officer. If he would, in fact, you know, remove
(41:28):
exculpable evidence and plant evidence at the crime scene, what
would he say to the media in order to further
victimize this individual.
Speaker 2 (41:40):
Well, I can look into this a little more. I've
at a very busy unusual wake for my situation here,
but it just raised a whole bunch of questions more
than answers.
Speaker 3 (41:53):
Right right, it does, and I would love to collaborate
with you on that, especially if you could get me
that last name. I think that there's some searches that
we can do. I know a few private investigators, and
I know that Nolan and David Villa as well would
be interested and probably have some avenues to be able
to look some of this stuff up. Wow. I don't
(42:13):
know why you didn't call me ahead of time to
tell me you had this information, because I would have
been on that before. Now.
Speaker 2 (42:18):
I had an interesting day yesterday, so it wasn't going
to happen anyways. Well, I aim to get here, you know,
and I have just one wonderful background echo here. But
it's good.
Speaker 3 (42:34):
Are you able to see the show now on your phone?
I can see it.
Speaker 2 (42:36):
Yeah, I got my reading glasses on.
Speaker 3 (42:39):
So nice, nice, So welcome back with us full. But
you still didn't get the video working out right.
Speaker 2 (42:46):
I was going to try that, and I said, after
forty five minutes of trying to unlock this, for some reason,
it was blocked on my phone.
Speaker 3 (42:53):
I had to.
Speaker 2 (42:53):
Dig deep, so I had to be my own it person.
I said, I'm not spending another fight of forty five
minut and it's unlocked the camera.
Speaker 3 (43:02):
Well, and hopefully they would be in the same location,
but I don't know. I've not seen it or viewed
it from the Google telephone.
Speaker 2 (43:10):
This is just unreally, it's it kept on the same life.
It's blocked. It's blocked, and I didn't have an explanation. Anyways,
we'll get to that later.
Speaker 3 (43:18):
Well, and did you find any information on mister William Coleman,
because is there I'm now wondering if there's a possibility
that he changed his name as well.
Speaker 2 (43:28):
All I know is what I started going down a
rabbit hole and there is some person who is with
the last name of Coleman, not this William Coleman, but
that did some wrote some books on the Iranian life
of nineteen seventy nine, and uh, and I thought, is
this person related? Is the person I'm seeing about some book?
(43:52):
You know? His father? I had a lot of questions,
So I was going down some rabbit holes.
Speaker 3 (43:57):
So is it normal? And I don't know if you
know the answer to this. I wish Nolan had joined
us today. But is it normal for them to allow
people here on visas to make changes to their names.
Speaker 2 (44:10):
I think since it's the nineties, you might want to
try asking the Clinton administration.
Speaker 3 (44:16):
I wonder, you mean, the best friends of Trump.
Speaker 2 (44:22):
All I know is I'm seeing things from nineteen seventy nine,
the Iranian Revolution, and I'm wondering, is this person from
before that, which would be actually a good flag if
it was during when there was the Prince and Princess
of Iran and we were under much more better, better
(44:45):
things with him. Did he come here after the collapse
of that civilization and during Carter's the Iranian hostage crisis
and that era. But it is I think logically that
if they did come here under pressure like that, that
(45:06):
they were going to be allowed to change their name.
But I don't see him as as americanized, you know,
like nationalized, And you know, I don't know. That's my question.
Is this person a US citizen with the change name?
Speaker 3 (45:24):
Well?
Speaker 2 (45:24):
Well, I know they went to charge him and they
said we can't charge him under that name. We have
to charge them under am ild and whatever the last
name started out as.
Speaker 3 (45:35):
Well, But then he would have been locked up under
that name that would have I'm yeah, now I get
really confused about the whole name change situation. If this
is if this is correct and we have the right
person now, it really makes me want to kind of
dig into it. Yeah. So, like just in the last
couple of weeks, I'd found out that and I didn't
(45:55):
know this because I don't follow politics for the most part.
I vote for a a party based on beliefs and
how that benefits me as a citizen. And it turns
out that Trump was a former Democrat. And I thought
that to be extremely interesting because I'm getting all of
this you know, throwback from the Dems, my friends that
(46:17):
are Democratic that this is one of their people, this
is their party, this individual that they hate so badly
for being a Republican and putting a foot down in
these areas as a Republican is something he would have
done whether he was a Democratic president or a Republican president. Correct.
Speaker 2 (46:37):
Yeah, And you know, there's a lot of saying now
that today's Republicans are yesterday's Democrats, and you don't want
to really feel people when you say that meant that
Bobby Well, Bobby Kennedy Senior and JFK Senior would be
more on the Trump side right now because of how
(47:00):
their political leanings are so right, yeah, so, and it would.
Speaker 3 (47:06):
Be crazy because we know Hillary Clinton was originally a
Republican during Watergate, while she you know, offended Nixon and
then it becomes a Democrat with her husband. It's almost
as if it's okay with these people to flip sides
based on how it builds there gets them up the ladder, right. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (47:25):
Yeah, she was a Yeah, she was a young Republican
in her teenage years in the school in the Chicago,
Illinois area. I'm trying to remember. So yeah, and then
comes along. Yeah. It does seem to be that you
want to get voted in, you have to go with
(47:45):
what your constituents are, and you, you know, kind of
be like a chameleon and change.
Speaker 3 (47:52):
And that's what was interesting about the conversation I was
having as they indicated that I guess, uh, Barack Obama
and Trump sat together at a dinner, which I've said
many times, you guys, look at them, they're hanging out.
They're friends, and it's now being becoming a little bit
more true. But that Barack Obama said to Trump, you'll
never make it as a Democratic president obviously running against
(48:16):
Barack Obama. He felt that he was a stronger candidate
for being a Democrat, and that's why Trump flips to Republican.
And then in that quest for information, I found out
that Trump also ran early two thousands as a liberal.
Isn't that just proof? Again, we voted him in as
a Republican, but we couldn't get him voted in as
a liberal. And that truly means that they know as
(48:38):
a political society that half of Americans are going to
be Republicans, the other half are going to be Democrats,
and then somewhere in between are these small pools of
independence and liberals and conservatives in an area where we
as a majority of Americans are never going to place
all of our votes towards those type of parties. It's system.
Speaker 2 (49:01):
All I know is I can think back when my
parents were of course in the sixties, seventies and eighties
and nineties, they were considerably conservative, but they voted Democrat,
right because you have to. And then so now you
try to say you're conservative as a Democrat, you're going
to get screened at.
Speaker 3 (49:23):
Well, you have to. You have to vote for the
least detrimental person, and that forces you into a party
like Republican or Democrat, because who you really want from
your own party that you believe and your belief system
follows is not going to likely be voted in. So
now we were at the end of our session, I've
got a couple seconds here just to kind of sign off,
(49:45):
to tell everybody thank you for watching. I would really
like to get more interested in this entire case, and
I will have updates as we go along with the
Zodiac case. Thank you so much Harriet for being here. Everybody,
have a wonderful weekend and we'll see you next Friday.
Speaker 2 (50:00):
Thank you, bye bye bye
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.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.