August 7, 2025 • 29 mins
Carl Koppelman draws dead people.
Specifically, Koppleman, a 53-year-old who lives near LA, makes reconstructions based on post-mortem photos of unidentified bodies, in the hopes that a drawing of a person’s face that’s closer to how they appeared in life will assist in identifying them, sometimes decades after their death.
“Everybody likes a good mystery,” Koppelman says. “I’ve been kind of always been intrigued by mysteries. Unsolved mysteries and crime stories and that sort of thing.”
He has plenty of material to work with. There are nearly 11,000 unidentified bodies listed in the National Missing and Unidentified Persons database (known as “NamUs”), which represents just a quarter of the estimated 40,000 unidentified bodies believed to be on record at medical examiner and coroners’ offices across the country. For many of these bodies, only a few biographical details are available for identification; some were found years after death, which can make determining an age, year of death, or even gender impossible, let alone provide an image for the person’s relatives or loved ones to identify—if the person has relatives or loved ones looking for them in the first place.
The “lucky” bodies are found close enough to time of death and in good enough condition that a reconstruction of their face can be created and released to the public. The problem is, sometimes those reconstructions just aren’t very good. Resources are scant and some of these cases are decades old, with only the crudest of sketches, drawn by a clearly untrained hand, to go by. Sometimes, if enough time has gone by without an identification and the post-mortem photo isn’t too graphic, law enforcement will release those photos as well.
Koppelman came across one of those photos in 2009. It was a man who was found in an abandoned Philadelphia hotel in 2006, having bled to death from a cut on his foot.
“I looked at the post-mortem photo and I looked at the sketch and I said, ‘Hey, this doesn’t even look like the same person to me,'” Koppelman says.
Koppelman is an accountant by trade but had recently been laid off and was taking care of his ill mother in 2009. He’d become interested in amateur crime-solving websites around this time (he’s a moderator at WebSleuths, one of the largest of such communities), specifically the forums that try to match unidentified bodies to missing persons, not without some success. It’s easier than ever to do this with the internet, and publicly accessible databases that list both missing persons and unidentified people, like NamUs, have helped them give names to bodies found decades ago.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Specifically, Koppleman, a 53-year-old who lives near LA, makes reconstructions based on post-mortem photos of unidentified bodies, in the hopes that a drawing of a person’s face that’s closer to how they appeared in life will assist in identifying them, sometimes decades after their death.
“Everybody likes a good mystery,” Koppelman says. “I’ve been kind of always been intrigued by mysteries. Unsolved mysteries and crime stories and that sort of thing.”
He has plenty of material to work with. There are nearly 11,000 unidentified bodies listed in the National Missing and Unidentified Persons database (known as “NamUs”), which represents just a quarter of the estimated 40,000 unidentified bodies believed to be on record at medical examiner and coroners’ offices across the country. For many of these bodies, only a few biographical details are available for identification; some were found years after death, which can make determining an age, year of death, or even gender impossible, let alone provide an image for the person’s relatives or loved ones to identify—if the person has relatives or loved ones looking for them in the first place.
The “lucky” bodies are found close enough to time of death and in good enough condition that a reconstruction of their face can be created and released to the public. The problem is, sometimes those reconstructions just aren’t very good. Resources are scant and some of these cases are decades old, with only the crudest of sketches, drawn by a clearly untrained hand, to go by. Sometimes, if enough time has gone by without an identification and the post-mortem photo isn’t too graphic, law enforcement will release those photos as well.
Koppelman came across one of those photos in 2009. It was a man who was found in an abandoned Philadelphia hotel in 2006, having bled to death from a cut on his foot.
“I looked at the post-mortem photo and I looked at the sketch and I said, ‘Hey, this doesn’t even look like the same person to me,'” Koppelman says.
Koppelman is an accountant by trade but had recently been laid off and was taking care of his ill mother in 2009. He’d become interested in amateur crime-solving websites around this time (he’s a moderator at WebSleuths, one of the largest of such communities), specifically the forums that try to match unidentified bodies to missing persons, not without some success. It’s easier than ever to do this with the internet, and publicly accessible databases that list both missing persons and unidentified people, like NamUs, have helped them give names to bodies found decades ago.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
We are joined by Carl Koppleman and he's one of
the regulars over there on web slutes And we were
just talking to Kathy Trcayan. Carl is the guy she
was telling us about who saw the Morgue photos of
this girl up there in Wisconsin that he thought was
Kathy's daughter. So we're gonna ca them tell us about
(00:21):
the kind of work he does and he's involvement in
this case here. So Carl, are you there, Yes, I
guess I'm here. Thank you so much. Tell us about yourself.
Who is Carl Kopleman.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
Well, I'm a CPA and up until two thousand and nine,
I was working at Disney. Got laid off from the
job at Disney, and my mother, who just passed away
last month, but she needed me to be a full
time caretaker. So this was back in two thousand and nine,
and for the last eight years or so, I've been
(00:52):
a full time caretaker from my mother, which meant I
was around the house quite a bit. And as I
was around the house, you know, just online reading news
articles and that sort of thing, I became interested in
the JC do Guard story and consequently came across web slues.
(01:16):
I was in. I've always been interested in kind of
true crime and unsolved mysteries and that sort of thing.
And as I came across web slues, I became fascinated
with this one forum about the unidentified. It's the forum
full of people. There's you know, thousands of people who
are members of web slues who look at unidentified decedent
(01:40):
cases and try to see if they can identify these people.
And these cases go back, they go back decades, some
of them, you know, back to the nineteen sixties, or
some of them back to the nineteen fifties. Even but
you know, there are thousands of cases. They have threads
on web sues to profile these various cases, and I
(02:01):
became interested in trying to see if I could solve
some of them. Uh how Jackie and I were OK, go.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
Ahead, Yeah, how would you go back doing that?
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Uh? Just when I started doing this, it was just
a matter of looking at missing persons listings and seeing
if you could find someone who can fit the description
or or in some cases if they had post mortem
photos of you know, trying to match up faces and
to to missing persons listings. Uh that that method is
(02:33):
not as effective anymore. Just because the low hanging fruit
has all been picked. There are a lot of people
who do this now these days, and and uh, you
have to come up with more clever ways of of
researching these cases. I've done quite a bit of browsing
high school yearbooks and you know, various you know, other
(02:54):
research methods to uh to try to solve these are
But but back intoy eleven, I was just basically going
through missing persons listings back back then, there was a
case that I was looking at. They called her Racine
Jane Doe. She was a twenty something woman who was
(03:15):
found dead in a cornfield, had been tortured. She'd brutalized
very very cruelly, and she had burn marks all over
and you know, signs that she's been tortured. And I
was going through the missing person's listings trying to see
(03:35):
if I could find somebody, you know, who was listed
as missing who fit her description and looked like the
corner photo that I had. Well, I came across this
case from of Andrea Bowman, who was a teenage runaway
from ten years earlier. She was fourteen at the time
she went missing, so her age was consistent with you know,
(04:00):
years later, this twenty something woman. Her facial characteristics matched
almost perfectly. I you know, using my computer and using
overlays on my graphics program, I overlaid the two faces
and they appeared to be aligned perfectly. So I was
(04:20):
convinced in my mind, Okay, this was Andrea Bowman. Ten
years later, I contacted the Racine County Sheriff's department. There's
a guy by the name of Canos, I think the
sheriff's deputy was in charge of the case at the time.
His name was I forgured his first name is the
last name was Canos, and I you know, worked with him,
(04:43):
and he, you know, he got in contact with well.
As he learned from Kathy, Andrea Bowman was from the Holland,
Michigan area or Hamilton, Michigan, which was right straight across
the Lake Michigan from Racine County, Wisconsin. So that you know,
appeared to be a you know, consistent part of the
(05:06):
case as well. So Canals got in touch with the
detectives in case in charge of Andrea Bowman's missing person's case.
And you know, there was about a year went by.
Speaker 1 (05:18):
Uh I missed a couple of questions. One is what
is the graphics program that you use.
Speaker 2 (05:25):
I used Coroll Photo Paint. And I'm also a forensic artist,
or not not a a certified forensic artist, but I
do quite a bit of forensic art and I've gotten
a lot of recognition for the work that i do,
so you know, I've been doing that quite quite a
(05:45):
while too. That's part of what I do. You know,
in trying to solve these unidentified dicedent cases, I create
facial reconstructions of of these John Do's and Jane does.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Now, when you call up these detectives in charge of
these cases, how do you describe yourself? How do you
make contact with him? Because they're usually not very welcome
to be hearing from a you know.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
Some of them are, some of them aren't. In the
case of Canals, he was very very nice guy and
very interested in what I had to say. I just
call up and say, hey, I'm you know, just I'm
not with any official agency, but I've been, you know,
in my spare time going through these these cases, and
I have a possible match I think he might want
to look at. And you know, he listened to what
(06:30):
I had to say and and actually kept in contact
with me in the you know, the for for about
a year. It took him because as it turned, you know,
as we now know, they had trouble u confirming because
Andrea was adopted and they didn't have DNA on her.
They had not contacted Kathy by at that point, and
(06:54):
all they had was I think a single fingerprint that
they had taken off of a flute. So and they weren't,
you know, one hundred per sin sure that fingerprint belonged
to Andrea. It could have been belonged to someone else,
but it was Andrea's flute, and so they assumed that, okay,
we have one fingerprint off the flute and that doesn't match,
but it may not be Andrea's fingerprint. And so they
(07:18):
were having trouble coming up with a means of making
a positive identification or exclusion. So there was about a
year wait. And he had told me that they were
trying to locate her biological mother, and I waited and waited,
and eventually I was contacted by Kathy. They had located
(07:41):
Kathy notified her that her her biological daughter had gone
missing back in nineteen eighty nine. And Kathy became quite
alarmed at that and started googling around and found what
I had done online to create this overlad of of
(08:04):
the racine Jane Doe to Andrea Bowman. So, you know,
we she got in contact with me, and there was
another girl who had gone to school with Andrea at
the time, who was also a member of web sluse,
and she had given a little bit of information.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
So so this is you had already posted your work
online by the time, Katy, So then she was able
to just start looking around and she found your work
of her daughter.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
Yeah, oh man, that's that's fascinating.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Yeah, and she found this overlay of this unidentified Jane
Doe who had been tortured and murdered, and you know,
you could see how close their facial features aligned, and
and so uh, actually what happened was Kathy had gone
on too classmates dot com and created an account in
Andrea's name. So we were starting to you know, as
(08:54):
on our own time as we were waiting for this result.
I went when I went to uh websluse, saw this
account in the name Andrea Bowman. I thought, oh wow,
Andrea just signed up for classmates, because normally people don't
sign up for that in somebody else's name. So uh,
and then it was a paid member. It wasn't you know,
(09:15):
just something the computer that had picked up it was
somebody who had paid for an account there. So, you know,
I was kind of intrigued by that, and I got
this friend of of Andrea's from high school to to
contact the through through classmates dot com to send a
private message to to the person that had turned out
(09:37):
it was Kathy that had created that account. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
That was good thinking.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
H So, you know, Katy got a hold of me
and said, you know, what's the story on this racine
Jane Doe? And you know, we you know, eventually, after
she had turned in her DNA it it turned out
that she wasn't racine Jane Doe. But but we started
looking into the whole circumstances behind Andrea's disappearance, and we
(10:03):
found all kinds of very interesting uh information about the
family that had adopted her.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
Yeah, and I did they had to exhume that body, right,
the racine chains. Oh, they had to exhumee that body right?
Speaker 2 (10:20):
Uh? Yeah, Well I think they had DNA on her
from the start. I think, yeah, eventually they may have
exhumer body again for additional testing. But you know they've
had a DNA profile on her. It was only a
nineteen ninety nine case, so you know that this was
well within the you know, timeframe for DNA testing. But
(10:44):
but yeah, I think I'm not sure why they re
exhumed why they exhumed the body again, but I think because.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
They didn't have miochondrial DNA and it's and it's what
the DNA that they had from the mother, so they
needed to go back and get another DNA type sample.
Yea FASc Okay, yeah, the whole And you guys really
did a lot of work on It's very fascinating stuff.
What are so many other cases you've been working on?
Speaker 2 (11:06):
Oh, well, there's one case I got quite a bit
of notoriety for I had discovered the identity of a
girl who was known as Calie Doe. She was a
sixteen year old girl. We now know she was sixteen,
but for thirty five years, this was a nineteen seventy
nine case of a girl was shot in the forehead
and left in a cornfield. And this was up in
(11:28):
upstate New York, and the local sheriff there had gone
great efforts to try to figure out who this girl
was and spent thirty five years, spent his whole rest
of his career going on national TV and putting out
publicity on this case to try to figure out who
she was. Well, back in twenty fourteen, September twenty fourteen,
(11:52):
I would just happen to be going through missing persons
listings and spotted this new listing of a girl from
Florida named Tammy Joe Alexander and recognized her immediately as
as Callie Doe. I called it in and uh, you know,
about four months later, they confirmed through DNA testing with
(12:13):
with Tammy's sister that that she was in fact Kelly
Doe and and this case was solved. And uh, on
the morning they announced that, I was, you know, getting
all kinds of the media calls from the media wanting
wanting to interview me, wanting to talk to me about this. So,
you know, when that case was solved, my name became
(12:36):
a lot more well known than than it had been prior.
So uh there, but there are several cases that I
have been able to resolve, that one being the most, uh,
the most well known.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
Do you have a lot of parents of these missing
kids contacting and said, hey, Carol, we need your help
on this. We need to help on that.
Speaker 2 (12:54):
Oh, I get contacted for in addition to the facial
reconstructions of an idea and if I deced in cases,
I also do age progressions of you know, I'll take
a photo of somebody who's been missing since they the
nineteen seventies or or whatever, and take their photo and
try to present what they looked like thirty forty fifty
(13:16):
years later. And so I've been getting a lot of
people contact me, families of missing persons who've been missing
for decades, and you know, they want me to create
an image of what they what the person might look
like today. So I've been doing quite a few of those.
And so yeah, and I get contacted from families of
(13:37):
missing persons for other purposes as well, just to you know,
try to put out publicity. Because I'm fairly well known
now and have a pretty big following on Facebook. I
have about fifteen hundred Facebook friends.
Speaker 1 (13:52):
So yeah, if you want to find on contacted, if
people want to fly on on Facebook, it's Karl with
a C, Carl and Coppleman with a K kopp l.
Yes that's correct, an now, but you've never been called
to testify in court.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
No, I'm not, I mean, not on not on this
not on this topic.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
Okay, And have you found that most of these missing
people and stuff like that, it's a lot more girls
than boys, right?
Speaker 2 (14:21):
Oh yeah, I'm not so sure. Just maybe the more
the girls get more attention to just maybe just by
because of the nature, because you know, the way people
react more sympathetically to girls and boys. I don't know,
but you know there are there are plenty of cases
of boys, unidentified boys, as there are unidentified girls. Uh,
(14:44):
there's a you know, people of all demographics who are
you know, profile and web slues, and you know that
I've done facial reconstructions for I don't I generally try
to focus on the younger people just because that's you know,
there's more potential for them being solved if the person's younger.
(15:06):
But but you know, I've done people of all ages,
all demographics, all races, whatever. I've I've probably done a
few hundred of facial reconstructions since I started doing this.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
Is there anything you're working on right now you need
to publicize? You want to get out there?
Speaker 2 (15:28):
I don't know in particular. I mean, people can follow
my Facebook and you know, see my Facebook wall and
the various cases I've worked on. I usually when I
create an image, I put it on my Facebook wall.
So if you go to my photo albums in my
Facebook page, there's a photo album called the Missing and
the Unidentified, and there are over one hundred images in
(15:53):
that album on my Facebook page that people can look
at and see if you know, maybe it's there their
own neighborhood, if the miss the unidentified person was located
and in their area, maybe you know, they can share
it around on their own Facebook page and hopefully get
it in front of the eyes of somebody who might
recognize the person.
Speaker 1 (16:14):
And how often do you have to actually call the
detectives in charge of these cases and try and present
them with drama evidence.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
I've been doing it a little less often that I
used to, just because there are so many people who
are interested in this now that that law enforcement does
tend to get overloaded with uh, you know, possible matches.
And so unless I'm really, you know, feel really confident
that I've that I'm onto something, I I generally don't,
(16:43):
you know, do as many callings as I used to,
But you know, every couple of months I'll spot something
that that I feel real good about and I either
turn it into the the National Missing and Unidentified Person
system or else the detective in charge of the case.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
So yeah, what I found is it's helpful if you
can identify the detective in charge of the case, right,
and they're not being all that cooperative, they're not all
that excited to be handed more work of power, right.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
And you know, there there are people who are some
are better than others at it. And you know there
are some people who don't do the simple homework to
you know, be able to see, Okay, this person has
a tattoo and the you know, the unidentified person doesn't.
You can easily exclude that why you're calling the police
to have them look at it. And you know there's
(17:34):
you know a lot of people who don't do the
basic research on the case. They just look at it
and say, oh, this looks like the facial reconstruction. Call
it in. And so you know, the law enforcement tend
to get annoyed at those types of calls. So and
and there are more people doing that these days than
there used to be. So I'm very discriminating on you know,
(17:58):
calling things in, not calling things in before I've actually
done a you know, complete research, and yeah, that's interesting.
People very confident about what I'm calling in.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
Because it seems really easy to get carried away by
emotion and say, oh my god, they look exactly alike.
You know. It's such a personal opinion type thing. But
one of the things I found out, when you're working
with these detectives and you want them to take you serious,
if you send them a edex where they have to
sign for it, you know, and they okay, it seems
(18:33):
to really really get their attention once they've signed, you know,
in another on the hook for it, you know, and
wan I'll.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
Do some time. Somebody's going to take the trouble to
send them of you know, right certified letter. Then you
know they probably will want to look at it a
little closer.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
I don't know, it helps, it's a big difference. And
also to attach an half a day, but you do
a little write up, a little alff David, you get
it notarized. And you know, my name is Carl Copper.
I researched this thing here. I believe this is these
two match. I have this kind of experience and this
gets your attention. Man, it really opens up doors because
now they're on the hook, they can't just still blow
(19:08):
you off.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
I mean if I found that if you just write
a very well drawn out email, if you you know,
your bullet point your reasons for why you think this
person is a match, uh, you know, and and write
clearly and legibly and you know, and concisely, then then
they'll pay attention to it. You know, if you just say,
(19:32):
you know, how about this one, this person looks like
your facial reconstruction without any other elaboration, then they might
not look at it as closely. But but I'm always
you know, if I'm going to call in or send
in an email to a detective, I'll bullet point my
reasons for why they should be taking this seriously, you know,
(19:52):
and writing clear english and concise so you know, and
don't spend five pages explaining it.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Oh yeah, that's a home Yeah, that's a whole other thing.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
Man.
Speaker 1 (20:02):
People are sending fourteen pages. You know, they want you
to review the whole No one reads that. No one
reads that stuff, yeah right, yeah, no. Back to back
to Andrew Bowman for a second. Okay, with all the
information we have on this case, do you think that
you're going to find a resolution on us.
Speaker 2 (20:20):
Uh. I mean it's tough to say that the adoptive
family isn't really cooperating that closely. And you know, because
you know, they have constitutional rights that you know, they
have the right to keep their mouths shut, they have
the right to refuse a polygraph exam. It doesn't really
look good for him. But you know, if they want
(20:42):
to clam up, then you know, it makes it a
lot more difficult to, you know, if it's not them,
to you know, get insight into who may have caused
their disappearance. I'm pretty confident at this point that, you know,
a fourteen year old girl who's been missing for twenty
eight years and doesn't show back up again, something has
(21:04):
probably happened to her. And given the history of her
adopted father of being described by the sentencing judge in
nineteen eighty one has described him as a danger to
women if not confined, then that doesn't really look too
good for him in the context of his missing adopted daughter.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
Yeah, it seems like there were so many opportunities in
that case to rescue this kid before things went all
to hell there.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
Yeah, there was you know, she had talked to a
high school counselor and said that, you know, she'd been
abused inappropriately touched, I think is the word that the
detective told me that you know, she used the word
inappropriately touched when when describing you know, what had happened
to her. So and then you know, we have various
(21:57):
people who who knew the Bowman's new new Andrea, knew
she was a troubled kid, knew she wasn't happy with her,
with her family, the situation. And then you can just
go to the transcript of you know, Dennis Bowman's arrests
and see you know that this this man is has
(22:20):
very serious issues in dealing with the opposite sex or
with this dealing with women. He you know, he's had
displayed stalking behavior, He's shown a fascination with knives. He
you know, I'm sure Kathy explained you back in nineteen
eighty when you know he ran a eighteen year old
(22:42):
girl off the highway. The girl was on a bicycles,
He was on a motorcycle, ran her off the highway,
pulled a gun on her, told her he was going
to blow a hole in her if she didn't walk
into the woods, and you know, the woman, the young
woman was pretty sharp, was able to escape without anything
(23:03):
happening to her. But you know, if not, as the
judge described, if not for you know, the quick thinking
of this girl, she probably would have she most definitely
would have been raped and and may have been murdered. So,
I mean, that's the mentality of you know, of the environment,
(23:23):
the mentality of the man who had raised Andrea Bowman.
So that was the environment that she lived in.
Speaker 1 (23:30):
I was trying to abridge this with the with Kathy.
But when you look at the dates right of the
birth of the biological daughter to the Bowmans, hear the
Bomans they had to adopt because they could not conceive.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
Yeah, they they had up until the you know, Brenda's pregnancy,
after Dennis had been released from prison in nineteen eighty six,
nineteen eighty seven, she was they were able to conceive
of their own biological daughter. And then that kind of
looks strange too, that all of a sudden, you know,
now that they have the daughter that they didn't think
(24:05):
they could have. Now all of a sudden they have
this adopted daughter that isn't his, you know, doesn't have
the sentimental connection that that a biological daughter would have
and then all of a sudden she disappears.
Speaker 1 (24:21):
And what about the possibility that there was incest and
Andrea was actually the mother, the biological mother of this
the second daughter.
Speaker 2 (24:28):
No, no, no, nothing, no that No, Brenda is definitely
the the mother of Somebody would have seen Andrea pregnant
and in high school or in school if she had
been the mother of I mean, you know, she has
a whole school history, so you know, she wouldn't have
escaped notice of being pregnantive, you know.
Speaker 1 (24:52):
Okay, so we're convinced about that.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
Yeah, yeah, okay, Now Brenda is definitely the biological mother
of Vanessa. I wouldn't I wouldn't want to go there,
and you know, trying to presume anything otherwise, Okay, yeah.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
Because when you look at the dates, they all fit,
you know. But yeah, right.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
But she was in high school, and you know, somebody
would have noticed she was pregnant if she was if
she was pregnant.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
Okay, and what does anybody notice that the mother was pregnant,
because even Kathy said.
Speaker 2 (25:22):
Yes, oh yeah, yeah, her friends have said, you know,
they remember when she was pregnant. So we've heard from
people who.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
Have Okay, Brandan and people saw her in.
Speaker 2 (25:32):
The pregnant and and know that Brenda is the mother
of Andrea or excuse me of Vanessa.
Speaker 1 (25:38):
Hey, what about any neighbors of the Bowman's longtime friends,
strange family members, people wouldn't lawsuits with them? Have these
people been searched out and investigated? I'm sure because she
had a good investigator, right.
Speaker 2 (25:49):
Uh, yeah, we've We've got in touch with various people
who knew them. Nobody who's been involved in any lawsuits
that I know of, But there have been plenty of
people who have come forward to the Find Andrea and
Bowman facebook page that you know, they they you know,
(26:11):
have various stories to tell about what they know about
the Bowmans of you know, we have that to work on.
We've have various people. There was there's a young woman
who back in nineteen eighty nine, just not long after
Andrea's disappearance. This this girl was six years old at
(26:32):
the time and was kidnapped and was abducted and pulled
into a car and taken seventeen miles to a state park,
a little picnic area that was just happened to be
a few miles from where the Bowmans live, and she
was sexually he tried to you began to he stripped
(26:54):
her naked, tied her up, and then was going to
sexually assault her. And and he was chased away by
a barking dog. And they never have caught the guy
who did that. But you know, looking at the details,
that looks very suspiciously like it could be Dennis Bowman
who had done that. So there's that as well.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
So and that child's still a lot today. Pardon me,
that child is still a lot today.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
Yes, And we we know she's in her thirties now,
and you know, we know who she is. She's contacted
our our Facebook page just saying, oh, I'm wondering if
my you know, my case might have something to do with,
you know, Andrea's case. Not knowing anything about Dennis Bowman
that you know, had no familiarity with Dennis Bowman, but
knew about the Andrea Bowman case, and and you know,
(27:40):
she started telling us the details and I'm thinking to myself, Wow, this,
you know, could very well have been Dennis Bowman, who
you know, who picked up this six year old girl
over in you know, over near Lake Macatawua in Holland
and then drove her seventeen miles to a to a
a little campground that was, you know, just around the
(28:03):
corner from the Bowman's house. You know, I mean, there
are a lot of little coincidences about that little incident
that that, you know, that make us think, you know,
we the Dennis Bowman needs to be looked at a
little closer as as the man who had taken this girl.
Speaker 1 (28:20):
So, Carl, we're out of time though, But what do
you want to leave us with? And how can people
find you? On your face?
Speaker 2 (28:26):
Well, I'm My Facebook page is in my name, Carl Koppleman.
There's only one person I know of in the whole
country by that name, so there should be no trouble
finding my Facebook page. Let's see Carl with a C.
Koppleman's kopp e L M A N. I'm also a
moderator on the web forum, the web crime Crime Solving community.
(28:51):
I moderate the Unidentified forum there and there's a lot
of discussion there of various cases. I'm a regular participant
in that. Uh And yeah, that's uh. You know, anybody
who you know wants to see what I'm doing. Is
(29:11):
no trouble locating me.
Speaker 1 (29:13):
Okay, great Carl compliment. Thank you so much. We'll be
right back after these messages, okay,
We are joined by Carl Koppleman and he's one of
the regulars over there on web slutes And we were
just talking to Kathy Trcayan. Carl is the guy she
was telling us about who saw the Morgue photos of
this girl up there in Wisconsin that he thought was
Kathy's daughter. So we're gonna ca them tell us about
(00:21):
the kind of work he does and he's involvement in
this case here. So Carl, are you there, Yes, I
guess I'm here. Thank you so much. Tell us about yourself.
Who is Carl Kopleman.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
Well, I'm a CPA and up until two thousand and nine,
I was working at Disney. Got laid off from the
job at Disney, and my mother, who just passed away
last month, but she needed me to be a full
time caretaker. So this was back in two thousand and nine,
and for the last eight years or so, I've been
(00:52):
a full time caretaker from my mother, which meant I
was around the house quite a bit. And as I
was around the house, you know, just online reading news
articles and that sort of thing, I became interested in
the JC do Guard story and consequently came across web slues.
(01:16):
I was in. I've always been interested in kind of
true crime and unsolved mysteries and that sort of thing.
And as I came across web slues, I became fascinated
with this one forum about the unidentified. It's the forum
full of people. There's you know, thousands of people who
are members of web slues who look at unidentified decedent
(01:40):
cases and try to see if they can identify these people.
And these cases go back, they go back decades, some
of them, you know, back to the nineteen sixties, or
some of them back to the nineteen fifties. Even but
you know, there are thousands of cases. They have threads
on web sues to profile these various cases, and I
(02:01):
became interested in trying to see if I could solve
some of them. Uh how Jackie and I were OK, go.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
Ahead, Yeah, how would you go back doing that?
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Uh? Just when I started doing this, it was just
a matter of looking at missing persons listings and seeing
if you could find someone who can fit the description
or or in some cases if they had post mortem
photos of you know, trying to match up faces and
to to missing persons listings. Uh that that method is
(02:33):
not as effective anymore. Just because the low hanging fruit
has all been picked. There are a lot of people
who do this now these days, and and uh, you
have to come up with more clever ways of of
researching these cases. I've done quite a bit of browsing
high school yearbooks and you know, various you know, other
(02:54):
research methods to uh to try to solve these are
But but back intoy eleven, I was just basically going
through missing persons listings back back then, there was a
case that I was looking at. They called her Racine
Jane Doe. She was a twenty something woman who was
(03:15):
found dead in a cornfield, had been tortured. She'd brutalized
very very cruelly, and she had burn marks all over
and you know, signs that she's been tortured. And I
was going through the missing person's listings trying to see
(03:35):
if I could find somebody, you know, who was listed
as missing who fit her description and looked like the
corner photo that I had. Well, I came across this
case from of Andrea Bowman, who was a teenage runaway
from ten years earlier. She was fourteen at the time
she went missing, so her age was consistent with you know,
(04:00):
years later, this twenty something woman. Her facial characteristics matched
almost perfectly. I you know, using my computer and using
overlays on my graphics program, I overlaid the two faces
and they appeared to be aligned perfectly. So I was
(04:20):
convinced in my mind, Okay, this was Andrea Bowman. Ten
years later, I contacted the Racine County Sheriff's department. There's
a guy by the name of Canos, I think the
sheriff's deputy was in charge of the case at the time.
His name was I forgured his first name is the
last name was Canos, and I you know, worked with him,
(04:43):
and he, you know, he got in contact with well.
As he learned from Kathy, Andrea Bowman was from the Holland,
Michigan area or Hamilton, Michigan, which was right straight across
the Lake Michigan from Racine County, Wisconsin. So that you know,
appeared to be a you know, consistent part of the
(05:06):
case as well. So Canals got in touch with the
detectives in case in charge of Andrea Bowman's missing person's case.
And you know, there was about a year went by.
Speaker 1 (05:18):
Uh I missed a couple of questions. One is what
is the graphics program that you use.
Speaker 2 (05:25):
I used Coroll Photo Paint. And I'm also a forensic artist,
or not not a a certified forensic artist, but I
do quite a bit of forensic art and I've gotten
a lot of recognition for the work that i do,
so you know, I've been doing that quite quite a
(05:45):
while too. That's part of what I do. You know,
in trying to solve these unidentified dicedent cases, I create
facial reconstructions of of these John Do's and Jane does.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Now, when you call up these detectives in charge of
these cases, how do you describe yourself? How do you
make contact with him? Because they're usually not very welcome
to be hearing from a you know.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
Some of them are, some of them aren't. In the
case of Canals, he was very very nice guy and
very interested in what I had to say. I just
call up and say, hey, I'm you know, just I'm
not with any official agency, but I've been, you know,
in my spare time going through these these cases, and
I have a possible match I think he might want
to look at. And you know, he listened to what
(06:30):
I had to say and and actually kept in contact
with me in the you know, the for for about
a year. It took him because as it turned, you know,
as we now know, they had trouble u confirming because
Andrea was adopted and they didn't have DNA on her.
They had not contacted Kathy by at that point, and
(06:54):
all they had was I think a single fingerprint that
they had taken off of a flute. So and they weren't,
you know, one hundred per sin sure that fingerprint belonged
to Andrea. It could have been belonged to someone else,
but it was Andrea's flute, and so they assumed that, okay,
we have one fingerprint off the flute and that doesn't match,
but it may not be Andrea's fingerprint. And so they
(07:18):
were having trouble coming up with a means of making
a positive identification or exclusion. So there was about a
year wait. And he had told me that they were
trying to locate her biological mother, and I waited and waited,
and eventually I was contacted by Kathy. They had located
(07:41):
Kathy notified her that her her biological daughter had gone
missing back in nineteen eighty nine. And Kathy became quite
alarmed at that and started googling around and found what
I had done online to create this overlad of of
(08:04):
the racine Jane Doe to Andrea Bowman. So, you know,
we she got in contact with me, and there was
another girl who had gone to school with Andrea at
the time, who was also a member of web sluse,
and she had given a little bit of information.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
So so this is you had already posted your work
online by the time, Katy, So then she was able
to just start looking around and she found your work
of her daughter.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
Yeah, oh man, that's that's fascinating.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Yeah, and she found this overlay of this unidentified Jane
Doe who had been tortured and murdered, and you know,
you could see how close their facial features aligned, and
and so uh, actually what happened was Kathy had gone
on too classmates dot com and created an account in
Andrea's name. So we were starting to you know, as
(08:54):
on our own time as we were waiting for this result.
I went when I went to uh websluse, saw this
account in the name Andrea Bowman. I thought, oh wow,
Andrea just signed up for classmates, because normally people don't
sign up for that in somebody else's name. So uh,
and then it was a paid member. It wasn't you know,
(09:15):
just something the computer that had picked up it was
somebody who had paid for an account there. So, you know,
I was kind of intrigued by that, and I got
this friend of of Andrea's from high school to to
contact the through through classmates dot com to send a
private message to to the person that had turned out
(09:37):
it was Kathy that had created that account. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
That was good thinking.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
H So, you know, Katy got a hold of me
and said, you know, what's the story on this racine
Jane Doe? And you know, we you know, eventually, after
she had turned in her DNA it it turned out
that she wasn't racine Jane Doe. But but we started
looking into the whole circumstances behind Andrea's disappearance, and we
(10:03):
found all kinds of very interesting uh information about the
family that had adopted her.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
Yeah, and I did they had to exhume that body, right,
the racine chains. Oh, they had to exhumee that body right?
Speaker 2 (10:20):
Uh? Yeah, Well I think they had DNA on her
from the start. I think, yeah, eventually they may have
exhumer body again for additional testing. But you know they've
had a DNA profile on her. It was only a
nineteen ninety nine case, so you know that this was
well within the you know, timeframe for DNA testing. But
(10:44):
but yeah, I think I'm not sure why they re
exhumed why they exhumed the body again, but I think because.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
They didn't have miochondrial DNA and it's and it's what
the DNA that they had from the mother, so they
needed to go back and get another DNA type sample.
Yea FASc Okay, yeah, the whole And you guys really
did a lot of work on It's very fascinating stuff.
What are so many other cases you've been working on?
Speaker 2 (11:06):
Oh, well, there's one case I got quite a bit
of notoriety for I had discovered the identity of a
girl who was known as Calie Doe. She was a
sixteen year old girl. We now know she was sixteen,
but for thirty five years, this was a nineteen seventy
nine case of a girl was shot in the forehead
and left in a cornfield. And this was up in
(11:28):
upstate New York, and the local sheriff there had gone
great efforts to try to figure out who this girl
was and spent thirty five years, spent his whole rest
of his career going on national TV and putting out
publicity on this case to try to figure out who
she was. Well, back in twenty fourteen, September twenty fourteen,
(11:52):
I would just happen to be going through missing persons
listings and spotted this new listing of a girl from
Florida named Tammy Joe Alexander and recognized her immediately as
as Callie Doe. I called it in and uh, you know,
about four months later, they confirmed through DNA testing with
(12:13):
with Tammy's sister that that she was in fact Kelly
Doe and and this case was solved. And uh, on
the morning they announced that, I was, you know, getting
all kinds of the media calls from the media wanting
wanting to interview me, wanting to talk to me about this. So,
you know, when that case was solved, my name became
(12:36):
a lot more well known than than it had been prior.
So uh there, but there are several cases that I
have been able to resolve, that one being the most, uh,
the most well known.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
Do you have a lot of parents of these missing
kids contacting and said, hey, Carol, we need your help
on this. We need to help on that.
Speaker 2 (12:54):
Oh, I get contacted for in addition to the facial
reconstructions of an idea and if I deced in cases,
I also do age progressions of you know, I'll take
a photo of somebody who's been missing since they the
nineteen seventies or or whatever, and take their photo and
try to present what they looked like thirty forty fifty
(13:16):
years later. And so I've been getting a lot of
people contact me, families of missing persons who've been missing
for decades, and you know, they want me to create
an image of what they what the person might look
like today. So I've been doing quite a few of those.
And so yeah, and I get contacted from families of
(13:37):
missing persons for other purposes as well, just to you know,
try to put out publicity. Because I'm fairly well known
now and have a pretty big following on Facebook. I
have about fifteen hundred Facebook friends.
Speaker 1 (13:52):
So yeah, if you want to find on contacted, if
people want to fly on on Facebook, it's Karl with
a C, Carl and Coppleman with a K kopp l.
Yes that's correct, an now, but you've never been called
to testify in court.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
No, I'm not, I mean, not on not on this
not on this topic.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
Okay, And have you found that most of these missing
people and stuff like that, it's a lot more girls
than boys, right?
Speaker 2 (14:21):
Oh yeah, I'm not so sure. Just maybe the more
the girls get more attention to just maybe just by
because of the nature, because you know, the way people
react more sympathetically to girls and boys. I don't know,
but you know there are there are plenty of cases
of boys, unidentified boys, as there are unidentified girls. Uh,
(14:44):
there's a you know, people of all demographics who are
you know, profile and web slues, and you know that
I've done facial reconstructions for I don't I generally try
to focus on the younger people just because that's you know,
there's more potential for them being solved if the person's younger.
(15:06):
But but you know, I've done people of all ages,
all demographics, all races, whatever. I've I've probably done a
few hundred of facial reconstructions since I started doing this.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
Is there anything you're working on right now you need
to publicize? You want to get out there?
Speaker 2 (15:28):
I don't know in particular. I mean, people can follow
my Facebook and you know, see my Facebook wall and
the various cases I've worked on. I usually when I
create an image, I put it on my Facebook wall.
So if you go to my photo albums in my
Facebook page, there's a photo album called the Missing and
the Unidentified, and there are over one hundred images in
(15:53):
that album on my Facebook page that people can look
at and see if you know, maybe it's there their
own neighborhood, if the miss the unidentified person was located
and in their area, maybe you know, they can share
it around on their own Facebook page and hopefully get
it in front of the eyes of somebody who might
recognize the person.
Speaker 1 (16:14):
And how often do you have to actually call the
detectives in charge of these cases and try and present
them with drama evidence.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
I've been doing it a little less often that I
used to, just because there are so many people who
are interested in this now that that law enforcement does
tend to get overloaded with uh, you know, possible matches.
And so unless I'm really, you know, feel really confident
that I've that I'm onto something, I I generally don't,
(16:43):
you know, do as many callings as I used to,
But you know, every couple of months I'll spot something
that that I feel real good about and I either
turn it into the the National Missing and Unidentified Person
system or else the detective in charge of the case.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
So yeah, what I found is it's helpful if you
can identify the detective in charge of the case, right,
and they're not being all that cooperative, they're not all
that excited to be handed more work of power, right.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
And you know, there there are people who are some
are better than others at it. And you know there
are some people who don't do the simple homework to
you know, be able to see, Okay, this person has
a tattoo and the you know, the unidentified person doesn't.
You can easily exclude that why you're calling the police
to have them look at it. And you know there's
(17:34):
you know a lot of people who don't do the
basic research on the case. They just look at it
and say, oh, this looks like the facial reconstruction. Call
it in. And so you know, the law enforcement tend
to get annoyed at those types of calls. So and
and there are more people doing that these days than
there used to be. So I'm very discriminating on you know,
(17:58):
calling things in, not calling things in before I've actually
done a you know, complete research, and yeah, that's interesting.
People very confident about what I'm calling in.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
Because it seems really easy to get carried away by
emotion and say, oh my god, they look exactly alike.
You know. It's such a personal opinion type thing. But
one of the things I found out, when you're working
with these detectives and you want them to take you serious,
if you send them a edex where they have to
sign for it, you know, and they okay, it seems
(18:33):
to really really get their attention once they've signed, you know,
in another on the hook for it, you know, and
wan I'll.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
Do some time. Somebody's going to take the trouble to
send them of you know, right certified letter. Then you
know they probably will want to look at it a
little closer.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
I don't know, it helps, it's a big difference. And
also to attach an half a day, but you do
a little write up, a little alff David, you get
it notarized. And you know, my name is Carl Copper.
I researched this thing here. I believe this is these
two match. I have this kind of experience and this
gets your attention. Man, it really opens up doors because
now they're on the hook, they can't just still blow
(19:08):
you off.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
I mean if I found that if you just write
a very well drawn out email, if you you know,
your bullet point your reasons for why you think this
person is a match, uh, you know, and and write
clearly and legibly and you know, and concisely, then then
they'll pay attention to it. You know, if you just say,
(19:32):
you know, how about this one, this person looks like
your facial reconstruction without any other elaboration, then they might
not look at it as closely. But but I'm always
you know, if I'm going to call in or send
in an email to a detective, I'll bullet point my
reasons for why they should be taking this seriously, you know,
(19:52):
and writing clear english and concise so you know, and
don't spend five pages explaining it.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Oh yeah, that's a home Yeah, that's a whole other thing.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
Man.
Speaker 1 (20:02):
People are sending fourteen pages. You know, they want you
to review the whole No one reads that. No one
reads that stuff, yeah right, yeah, no. Back to back
to Andrew Bowman for a second. Okay, with all the
information we have on this case, do you think that
you're going to find a resolution on us.
Speaker 2 (20:20):
Uh. I mean it's tough to say that the adoptive
family isn't really cooperating that closely. And you know, because
you know, they have constitutional rights that you know, they
have the right to keep their mouths shut, they have
the right to refuse a polygraph exam. It doesn't really
look good for him. But you know, if they want
(20:42):
to clam up, then you know, it makes it a
lot more difficult to, you know, if it's not them,
to you know, get insight into who may have caused
their disappearance. I'm pretty confident at this point that, you know,
a fourteen year old girl who's been missing for twenty
eight years and doesn't show back up again, something has
(21:04):
probably happened to her. And given the history of her
adopted father of being described by the sentencing judge in
nineteen eighty one has described him as a danger to
women if not confined, then that doesn't really look too
good for him in the context of his missing adopted daughter.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
Yeah, it seems like there were so many opportunities in
that case to rescue this kid before things went all
to hell there.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
Yeah, there was you know, she had talked to a
high school counselor and said that, you know, she'd been
abused inappropriately touched, I think is the word that the
detective told me that you know, she used the word
inappropriately touched when when describing you know, what had happened
to her. So and then you know, we have various
(21:57):
people who who knew the Bowman's new new Andrea, knew
she was a troubled kid, knew she wasn't happy with her,
with her family, the situation. And then you can just
go to the transcript of you know, Dennis Bowman's arrests
and see you know that this this man is has
(22:20):
very serious issues in dealing with the opposite sex or
with this dealing with women. He you know, he's had
displayed stalking behavior, He's shown a fascination with knives. He
you know, I'm sure Kathy explained you back in nineteen
eighty when you know he ran a eighteen year old
(22:42):
girl off the highway. The girl was on a bicycles,
He was on a motorcycle, ran her off the highway,
pulled a gun on her, told her he was going
to blow a hole in her if she didn't walk
into the woods, and you know, the woman, the young
woman was pretty sharp, was able to escape without anything
(23:03):
happening to her. But you know, if not, as the
judge described, if not for you know, the quick thinking
of this girl, she probably would have she most definitely
would have been raped and and may have been murdered. So,
I mean, that's the mentality of you know, of the environment,
(23:23):
the mentality of the man who had raised Andrea Bowman.
So that was the environment that she lived in.
Speaker 1 (23:30):
I was trying to abridge this with the with Kathy.
But when you look at the dates right of the
birth of the biological daughter to the Bowmans, hear the
Bomans they had to adopt because they could not conceive.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
Yeah, they they had up until the you know, Brenda's pregnancy,
after Dennis had been released from prison in nineteen eighty six,
nineteen eighty seven, she was they were able to conceive
of their own biological daughter. And then that kind of
looks strange too, that all of a sudden, you know,
now that they have the daughter that they didn't think
(24:05):
they could have. Now all of a sudden they have
this adopted daughter that isn't his, you know, doesn't have
the sentimental connection that that a biological daughter would have
and then all of a sudden she disappears.
Speaker 1 (24:21):
And what about the possibility that there was incest and
Andrea was actually the mother, the biological mother of this
the second daughter.
Speaker 2 (24:28):
No, no, no, nothing, no that No, Brenda is definitely
the the mother of Somebody would have seen Andrea pregnant
and in high school or in school if she had
been the mother of I mean, you know, she has
a whole school history, so you know, she wouldn't have
escaped notice of being pregnantive, you know.
Speaker 1 (24:52):
Okay, so we're convinced about that.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
Yeah, yeah, okay, Now Brenda is definitely the biological mother
of Vanessa. I wouldn't I wouldn't want to go there,
and you know, trying to presume anything otherwise, Okay, yeah.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
Because when you look at the dates, they all fit,
you know. But yeah, right.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
But she was in high school, and you know, somebody
would have noticed she was pregnant if she was if
she was pregnant.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
Okay, and what does anybody notice that the mother was pregnant,
because even Kathy said.
Speaker 2 (25:22):
Yes, oh yeah, yeah, her friends have said, you know,
they remember when she was pregnant. So we've heard from
people who.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
Have Okay, Brandan and people saw her in.
Speaker 2 (25:32):
The pregnant and and know that Brenda is the mother
of Andrea or excuse me of Vanessa.
Speaker 1 (25:38):
Hey, what about any neighbors of the Bowman's longtime friends,
strange family members, people wouldn't lawsuits with them? Have these
people been searched out and investigated? I'm sure because she
had a good investigator, right.
Speaker 2 (25:49):
Uh, yeah, we've We've got in touch with various people
who knew them. Nobody who's been involved in any lawsuits
that I know of, But there have been plenty of
people who have come forward to the Find Andrea and
Bowman facebook page that you know, they they you know,
(26:11):
have various stories to tell about what they know about
the Bowmans of you know, we have that to work on.
We've have various people. There was there's a young woman
who back in nineteen eighty nine, just not long after
Andrea's disappearance. This this girl was six years old at
(26:32):
the time and was kidnapped and was abducted and pulled
into a car and taken seventeen miles to a state park,
a little picnic area that was just happened to be
a few miles from where the Bowmans live, and she
was sexually he tried to you began to he stripped
(26:54):
her naked, tied her up, and then was going to
sexually assault her. And and he was chased away by
a barking dog. And they never have caught the guy
who did that. But you know, looking at the details,
that looks very suspiciously like it could be Dennis Bowman
who had done that. So there's that as well.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
So and that child's still a lot today. Pardon me,
that child is still a lot today.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
Yes, And we we know she's in her thirties now,
and you know, we know who she is. She's contacted
our our Facebook page just saying, oh, I'm wondering if
my you know, my case might have something to do with,
you know, Andrea's case. Not knowing anything about Dennis Bowman
that you know, had no familiarity with Dennis Bowman, but
knew about the Andrea Bowman case, and and you know,
(27:40):
she started telling us the details and I'm thinking to myself, Wow, this,
you know, could very well have been Dennis Bowman, who
you know, who picked up this six year old girl
over in you know, over near Lake Macatawua in Holland
and then drove her seventeen miles to a to a
a little campground that was, you know, just around the
(28:03):
corner from the Bowman's house. You know, I mean, there
are a lot of little coincidences about that little incident
that that, you know, that make us think, you know,
we the Dennis Bowman needs to be looked at a
little closer as as the man who had taken this girl.
Speaker 1 (28:20):
So, Carl, we're out of time though, But what do
you want to leave us with? And how can people
find you? On your face?
Speaker 2 (28:26):
Well, I'm My Facebook page is in my name, Carl Koppleman.
There's only one person I know of in the whole
country by that name, so there should be no trouble
finding my Facebook page. Let's see Carl with a C.
Koppleman's kopp e L M A N. I'm also a
moderator on the web forum, the web crime Crime Solving community.
(28:51):
I moderate the Unidentified forum there and there's a lot
of discussion there of various cases. I'm a regular participant
in that. Uh And yeah, that's uh. You know, anybody
who you know wants to see what I'm doing. Is
(29:11):
no trouble locating me.
Speaker 1 (29:13):
Okay, great Carl compliment. Thank you so much. We'll be
right back after these messages, okay,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!