0:00

Hey guys, Bella

0:02

here. Welcome

0:04

to the bonfire. Hey

0:07

guys, Hide and Seek is now on Patreon.

0:10

If you'd like to learn how to support the work we do, please

0:13

visit www.patreon.com

0:17

backslash hideandseekpodcast.

0:20

For as little as $5 a month, you

0:22

can get access to exclusive rewards. Rewards

0:25

include live events, early access

0:28

to video trailers, ad-free episodes,

0:31

never-before-seen videos, behind-the-scenes

0:33

video and photo content, along

0:36

with extended and never-before-heard interviews.

0:39

My team and I would be honored to have you. Again,

0:43

visit www.patreon.com backslash

0:46

hideandseekpodcast.

0:48

Thanks guys. Do

0:54

you want to try making your own podcast? I did.

0:58

When I started a small podcast for our

1:00

listeners, I had no idea where

1:02

to start. After I did a little

1:04

research, I found out that Spotify

1:06

has a platform that lets you

1:09

make your own podcast and it's super

1:11

easy. You can distribute

1:13

it everywhere and you can even earn

1:15

money.

1:16

All the tools you need in one place

1:19

and it's free. With options

1:21

like video podcasting, Q&A

1:23

and polls, I can be as creative

1:26

as I want. From

1:27

your phone or your computer, no

1:29

matter what your setup is, you can

1:31

jump right in.

1:32

Check it out. It's called Spotify

1:35

for Podcasters.

1:38

The views and opinions expressed by guests

1:40

on the Hide and Seek podcast are their own

1:43

and do not necessarily reflect the views,

1:46

opinions or positions of the host

1:48

or contributors.

1:52

Hey everyone, this is Sarah. Would

1:55

you like to take a more active role in the Hide

1:57

and Seek community? Would you

1:58

like to share your thoughts? your thoughts with

2:00

other listeners, join us

2:03

in the Hide and Seek Podcast Discussion Group

2:05

on Facebook. You can find us

2:07

by searching Hide and Seek Podcast Discussion

2:09

Group on Facebook. This

2:13

podcast deals with mature topics that

2:16

may not be suitable for all listeners. Material

2:19

heard on the Hide and Seek Podcast is intended

2:21

for adult listeners. Listener

2:23

discretion is advised.

2:45

This

2:54

podcast is intended

2:56

for adult listeners.

2:58

This podcast is intended for adult listeners.

3:22

Lunatic regular

3:35

television

3:45

audio continue

4:09

Last week in a 2-4 episode you heard from Zach Age.

4:14

Zach Age was connected to a number on Britney's short

4:16

call log of outgoing calls that Christina

4:18

M and Jessica obtained shortly after Britney disappeared.

4:21

We checked out the numbers on the call log and one of

4:24

those numbers led to an AT&T customer named

4:26

Zach Age. His name

4:28

was one we saw in comments in different places but

4:31

it wasn't until we reviewed Britney's rejected

4:33

friend request that his name seemed

4:35

a little bit more intriguing. On

4:38

November 28th at 4.15am Britney

4:42

rejected a friend request from Zach Age.

4:45

Zach's name came up again when we received the case

4:47

file. In 2020

4:50

a witness named Tracy came forward to law enforcement.

4:55

He told law enforcement that while both she and Zach

4:57

were passengers in the vehicle, he confessed

5:00

to the homicide of Britney's shame. Law

5:03

enforcement requested an interview with Zach Age

5:06

after he was released from jail. He

5:09

told the detective that he didn't know Britney and had nothing

5:11

to do with her disappearance. I

5:13

asked Zach about the phone number that he had previously

5:15

attributed to him, the same one

5:17

that showed up on Britney's call log and

5:19

in her notebook and the same one we'd

5:21

seen comments about. He

5:24

agreed. This number previously

5:26

belonged to him. I

5:31

asked him about his relationship with Ashley.

5:34

Did he know her? He told me he didn't know her

5:36

very well and he didn't have much of a relationship

5:38

with her outside of being acquaintances. She

5:41

purchased narcotics from him and he dated a friend

5:43

of hers. He told me the last contact

5:45

he had with her was 78

5:48

months prior to our interview. And

5:56

when I hung up with Zach, the

5:58

number I spoke to him about... The

6:00

number he confirmed used to be his, was

6:03

calling me. When

6:06

he answered, it was in Michigan State

6:08

Prison, with

6:11

a call from an inmate whose name I didn't recognize.

6:14

Unfortunately, I couldn't speak to the

6:16

caller. While I was trying to add funds to my account

6:18

in order to accept the call, the call

6:20

was disconnected and the caller

6:23

never called back. That

6:27

is the Britney Wallace case. In

6:31

part 2 of episode 46, we

6:34

heard from the nation's leading expert on nobody

6:36

homicide cases. He had

6:38

the bias. Dad

6:40

had a lot to share with us. His

6:43

experience and knowledge is priceless. Dad

6:46

talked to us about circumstantial evidence and

6:48

the bad rapid gets, and his unique perspective

6:50

on this gave us hope. So,

6:56

if you're unsure what circumstantial evidence is,

6:59

Dad explained it like this.

7:04

Most nobody murder cases are

7:07

circumstantial cases. That it is rare,

7:09

not never, but it's rare,

7:12

to have someone come forward and say, oh

7:14

yeah, I was there when Dad killed

7:16

so and so. But most of the time

7:18

in a nobody case, there's really what I call

7:21

three types of circumstantial

7:23

evidence. And I always give them the analogy

7:26

that let's say when

7:28

you go to bed, you look out your window

7:30

and it's snowing. You

7:33

go to bed, you wake up the next morning and

7:35

there's snow covering your lawn, there's snow covering your

7:37

sidewalk. You knew that it snowed

7:39

because you saw it last night. You saw direct evidence

7:41

of that. But let's say in fact on

7:44

that night, you go to bed, you look

7:46

out your window, it's not snowing. You

7:48

get in the bed, go to sleep, you wake up the next

7:50

morning and there's snow on the ground. There's

7:52

circumstantial evidence that it snowed. It's not

7:55

direct. You didn't see it snow, but you

7:57

see the snow on your sidewalk and your grass. Now,

7:59

is it? possible in some crazy

8:02

world that a Hollywood company came

8:04

and spread snow all over your

8:06

yard. That's possible, but that's

8:09

not reasonable. That's not likely.

8:11

And that's how you show people that in your

8:13

everyday life, you use

8:16

this circumstantial evidence, and it's

8:18

just the same as direct. And that's

8:20

a jury instruction in most jurisdictions,

8:22

right? They say you are to treat circumstantial

8:25

evidence the same as direct. So that's

8:27

why I spend a lot of time talking

8:30

to prosecutors is they don't fear

8:32

circumstantial evidence. You're going to

8:34

learn when you pitch it

8:36

this way to a jury, they're going to understand it's exactly

8:39

the same as direct evidence.

8:44

In this era of rapidly advancing technology,

8:47

the significance of circumstantial evidence needs

8:49

to evolve to keep up with it. What

8:52

was once deemed less compelling is now recognized

8:55

as equally valuable direct evidence. Furthermore,

8:59

the lies told by suspects in nobody homicide

9:02

cases could serve as compelling evidence

9:04

and should not be underestimated. These

9:08

lies often work in conjunction with circumstantial

9:10

evidence further strengthening the case against

9:12

the suspect. While we're here addressing

9:14

this subject, I'd like to follow

9:16

this up with an example of a case where a significant

9:19

amount of circumstantial evidence played

9:21

a crucial role in securing a conviction. One

9:24

example is the case of Scott

9:26

Peterson. Detective

9:29

Rokini went into the house immediately started

9:31

going. Scott was convicted of the murder of

9:33

his wife Lacey Peterson in 2004. There

9:37

was no evidence of force entering

9:38

into the house. There was no evidence of

9:40

a struggle. There was

9:41

no evidence of bloodshed or anything like that. Although

9:43

there was no direct evidence linking Scott Peterson

9:46

to the crimes for that afternoon. The prosecution

9:48

presented a substantial amount of circumstantial

9:51

evidence, including his affair, his

9:53

behavior after Lacey's disappearance and

9:56

the discovery of Lacey's body in the same area

9:58

where Scott had been fishing.

9:59

Okay, so you finished 90 minutes,

10:02

did you troll? A little

10:04

bit? You have no idea where

10:06

this is.

10:08

That's right. You

10:11

guys haven't had any problems. Um,

10:13

their problems. Everything's

10:16

good. I know. When did it occur to

10:18

you that the police really reserved

10:20

you?

10:21

Uh, what's the key to

10:23

the street? The

10:25

driveway to the house. Of

10:27

Christmas Eve. I heard

10:29

an officer from the radio, named the Hudson.

10:37

This combination of circumstantial evidence was

10:39

instrumental in the jury's decision to find him

10:41

guilty. That

10:44

explained how advancement in technology

10:46

today affects missing person cases. Today's

10:49

technology has far exceeded

10:51

our expectations. From

10:54

triangular pinging to GPS cellular

10:56

data. Modern

10:58

day cell phones have made it possible to track our whereabouts.

11:01

Social media platforms allow for tracking

11:03

your phone, while banking capabilities straight

11:05

from your device leave little room for going off

11:07

the grid. And

11:09

it's become difficult to disappear without a

11:11

trace. Most of us rely

11:13

on Google Maps or something similar, for navigation

11:16

when traveling distances. Unless

11:18

one's willing to live off the grid, it is challenging

11:21

to completely vanish. In 2002,

11:25

Michelle Whittaker, a Waffle House employee,

11:28

left her family home following an argument with her mother.

11:32

Michelle didn't come back.

11:34

I got a phone call, and it was

11:36

from a gentleman 10

11:38

miles away that apparently

11:41

she had been staying with. And

11:43

he called me and he said something's wrong,

11:46

that he can't find her or reach

11:49

her. And I'm not sure why I

11:51

took him seriously, but

11:53

I did. In the weeks before her disappearance, the

11:55

police were contacted and they began looking into

11:57

her disappearance.

11:59

doubled their efforts when Heather Sellers,

12:02

another Waffle House employee, disappeared

12:04

just a few weeks later.

12:08

Police feared that Sellers boyfriend, a suspect and

12:10

another murder, may have killed both women. Six

12:13

years later, the boyfriend's story showed

12:15

up on a true crime TV show where his

12:17

suspected victims were shown. The viewer

12:20

recognized one of the victims as

12:22

her neighbor. Whitaker

12:24

simply had enough of her old life and walked. She

12:27

was ultimately reunited with her family. The

12:30

widely recognized story of Stephen Stainer

12:32

captivated audiences. In 1979,

12:37

Kenneth Parnell pulled up six again and he moved

12:39

with Stephen to a small cabin in Manchester,

12:41

California, which is in the middle of nowhere

12:43

surrounded by almost nothing. Particularly

12:45

through the 1989 TV miniseries

12:47

adaptation of the story. At the age of seven,

12:50

Stainer felt victim to Kenneth Parnell. It

12:52

was a one-room shack,

12:55

very old and cold. The notorious

12:57

pedophile who subjected him to years of abuse.

12:59

At some point, Parnell and

13:02

Stephen

13:02

together realized that Stephen

13:04

was growing up. Parnell cunningly manipulated

13:07

Stainer, convincing him that he had been granted

13:09

legal custody due to his family's financial

13:11

constraints. And that he was no

13:13

longer going to be able to be controlled by Parnell.

13:16

However,

13:17

when Stainer was 14, Parnell committed

13:19

another kidnapping. Parnell wanted

13:22

another kid. The victim's name

13:24

was Timothy. So

13:26

in February of 1980, Ken Parnell goes back

13:29

to the exact same memo that he used

13:31

to get Stephen Stainer. He

13:34

paid a local kid to survive with them to the little town

13:36

of Ukiah, California.

13:38

So he's going to get out on

13:40

the street and go find him a boy.

13:43

And he finds five-year-old Timothy White

13:45

walking home from school. Fueled by his deep

13:47

concern for Timothy's safety, Stainer

13:49

found the courage to escape

13:51

with him. Ultimately reuniting

13:54

with his long-lost family. The

13:56

path can almost prove to be difficult

13:58

for Stainer in the years out. after his escape.

14:00

I was not going to let that child go

14:02

through what I had already been through.

14:06

And if I didn't take care of it now, it

14:08

would just get worse. He struggled with the challenges

14:11

of readjusting to life he had been deprived of

14:13

for so long.

14:14

Tragically, in 1989, after

14:18

building a family of his own, Stainer's

14:21

life was cut short by a devastating motorcycle

14:23

accident. These

14:26

stories are powerful reminders that people

14:28

disappear for a variety of reasons. Even

14:31

walking away from one's own life is possible. Leaving

14:34

behind family, friends, and

14:37

a job is possible.

14:40

Is it probable? No.

14:44

This raises the question of law enforcement's protocols

14:47

and the potential need for updates

14:49

to stay in the race of technological advancements.

14:53

I know we've heard it. It's not a crime to

14:55

go missing.

14:57

But, call me.

15:00

How many missing persons you've searched? And the

15:02

conclusion was that they disappeared on their

15:04

own accord.

15:08

In rejecting an appeal by Charles Manson in 1977 for

15:10

the 1969 murder of Donald Shea,

15:14

a California appeals court wrote, the

15:17

fact that a murderer may successfully

15:19

dispose of the body of the victim does

15:22

not entitle him to an acquittal. This

15:24

is one form of success for which society

15:27

has no reward. Murderers

15:29

shouldn't be rewarded for doing a good cleanup. Where

15:33

are we at in the timeline? Well,

15:37

it's about time to go back to Sturgis. He

15:40

nearly caught up to the present day. It's

15:43

just weeks before I returned to Sturgis in June

15:45

of 2023. And Sarah

15:47

and I walk away from an interview with Tad filled with

15:49

a renewed sense of purpose. The

15:51

interview had a profound impact on the way I look

15:54

at this case and probably all

15:56

cases from here on out. Listening to

15:58

Tad transform my perspective. It gave

16:00

me a newfound depth of understanding. We

16:03

learned that nobody homicide cases have

16:05

increased, especially since the year 2000. Advancements

16:09

in DNA technology and the ability to

16:11

track electronic trails make it easier

16:13

to prove that a missing person is

16:15

likely dead. I

16:17

asked Sarah to do a roundtable talk with me, and

16:20

how we want to prepare for our return to Sturgis

16:22

and our meeting with Detective Otten.

16:34

All right, so I think Sarah

16:36

taking the approach that Tad, his

16:38

advice, if we look at the

16:40

case and let's say they were to go

16:42

to court or a prosecutor was

16:45

to look at this case, first thing

16:48

is how do we know that this person didn't leave

16:51

under their own power, you know, on their own accord?

16:53

The question is, did Brittany leave on her own

16:55

and what evidence do we have to prove that?

16:58

So let's start with forensic evidence.

17:02

I don't think that we have a lot of forensic

17:05

evidence. I think we have things

17:07

like electronic footprints, financial

17:10

obligations, but I

17:13

don't think that we have a lot of forensic evidence

17:15

in that category.

17:17

If you look at

17:18

Brittany's activity prior

17:20

to her disappearance, her

17:23

history, and then you see after

17:25

November 30th that there's

17:28

zero activity unless it's

17:30

done by Ashley. Brittany

17:32

was someone who was active always on social

17:34

media really. Very,

17:36

very, yeah.

17:38

If we look at her banking financial

17:40

records, we see only

17:42

a subscribed base to transactions that take

17:45

place afterwards, but there's

17:47

zero activity from Brittany's account to

17:49

show that she's using any of the funds.

17:52

Right.

17:54

Given that Brittany's history of being active,

17:56

she didn't have a ton of

17:58

money, so what was in there was... all that she

18:00

would have, right? So there is zero

18:03

in going in now. There's no other accounts

18:05

that are being made up under her name that

18:07

show that she's alive and she's

18:09

out there, right? So

18:11

looking at the lifestyle history, her social

18:13

media, her finances,

18:15

this isn't someone who's going to disappear. I

18:18

consider her to have been very active

18:21

on social media. So those

18:23

things all cease to exist

18:26

after November 30th. And

18:29

I think

18:30

those things

18:33

for me point

18:35

to her no longer being

18:39

alive.

18:40

Evidence based shows she's not active

18:43

and this isn't normal.

18:46

Right. I think

18:48

for Tad,

18:50

you know, a no body homicide

18:54

prosecutor, what

18:56

he's establishing and what, you know,

18:58

any prosecutor would be establishing is

19:01

the likelihood that the victim no longer

19:03

is alive. And I think the

19:05

things that we've just discussed demonstrates

19:09

that pretty well

19:12

after looking at her established

19:17

history.

19:18

I think those things demonstrate it

19:20

pretty well. Relationships

19:24

and the people that she was connected

19:26

and close with. Grandma.

19:29

Yes. The kid, the girl's mother. These

19:33

were people who said this is how she normally

19:36

behaved. These were the choices

19:38

that she made. This is the routine that she was

19:40

in after Britney has gone missing. Those

19:43

individuals said they never heard from her. But

19:45

grandma's passing specifically is like

19:49

Logan choosing not to show

19:51

up because when his grandpa died, you know,

19:53

that was important to him. He was

19:56

cared about. Same thing with me and grandma.

19:59

very strong relationships. So for

20:55

instance,

21:00

pretty strong evidence, I think, of

21:02

her desire to make that connection

21:04

and to reestablish

21:07

that relationship.

21:09

I'm really curious on what

21:11

the listeners think about this. Do

21:14

they feel, yes, that's enough evidence

21:16

to say she's not here or is that

21:19

or is it not? I'd be really curious to see what the

21:21

listeners have to say,

21:23

what their opinion is. I think

21:25

in this

21:27

day and age, you know, in the 80s and

21:29

the 70s, early 90s, we're talking about

21:33

a different story walking away from your life. But

21:37

in 2017, it's not as easy. It's

21:40

not as easy.

21:42

Look at the reasons why. There are situations

21:44

where people do walk away. Yeah.

21:47

Some of the examples that I've seen, they

21:50

have a medical history. Yeah, mental health,

21:52

medical. It's hard to

21:55

disappear in today's day and age with technology.

21:58

It's difficult.

21:59

difficult and it's

22:02

not only is it very difficult as an established

22:05

adult but as a young adult

22:07

at 23 you know

22:10

you're barely barely getting your own feet

22:12

under you. I'm

22:13

really curious on what

22:16

the listeners think about this. Do

22:18

they feel yes that's enough evidence

22:20

to say she's not here or is that

22:23

or is it not? In this day and age

22:26

you know in the 80s and the 70s

22:29

early 90s we're talking about a

22:31

different story walking away from your life but

22:34

in 2017 it's not as easy it's not

22:37

as easy.

22:38

No and like if you if you look

22:40

at the reasons why in situations where people

22:42

do walk away yeah I

22:45

don't see any of those

22:47

reasons being applied here for Brittany's

22:49

situation. It's hard yeah it's

22:51

hard to I mean yeah

22:54

to disappear in today's day and age with

22:56

technology it's difficult. It's

22:58

very difficult and it's

23:01

not only is it very difficult as an established

23:03

adult but as a young adult

23:07

at 23 you know you're barely barely getting

23:09

your own feet under you let alone

23:12

trying to establish a new identity and

23:14

you know let's be honest Brittany didn't have a ton

23:16

of money it's gonna take money you're

23:19

you have to fund that new life.

23:21

Detective Frawley in season two for Logan

23:23

said that there's he had his experience of a

23:25

girl who was you know a guy left disappeared

23:28

and his wife supposedly was looking for

23:30

him and ended up a girl who was just kind

23:32

of stalking him. Yeah.

23:35

As we were talking about this before I made

23:37

a comment or a point to say how

23:40

many individuals have you gone and found who

23:42

said I didn't want to be found compared to individuals

23:45

who have gone missing and ended up

23:48

gone.

23:49

Yeah. I would think that there's more of the people

23:51

who are the individuals who have just disappeared

23:54

starting a whole new life.

23:55

Also you know

23:57

as you're talking about that and as we We

24:00

are discussing established

24:04

routines and, you know, just walking

24:06

away and starting a new life. If

24:08

we're being honest here, Brittany

24:12

was struggling with addiction. And

24:16

it is very possible that

24:19

even had she walked away and just

24:21

started a new life elsewhere, let's just

24:23

play that card for a moment, she

24:25

would need to fulfill

24:29

that addiction, that need for the

24:31

drug. And that

24:34

means she's got to get it from somebody.

24:36

So walking away and having to find,

24:39

you know, somebody to buy from, somebody's going

24:41

to see her. This means

24:43

she's having dealings with somebody, somebody's going

24:45

to see her. That's going to come up eventually.

24:47

I mean, you don't walk away

24:50

forever and just disappear into thin air

24:52

and nobody ever sees you.

24:55

Take the scene into

24:57

consideration. If she chose to leave

25:00

in this fashion or this type of way,

25:02

this doesn't

25:04

really make sense. She's calling 911 for them

25:06

to come to the situation. Yeah, for

25:08

sure. She's saying, I need help

25:11

and it's 31 degrees. I'm barefoot.

25:14

I don't take this as a situation

25:16

or seeing that someone would want to leave and

25:19

try to disappear in this sort

25:21

of fashion. There is a

25:24

story that I was researching before

25:26

this and it was about a young kid who

25:28

went missing after

25:31

walking his two dogs one day and they found

25:33

the dogs and he ended up being,

25:37

they found him at a church, I think it was seven or eight years later.

25:40

Tonight, a sunny update

25:42

in the case of a missing teen who

25:44

vanished eight years ago near his home in Houston.

25:48

All this happened, we believe in miracles and this

25:50

certainly was a miracle. The

25:53

family of Rudy Faria is confirming he was

25:55

found alive last Thursday and

25:57

a good Samaritan spotted the now 25-year-old. unresponsive

26:01

at a church and called 911. The

26:04

last time she saw her son was in the spring

26:06

of 2015 when he left the house

26:09

with his two dogs and never returned.

26:11

Rudy was just 18

26:12

when he went missing.

26:14

At the time detectives did not suspect

26:17

foul play and classified his disappearance

26:19

as a missing persons

26:20

case.

26:22

I'm scared because he's out there alone.

26:25

The recent break in Rudy's story

26:27

putting a national spotlight on a troubling

26:29

statistic. According to

26:31

the FBI just last year alone

26:34

there were nearly 360,000 reports of missing children.

26:37

In 2015

26:40

with no

26:40

sign of Rudy family members told

26:42

NBC News that he had been suffering from depression

26:45

after losing his brother to a motorcycle

26:47

accident. I can't even tell

26:49

you how many times we searched and how many

26:51

leads and tips came in. In

26:55

the very beginning, you know, I

26:57

met with a family and detectives out there

26:59

by his house where he disappeared and we found

27:01

a backpack. We actually talked to somebody,

27:04

had one of the catering trucks which fell

27:06

to that day. So then there was different

27:08

hospital sightings in different places.

27:11

Tonight Rudy is recovering at the hospital.

27:14

His mom saying he's

27:15

non-verbal while receiving care to

27:17

overcome his trauma. His

27:19

brother had passed away. He was dealing with depression.

27:22

Even in that situation for him just to leave the dogs and

27:24

go. One, he was a male.

27:27

Two, he's not barefoot in

27:29

the winter out in the middle of nowhere. And

27:32

he didn't call 911. Right, right.

27:35

I mean, to

27:36

your point, if she

27:38

was going to choose to walk away I

27:40

don't think it would be leaving

27:43

Sheldon's car on the side of the road

27:46

and then walking away barefoot. You'd

27:48

just walk away without having

27:50

the car accident, without calling 911, without

27:53

any of that stuff. A little extra for

27:55

a while. You have a family member

27:57

just moments before this all takes place

27:59

who says... Yeah, she was, she was

28:01

on something. Not thinking

28:03

clearly right now. And if you want

28:06

to, if you want to say like, part, that's

28:08

part of the reason she's walking away is because she's

28:10

not thinking clearly. Well, at some point

28:12

she's going to come back to her senses,

28:14

you know, the next day, the day after,

28:16

whatever you want to say. And the likelihood

28:19

is she's going to return. She's not going

28:21

to keep disappear. She's

28:23

not, it's not going to keep going. Yeah.

28:26

During our interview with Tad, um,

28:28

there was a point in there where you had made a comment about

28:31

how defendants in nobody homicide cases

28:34

are a rare breed because they typically

28:36

do not have a history of committing crimes. And

28:38

the act exposing of a body as Tad was

28:40

explaining, it requires a different mentality

28:43

and a level of control over the situation. In

28:46

this case, we have a lot of individuals

28:48

who have a history of crimes.

28:50

Yeah. So I guess I'm curious

28:53

on what your opinion is of, of

28:56

that. Is this a anomaly? Is this a very

28:58

unique situation?

28:59

So

29:01

my opinion is kind of twofold

29:03

on this. There's exceptions

29:06

to every rule, right? But

29:08

also, I think we

29:11

can be discussing two

29:13

different, two different things here. There

29:16

is an element of a murder where there is

29:18

the intention of murder.

29:25

But also there

29:27

are

29:28

murders where there wasn't the intention.

29:33

The case that is never in the history

29:35

of mankind been in nobody murder cases.

29:37

I'm a burglar. I break into

29:39

someone's house because I think they're not

29:41

there. Maybe the intention was

29:44

a robbery. They're

29:46

actually there. I shoot and I kill

29:48

them and I say, Oh shit, I

29:51

got to get rid of this body. And

29:53

something goes, you know, terribly

29:56

wrong. Well, no, no one

29:58

knows you broke into their house.

29:59

there's no way you're going to hang around

30:02

and try and dispose of a body in

30:04

a strange location. That never

30:06

happened. Or maybe

30:09

the intention was a sexual assault

30:11

and something goes terribly wrong. So

30:13

I think this is kind of

30:15

deeper. This is kind of a deeper issue

30:18

than

30:18

it just appears to be on the surface.

30:21

I think for the most

30:22

part, yeah, yes. I

30:24

completely agree that defendants

30:28

in no body homicide cases

30:30

don't typically have a history of

30:33

criminal activity. But then

30:36

you have this other

30:38

subset of defendants

30:41

who have instances

30:44

where the murder

30:46

wasn't a plan. That's

30:48

not what was going to happen. What

30:51

was going to happen was a robbery. But then this

30:54

happens and then, you know,

30:56

we have this fateful incident and somebody

30:58

loses their life. It's twofold

31:01

for me. I do agree that

31:03

that is most of the time. But

31:06

you can't always.

31:08

Not everybody in every incident

31:11

fits into a statistic. I

31:12

love statistics. I

31:14

think they can explain

31:16

a lot of things, but I don't think,

31:19

especially in an instance like

31:21

this, where there's so many

31:23

variables, I don't think it

31:25

can always be explained that way. Do

31:28

you know what I mean? Yeah.

31:31

I think the other challenge that you're dealing with,

31:34

you don't have a ton of cases. There's

31:37

over 500. I think was the

31:40

number. And if you think about every situation

31:43

for all, we don't have a huge

31:45

pool of like data. Yeah. Here's

31:49

there's a lot of I think there's room for direction. For

31:51

error. Yeah. And

31:53

what that what that looks like. But one

31:57

of the comments he made was the

31:59

boyfriend.

31:59

the husband, the family, whoever

32:02

it is, if you know them, the

32:04

length that you will go to try to cover it up because you

32:06

know they're going to... Yes. I

32:08

think that's a very important

32:11

point for people to hear and

32:13

understand. If you're talking about

32:16

a spouse, boyfriend, girlfriend,

32:18

parent, child, whatever the relationship

32:20

is, if that person commits

32:23

a crime, the

32:26

offender will go to

32:30

extraordinary

32:33

lengths to

32:35

dispose of, to hide whatever you

32:37

want to call it, the evidence, the

32:39

body, because like you said, they

32:41

know they're going to be looking at them. Does

32:45

that affect how you think

32:48

about Brittany's case? Is

32:51

this why Brittany's

32:54

remains, we're assuming here

32:56

that she's no longer with us, does

32:58

this affect the way you think... When you

33:00

heard that, does this affect the way you think about

33:03

Brittany's case? Is this why her remains

33:06

have not been found in five years?

33:11

That means a definite impact

33:13

to the case. Weather conditions

33:15

also into consideration. Not

33:18

only did she leave the

33:20

young kids' house and then probably dart

33:22

it across the field, then

33:25

there had been some sort of altercation, I

33:28

imagine, and then they had to

33:30

take her and go through all

33:32

those steps. To that extent, you

33:34

have to deal with the ethics of

33:36

this, which happened.

33:40

Think about the mentality of,

33:42

I've just killed someone that at some point

33:45

in my life, presumably I loved, and

33:47

now I've got to cut them up. I've got to put them in a

33:50

bag, I've got to dump them, bury them, throw

33:52

them in a body of water. That's

33:54

a tough

33:57

type of mentality to be able to do

33:59

that. It's a difficult mentality. Most

34:02

of us could not do that, could

34:04

not dispose of the body of a

34:06

loved one even if you got so

34:09

angry. And so that does say

34:11

kind of what that mentality is like. It's different

34:13

than most of us are wired. Whether

34:16

it was your intention or not, like he said,

34:19

sometimes a guy strikes a girl,

34:21

accidentally hits her two car in the wrong spot and she

34:23

goes down then, oh shit. And

34:26

you're not digging into ground when it's 70 degree

34:29

weather.

34:29

It's 31. It's hard. Yes. So

34:32

you know digging that far down. So is that

34:35

what has you know, is that what happened?

34:38

I don't know, but I think the

34:41

fact that she hasn't been found kind

34:43

of adds some weight to okay, someone went

34:45

to great lengths to really make sure

34:47

that she wasn't found.

34:49

Because of that, does it change

34:52

your perspective about

34:54

where she would potentially be found. You

34:57

know, like you

34:59

said, we're talking about 30 degree

35:01

weather as opposed to you know, weather

35:04

where there's soft ground. So does

35:06

that change your perspective about where

35:10

she could potentially be found?

35:15

That's a hard question my guy because of what

35:17

I, you know, we know about certain things

35:19

that we haven't shared. Because

35:22

of the conditions and where they were at

35:24

and what was going on, I imagine

35:27

that they stayed nearby.

35:30

Yeah, and they were

35:32

in, they didn't do this

35:34

in some place where I think they were in control

35:37

of the scene.

35:39

What would you do? What lengths would you go to,

35:41

right?

35:42

I think most people think I would drive

35:44

out to the middle of nowhere. I think

35:46

for me when I think

35:48

about this, it

35:51

does impact my

35:53

thought process and where she may be found.

35:56

If we're talking about one

35:59

location,

35:59

where an offender

36:02

has

36:02

not moved the

36:05

remains. If we're talking

36:07

about just one time, it does

36:10

influence my thoughts about

36:12

where she may be found. And, yeah,

36:15

no, it does influence my thoughts about that.

36:19

And, you know, Tab mentions the weather

36:22

as being, you know, something

36:24

to consider here. If we're in Florida,

36:26

we're talking about a completely different

36:28

climate. We're in Michigan

36:31

at the end of November. And so

36:33

I think that that kind

36:36

of limits your possibilities. But

36:38

again, that's if we're

36:41

strictly talking about one, you know, one, like

36:45

they don't ever move the remains. They don't

36:47

ever, it's just a one, one and

36:49

done. So it does

36:51

influence. But again, I think

36:54

there is an element there

36:57

of just how desperate

37:00

you are. Desperation

37:04

causes people to do things that

37:06

are superhuman. Oh, it's 100%

37:08

I was about to say it's a drug. Yes,

37:11

absolutely. It takes over

37:13

like a drug. You're willing to

37:15

go to extreme lengths that you're

37:18

not normally behaving at like and you're... Absolutely.

37:21

And I guess, you know, that really comes

37:23

back to Tad's point. And

37:26

in that, you know, these

37:29

defendants typically are

37:33

people who don't have a criminal history. But

37:35

this one incident, that

37:39

desperation and

37:41

somebody knowing that you have this relationship

37:44

with this person drives

37:46

you to do

37:48

things that you would never. Right.

37:51

Have you ever been in a position of

37:53

desperation, which I think we probably all

37:55

have at some point in our life? Yeah,

37:57

certainly. It was a lie you didn't want to get out.

37:59

out or there was something that you did that

38:02

you didn't want it to come back on, whatever it was.

38:07

Yes, there are cases

38:09

where people lie about things when they weren't involved

38:11

in the murder and the best case for that

38:14

is the murder of Shondra Levy.

38:16

And some new revelations tied to

38:18

the disappearance and death

38:19

of Washington intern Shondra Levy, although

38:21

he denied any involvement and was quickly

38:23

dismissed as a suspect.

38:25

It was a young intern

38:27

in D.C. that happened and

38:29

the police suspected a congressman did a

38:31

Gary Condit, right? Well, Gary Condit lied

38:33

about his relationship with her. Well, he lied

38:35

because he was a politician who was having an extramarital

38:37

affair. Speculation

38:38

was rampant then that Congressman

38:41

Gary Condit was somehow involved. Well,

38:43

now 15 years later, he is

38:46

finally speaking out and NBC's Joe Fryer has

38:48

more on that story. Joe, good morning. Savannah,

38:50

good morning. That's right. Shondra Levy

38:52

scandal ended the political career of Congressman

38:55

Gary Condit. Now for the first time in 15

38:57

years, he's sharing his thoughts on this. In 2001,

39:01

the married congressman was accused of having

39:03

an affair with government intern Shondra

39:05

Levy. He developed a friendship with

39:07

her and you saw her

39:09

outside the office, correct? I saw

39:12

her

39:12

one time outside the office at a

39:14

restaurant and she came by Naconda

39:16

once. You

39:18

found her once? I found

39:21

her twice. So I think that's why she came by. Okay. The

39:23

development shocking to Condit considering

39:26

he helped launch the investigation. Well, you

39:29

know, you'll

39:31

do crazy things to make sure, you

39:33

know, whatever that is, you'll go to great lengths. Now

39:35

imagine it being about

39:37

someone's life. Desperation

39:40

is a deeply driving force. So

39:43

another point that Tad makes is

39:46

he advises police to always look for a body

39:48

in a murder case as, you know,

39:51

having a body is preferable, of course.

39:54

However, if the evidence is strong

39:57

and there's a likelihood of a high

40:00

likelihood of conviction, waiting for

40:02

a body may not be necessary.

40:04

Why do you think that is? What's

40:06

your take on that? The likelihood,

40:09

right? So

40:10

how much circumstantial evidence

40:12

do you have? As we've done our own

40:15

cross-course research and trying to figure out,

40:17

okay, what are our examples of circumstantial

40:20

evidence? You have fingerprint

40:22

evidence, which can be found at the

40:24

crime scene but doesn't imply that the person

40:27

was present, right? So yeah,

40:29

my fingerprints are there, but I live there. That

40:33

doesn't mean I killed her or killed

40:35

it. Specifically, I focus

40:37

on in this situation that will make it like the

40:39

likelihood, right, or the digital

40:43

circumstantial footprint that's left there.

40:46

And then you have motive as

40:48

well. There are a number of people who said, Eric

40:51

wasn't happy that she was wanting to get a divorce.

40:54

You have the digital footprint

40:56

of Ashley continuously

40:59

getting into Britney's accounts and being

41:01

the only person in control of those accounts as much

41:03

as she wants to blame others. If

41:06

you look at the digital footprint,

41:09

it's going to show it's only been

41:10

this person. Then you have to say, okay, well, why

41:12

is this part of Britney's

41:15

message history and yours

41:17

missing? Why are

41:19

things being deleted, right? What's

41:22

the motive? And I think that you

41:24

brought up a good point. It was just being able to also

41:26

know the difference between, okay,

41:29

circumstantial and direct. Right.

41:31

So I think it's good

41:33

to point out and explain

41:35

which is, you know, the differences.

41:39

So direct

41:40

evidence is

41:42

directly proving a fact without requiring

41:45

any interference or presumption. And

41:48

circumstantial means that

41:51

there is room for

41:53

presumption. So implying

41:57

something occurred without having

41:59

access.

41:59

evidence that it occurred. So

42:02

like you said, fingerprints

42:06

at the scene, sure, the

42:08

fingerprints are there, but I live there. Implying

42:12

that something happened rather than

42:14

having the direct evidence,

42:16

like a video, that it happened. The

42:19

knife with blood on it, the victim's blood

42:21

on it with your fingerprints. That's, you

42:23

have to explain that now, right? That's not, I live

42:26

there. One

42:30

of the other things that they pointed out in this, the

42:32

alibis inconsistencies. Was

42:35

he with you? Was he not with you? Yeah.

42:38

You were home all day? Was he there

42:40

all day? You know, that

42:42

to me as it's continually changing

42:44

is a big red flag. So

42:47

you have digital footprints, you have alibi

42:49

inconsistencies. One, another

42:52

individual has a motive. When

42:54

you stack them together, what's the likelihood of this

42:56

conviction?

42:58

And so

42:59

not waiting and pushing forward,

43:01

I think once someone in that position

43:04

knows the cards are stacked against you. And

43:06

as Chad said, there's a high success rate when

43:09

it comes to prosecuting these cases.

43:12

Some people might fold.

43:13

They're not directly

43:15

involved.

43:16

So he does mention that there's

43:19

a high success rate in prosecuting

43:22

no body homicide cases. And that's because

43:25

prosecutors have to go that extra

43:27

step, that extra length to

43:30

get that evidence circumstantial

43:34

or otherwise. So

43:38

the work that they're putting into these

43:40

cases is

43:43

extra, two-fold, three-fold, whatever.

43:46

And that contributes to the reason

43:48

that there is a high success

43:50

rate.

43:51

So

43:54

when we were talking to him and

43:57

we're talking about circumstantial,

44:00

direct evidence and we're

44:02

thinking, you know, you and I know, I know we're

44:04

both thinking back to everything that

44:06

we've accumulated over the past two

44:09

and a half years. Was that a changing

44:11

moment for you?

44:13

A hundred percent.

44:16

It feels like you're not reaching,

44:18

you're not crazy, you're not on the

44:21

wrong path. There are lots of times

44:23

that I really try to question

44:26

myself and when we had all

44:28

of this information stacked in front of us and

44:30

we're just looking at it saying, doesn't

44:33

that make sense to say look there? Doesn't

44:35

this make sense to say motive? Doesn't this say circumstantial

44:38

evidence? Talking to him was just a

44:41

hammer hitting the nail perfectly. It just

44:44

felt like confirmation. It really did. It

44:46

really did. I just didn't think I was crazy,

44:48

honestly.

44:49

It kind of gave stability to the

44:51

ground underneath you, right? Yes.

44:54

In that interview, as that

44:56

particular part of the conversation

44:58

was happening, I could see the

45:00

change for you happening

45:03

and so that was, it was

45:05

cool to witness that there was

45:08

some validation here from Tad in

45:11

the work that we've done over the past, you know,

45:13

two and a half whatever years. There

45:15

was some validation from him and that was really

45:19

eye-opening, helpful. What about you?

45:22

I think that because

45:24

I've had interactions

45:27

with Tad before and the combination

45:29

of hearing this before in

45:31

other cases and then hearing it in

45:37

connection to Brittany's case, sometimes

45:40

for me, I

45:42

doubt that

45:45

this past interaction,

45:49

you know, with Tad, how can

45:51

I apply it to this case? You

45:53

know, I worked with him for Murray's

45:56

case and I have to

45:58

think like, okay, This

46:00

applied in many ways to Morris's.

46:03

This conversation I had with him, this interview, whatever,

46:05

applied many ways to Morris's case. But then I

46:08

have to think, does it – can I apply

46:10

it to Britney's case? How can I apply it? And

46:13

I doubt myself. But hearing

46:15

him talk

46:16

again about this

46:19

kind of connected

46:21

things for me. And it

46:24

was validation for me too that

46:27

we're not just

46:29

throwing a bunch of stuff in a pile.

46:33

It's circumstantial. But circumstantial

46:36

evidence

46:37

is not

46:39

the circumstantial evidence of 1985

46:41

anymore. The

46:44

circumstantial evidence of 2023, 2018, 2000, whatever, is very,

46:46

very different. It

46:52

was like a, aha moment, you

46:55

know? So yeah,

46:58

it changed it similarly, I guess, for me.

47:01

In the interview with Taddie, he mentions,

47:03

you know, he pushes for prosecutors

47:06

not to fear pushing for circumstantial

47:08

evidence as part of their key evidence,

47:10

right?

47:12

And considering everything that we have with Britney,

47:16

from our Facebook, text messages,

47:18

thinking, receipt, cell

47:21

phone history, he mentions, you

47:23

know, they need to learn how to pitch this to

47:25

a jury the way that they need to do it so that they

47:27

understand it's exactly the same as evidence,

47:30

direct evidence. So let me ask

47:32

the question.

47:34

In your opinion, do we

47:37

have enough evidence that there's

47:39

a likelihood of a conviction?

47:45

Explain. Okay. Bye.

47:48

Okay.

48:02

Do I feel that there is enough

48:04

evidence that there would be

48:06

a conviction if this went to court

48:08

today?

48:10

Right. Yes.

48:16

I do not.

48:20

And

48:24

that's actually

48:27

really hard for me to say.

48:31

That's

48:34

harder for me to say than I thought

48:36

it would be.

48:39

It's hard for me to say because of the time

48:45

and effort

48:47

we have invested here.

48:50

So it's

48:52

really difficult for me to

48:57

look at all of that and

48:59

all of the work that we have done.

49:05

All of the people who have come

49:07

forward and provided help,

49:09

it's hard for me to

49:12

look at

49:12

that and say, no, I don't think there

49:14

is. Because that makes me feel like

49:16

we haven't done enough.

49:19

But I do not think that the

49:21

amount of circumstantial

49:25

evidence we have today is enough

49:27

for a conviction. That's

49:30

not to say that I don't think we have some

49:33

really strong circumstantial evidence

49:36

because I think that we do. Looking

49:39

back on everything that we

49:41

have, some of it, a

49:43

lot of it is known to our

49:45

listeners. Some of it is not. I

49:48

do think that

49:52

there would be enough for a civil case. And

49:55

there is a difference between a criminal case

49:57

and a civil case. Even

50:00

if there is enough for a civil case,

50:04

it is unfortunately

50:08

extremely expensive. It is extremely

50:11

time consuming, which lends itself

50:13

to being extremely expensive. It

50:16

is hard. When

50:20

I say hard, I mean on family

50:23

who would be the ones to bring a civil case. It

50:26

is emotionally trying. It is emotionally

50:28

hard. It is difficult.

50:32

If we're just talking about evidence,

50:35

circumstantial evidence, I think

50:39

no for criminal, yes for civil.

50:43

What do you think? What's

50:47

your take away here?

50:55

I think you do. Really?

50:59

Man, I'll be honest, it's hitting me right

51:01

now.

51:03

It hit me too, yeah.

51:08

If you go down this list, we

51:11

break down the digital footprint in Britney's

51:13

social media, emails, cell

51:15

phone. We've brought the key

51:18

pieces to the light.

51:20

We have proven that

51:22

there's been only one person in

51:24

her account. The information that we

51:26

have was provided by her. We

51:29

have proof that you were the

51:31

person with that receipt. She

51:33

acknowledges having it, but she can't explain

51:35

how she came into possession of it. When

51:38

you're telling Sheldon, I'll

51:40

fake cry, it's the cost of there. I asked her why.

51:43

She says, because I didn't want them to know I was there

51:45

to get the passwords. What's your motive behind

51:47

that? You look at motive from Eric's

51:49

position where there are multiple individuals

51:51

who have said he was upset and

51:53

angry, that she wanted to get a divorce.

51:56

Could have been influenced by her signing

51:58

off the kids too. state you know what

52:01

if that was something that was upsetting to him you have

52:03

alibi inconsistencies things

52:06

aren't lining up could

52:08

we have had surveillance footage

52:10

at the gas station

52:12

recruiting

52:15

it was there

52:17

so for those who were wondering if what

52:20

whatever came from that it was

52:22

there yeah it

52:24

wasn't there in time Ashley was a drug

52:26

supplier who also turned into someone

52:28

who was having an affair or not affair

52:30

but having a relationship with Brittany's husband

52:33

and I

52:36

think if you put all of this together

52:38

I think

52:40

you make a hell of a case if

52:44

someone was willing to put the time to put that together

52:47

of course but there are

52:49

three three of those things that stick out to me

52:52

motive

52:53

digital footprint all

52:56

about inconsistencies and

52:58

I would even argue direct if she had the

53:00

receipt in her possession what she's already admitted to I

53:03

would say if Eric

53:05

had her to Samsung 337 he's in possession

53:07

of her other phones

53:10

he's already admitted to that I

53:13

think you make a hell of a case I

53:16

I do think that there would be a hell

53:18

of a case

53:21

I you know and in a civil

53:23

case what you're looking at is having

53:26

to prove you know a preponderance

53:29

of the evidence showing more than you know a 50% chance

53:32

that one of the parties is is

53:34

at fault mm-hmm

53:37

and I think that would be a

53:40

same tone

53:43

so I guess the question goes back to do

53:45

we feel like we have enough evidence that

53:48

feel that we feel that there's a likelihood of a conviction

53:51

if you're a juror you're sitting there is

53:54

that enough for a jury to say

53:56

we agree

53:58

you know when I'm thinking about it But

54:01

I think about something

54:03

that Tad said, but also something

54:06

that we saw at CrimeCon. And

54:09

you know, Tad mentioned taking

54:12

all the lies and putting them

54:14

on a sticky note and putting them up

54:16

on a board. And at CrimeCon,

54:18

we saw this huge

54:22

wall display

54:24

of sticky notes with names

54:27

of victims. When you look

54:29

at that and you see

54:31

it's an actual visual

54:34

and we're not just talking about evidence

54:37

or circumstantial evidence, whatever, and

54:40

I think about everything that we

54:43

have, putting each thing on a sticky

54:45

note and putting it up,

54:46

that visual

54:48

is really freaking impressive.

54:51

There is a lot. Yeah,

54:53

I mean, I teeter right on the line.

54:55

I teeter right on the line, but I

54:58

guess, yeah,

55:01

I teeter right on the line. That's my

55:03

best answer.

55:06

That's my best answer. Another thing

55:08

he brought up was how it's important

55:10

for police to show that they made good faith over

55:12

the search for the victim.

55:14

Yeah.

55:15

Which means you have to document

55:17

all that, you know, grid maps,

55:20

following up on tits. We can say, hey,

55:23

great job, St. Joe.

55:25

We can say... Yeah, round of applause in that

55:27

arena.

55:28

Definitely tell you, you know, first that

55:30

they've gone out and searched

55:33

the wild tips too. If this

55:35

were to go to court, they were to

55:37

say, okay, are you fixated on just this one person?

55:40

That's why, because you don't even have a body. So like show that you've

55:42

gone and done all this work elsewhere that you're

55:44

not just focusing on. And I can

55:46

tell you that for sure, they're probably not because they didn't even

55:48

question the dude that I'm referring to. Yeah.

55:52

They did. They did a great job searching. And

55:54

that was one of the things that, you know, Detective

55:56

Otten brought up to me when we had our interview

55:59

was...

56:04

He wanted to make sure it was done thoroughly and

56:06

he felt like there can be more things that needed to be done

56:08

and he was doing so. I

56:11

think in that arena, I

56:13

think that

56:14

they have done a really

56:17

great job, you know,

56:20

going to lengths of searching septic

56:24

systems and bodies of water and

56:26

like you said, getting a blow towards the

56:30

frost or thaw out some

56:32

earth and, you know, and like

56:35

you said, chasing down the leads that

56:38

they know are unlikely

56:42

to turn up anything but they go

56:44

and do it. They went and did it and

56:48

that I got to give them props

56:50

for that.

56:51

Yeah,

56:52

they did good. They did good. Yeah,

56:57

they did their due diligence there for sure.

57:01

Okay, so there's no shortage

57:04

of lies in this case

57:07

that we've been working on for Brett that

57:10

I've been told, you've been told and

57:13

Tad talks about it's how it's crucial in the

57:15

no body case, you know, body homicide case that you

57:18

emphasize and pointing that out. You mentioned that a little

57:20

bit earlier and how you

57:22

put this up on the board and you make them

57:25

explain all these lies. And

57:29

I mean, if we stick to just the facts and the numbers

57:32

and we were to look at all the individuals who have lied

57:35

and specifically, if we look at just the numbers

57:39

from the suspects and what

57:42

we've learned over the season, call forward is

57:44

I think Ashley's lied to me the most. If

57:46

you think about those specific lies,

57:49

right? When's

57:51

the last time you saw her?

57:55

It changes.

57:56

Her relationships with individuals

57:59

and when she's...

57:59

started the relationship or didn't start the relationship.

58:02

It's overwhelming.

58:06

Let's say you're on, you're the prosecuting attorney,

58:08

Sarah, so put the hat on for a second. What

58:12

key things are you pointing out to

58:15

a jury? Let's say you're putting up

58:17

the lives, which ones stick out to you the most?

58:19

Well, I think starting

58:22

very early on first and foremost

58:24

was the alibi

58:27

for Eric. That

58:30

really sticks out to me.

58:32

And then we'll go with

58:35

the wavering of dates for

58:38

when she last saw her. This

58:41

one isn't just something where

58:44

the dates wavered when she spoke to

58:46

you, because I understand that

58:49

memories change as time goes on. And you interviewed

58:51

her in 2021, but

58:54

the dates wavered substantially

58:56

when she spoke

58:58

to police in 2019. And

59:01

kind of along the same line as when she

59:03

last talked to her,

59:04

you know, that that has changed

59:08

too. You know, when

59:10

you were getting

59:12

ready to sit down for the polygraph with

59:15

her, or she was getting ready

59:17

to sit down for the polygraph, she

59:19

told you that morning that she

59:22

spoke to her on the 30th. And

59:24

that was a significant change

59:27

from what had previously been said.

59:30

So those three things really have

59:33

stuck out for me.

59:35

There's many more. But

59:37

those three things have really stuck out for me. Which

59:41

ones have stuck out? I

59:44

think those are great points. I think that those

59:46

are great ones right there. And I would say

59:48

those definitely fall in line with what I would point

59:50

out. I think some of the ones are

59:54

her lies to law enforcement themselves.

59:56

This is your best friend. So the relationship status,

59:59

how it changes.

59:59

from that's my sister, we're

1:00:02

really close, best friends to

1:00:04

very barely met her. Those

1:00:06

are lies to law enforcement.

1:00:09

And this is your third time interacting

1:00:12

with them. The relationship went from sister

1:00:14

to hardly knew. Why are you

1:00:16

lying about this? Yeah. What's

1:00:19

the reason and motive behind you

1:00:21

lying? And if

1:00:23

the relationship was real, it

1:00:26

wouldn't have gone from like

1:00:28

sisters to hardly knew each other.

1:00:30

You would maintain the

1:00:33

true relationship status. Yeah, the

1:00:35

true dynamic, yeah.

1:00:38

She needs

1:00:39

somebody else in Britney's account. She

1:00:43

needs them to be in there because that

1:00:45

is the only reason that it can explain why

1:00:48

certain things are missing to her benefit. You

1:00:51

have to prove

1:00:52

by digital footprint,

1:00:54

no one else was in that account based

1:00:57

on the information you provided when

1:00:59

you did it. Yeah, yeah, yeah,

1:01:01

right. Why is this key

1:01:03

information missing?

1:01:08

Those are, I think those are two I would stack

1:01:10

on top of that. You

1:01:13

know, Eric was here all night to,

1:01:15

maybe he wasn't. Two, he was gone

1:01:18

at 1 a.m. or 1.30, whatever it is. There's

1:01:22

so many lies and inconsistencies here.

1:01:24

I think that the amount of

1:01:27

lies and inconsistencies, I mean, even

1:01:29

if we threw out being

1:01:32

generous and just threw out 50%

1:01:34

of them as chalking it up to

1:01:38

poor memory or whatever,

1:01:42

we're still working with a lot there. I

1:01:45

think the lies about the

1:01:48

dates of the data download and

1:01:50

the dates of when she stopped getting

1:01:52

in the account and then she was in the account and

1:01:54

then we see that she's in there in 2021 or

1:01:58

whatever it was with Chris. I

1:02:00

mean, that's a big deal for

1:02:02

me also. The lie about

1:02:05

when she met Eric, she says that she

1:02:07

met,

1:02:07

that she met Shank before

1:02:09

she met Brittany, but then she says to

1:02:11

Brittany in a text message, I

1:02:14

just met your husband. Actually, I just

1:02:16

met him the other day, but yeah. Why

1:02:19

are you...

1:02:20

That's

1:02:22

odd to me. Why are you lying about that? And

1:02:25

I think something else that was really

1:02:28

moving, and I think for the both of us, was

1:02:31

her lies around accessing

1:02:34

Brittany's Facebook accounts, because when

1:02:36

I came into this, she told me she

1:02:39

did get access to it. She told me someone

1:02:41

else was in there, and then when I got the massive

1:02:45

dump of files, and I'm looking at

1:02:47

the Facebook, and we eventually get there, and we're looking at

1:02:49

the IP address, and we're looking at who's access. It's

1:02:52

very clear. No one else accessed

1:02:55

the account.

1:02:56

When we were going to the polygraph, I remember

1:02:58

sitting in my car driving there thinking,

1:03:02

she's not going to pass. You know that she's not going

1:03:04

to pass. I was very confident,

1:03:06

which I know for you, the Facebook

1:03:09

dates and when she accessed was a big one for you as

1:03:11

well.

1:03:12

We see the access

1:03:15

of Facebook, you know, on

1:03:17

July 7th, there's some wavering

1:03:20

between July 7th, July

1:03:22

9th, you know, which

1:03:25

is it. But then stretching

1:03:28

further out, we know that there's

1:03:31

access all the way up to,

1:03:32

I think it was 20, was it 2020 or 20?

1:03:38

Yeah, 2021 when she's in

1:03:41

the account, and Chris M actually catches. Yeah,

1:03:45

Chris

1:03:47

catches it. But then,

1:03:48

because of what happened recently, I can tell you she

1:03:51

had been in the account in 2023.

1:03:53

Forgot about that. You

1:03:55

know, there's so much that I

1:03:57

cannot hold it all.

1:03:59

I'm the one who depends on you when I

1:04:02

can so I know. Trust me that

1:04:04

I'm like, wait did I or did I talk to that person?

1:04:07

It's a lot. It is a lot of information.

1:04:10

It's funny sitting here thinking about

1:04:12

it. Man, she's so lucky. The

1:04:14

first time and the only time I've ever sat down in

1:04:17

an interview with her was that first where

1:04:19

I was totally like tell me everything. I don't

1:04:21

know what's gonna stick but just give it to them. I

1:04:23

want it all and never

1:04:25

to have the opportunity to sit down and ask the

1:04:27

real questions I want to.

1:04:29

So frustrating. Well, that

1:04:31

first time for you was like putting your mouth on a

1:04:33

fire hose. You know, you had

1:04:36

no chance. Going

1:04:39

back and looking at conversations,

1:04:42

you know, just the amount

1:04:45

of access accounts

1:04:47

that have been accessed here is

1:04:49

something else that does stick out to me. May

1:04:52

6th, she's of 2019,

1:04:54

I'm sorry. She's gotten into

1:04:57

four of Brittany's account. July,

1:04:59

she's in the Facebook. She has

1:05:01

her Amazon photo account. She

1:05:04

admits to being in there as early as July

1:05:07

7th but then, you know, it's 2019 and

1:05:09

we talk about all the way up to 2021. She's

1:05:13

in JPay account, her JPay account. Her

1:05:15

text now, she's in Eric's

1:05:18

accounts which, you know, isn't Brittany

1:05:20

but we establish a pattern here. She

1:05:23

goes on to tell the PI that she

1:05:26

has the IMEI for Brittany's

1:05:28

phone, the amount

1:05:30

of accounts and, you know,

1:05:32

Samsung accounts and JPay accounts and Facebook.

1:05:35

She's accessing her credit account or

1:05:38

her credit report account.

1:05:40

You don't have to say anything because

1:05:43

accessing those accounts alone speaks

1:05:47

loudly to me and

1:05:49

I think probably to listen to us. Back

1:05:54

in 2021 when you interviewed her, she was speaking to you.

1:06:00

And her trade that

1:06:03

she was kind of having an epiphany about,

1:06:06

you know, having been—when she was speaking

1:06:08

about Brittany being afraid of

1:06:10

Daniel being caged, she

1:06:14

had an epiphany and thought, oh, you know, maybe

1:06:16

it's Daniel Walters. But

1:06:22

we know that she knew at that

1:06:24

time it actually wasn't Daniel Walters. And

1:06:27

this can be kind of corroborated through

1:06:30

the conversation with the PI, but

1:06:33

also in her own words, because

1:06:35

the whole story behind her—behind

1:06:38

Brittany being afraid, I should say, is

1:06:41

Daniel Cage, you know, threatening

1:06:44

her, having, you know, this tumultuous

1:06:46

relationship, and Brittany was going to move

1:06:48

in with her. So she knew that

1:06:50

the Daniel that she was afraid of

1:06:53

was actually Cage and not

1:06:55

Daniel Walters. Not

1:06:57

sure why his name got thrown in here, but

1:07:00

in her own words, she actually

1:07:02

says that it was Cage. We

1:07:05

have never really seen any proof that

1:07:08

Brittany even knew Daniel

1:07:10

Walters. I feel

1:07:12

like she does that on purpose, of course, when she tries to

1:07:15

confuse people, right? And I've watched the polygraph,

1:07:18

and I watch her doing it with Brad, and

1:07:20

I see what she's trying to do in other conversations

1:07:22

that people have had with her. You

1:07:25

see it where you're like, you know in

1:07:27

that moment that that's not the case, so why are

1:07:29

you going with that? Or why are you steering it

1:07:31

in that direction? And you're, of course,

1:07:34

you're intentionally doing it. So again, it goes

1:07:36

back to motive. Why? The

1:07:39

duplicate names here really

1:07:41

plays into that for her. You know, the Eric's

1:07:44

and the Daniel's and, you know, the Zach's.

1:07:49

Bill Reynolds. He lies. Now

1:07:51

Bill's not even supposed to be involved in this

1:07:53

situation because Daniel Walters

1:07:56

is not the person leaving the voicemail.

1:07:59

Bill lies. When you think back

1:08:02

on what Tad said when he was talking

1:08:04

about why would you lie, well you had one

1:08:06

person who, you know, let's say he's

1:08:08

cheating on his wife and doesn't

1:08:11

want out that information, that

1:08:13

would be an example. With Bill Reynolds,

1:08:16

I don't want to say I was buying drugs and

1:08:19

I think we both agreed whether that was

1:08:21

weed or not. He's covering

1:08:23

his own, worried about you

1:08:26

know just like Tad mentions

1:08:28

the Chandra Levy case in Gary Condit,

1:08:29

he didn't murder

1:08:32

Chandra Levy but he

1:08:34

lied because like you said

1:08:36

he's married as a congressman. I

1:08:39

do think that people lie not because

1:08:41

they're guilty but because

1:08:43

they may be guilty of something that has nothing

1:08:45

to do with the case but they're covering

1:08:48

their ass because they have this

1:08:50

other thing going on like

1:08:53

Bill has this addiction

1:08:55

going on and you know he

1:08:58

doesn't want people to know that he

1:09:00

was purchasing narcotics and

1:09:04

I think that has probably

1:09:07

been the case in more

1:09:09

than just Bill's interview. I

1:09:11

guess one that sticks out to me

1:09:13

that either this is part

1:09:15

of the truth, some of it's the truth

1:09:17

or it's all a lie and

1:09:20

then you have to really ask why the hell would you do that

1:09:23

and that is what do you

1:09:25

think about Skyler's testimony then?

1:09:29

You know there were

1:09:31

a lot of things in Skyler's

1:09:34

testimony for me that

1:09:37

didn't line up with

1:09:40

what we know and when I

1:09:42

say with what we know I'm saying

1:09:44

with what we know to be true. So

1:09:48

there were a lot of things that didn't line up and

1:09:51

then I look at you know the flip

1:09:53

side of that there were some things that did line

1:09:56

up and I gotta say

1:09:58

either

1:09:59

this

1:10:01

Either this guy deserves an

1:10:03

Academy Award or he

1:10:05

had some true fear

1:10:08

because listening to him

1:10:11

in that moment, not just recorded,

1:10:13

listening to him in that moment, he was scared.

1:10:16

He was scared. You know, whether we're

1:10:18

talking about something that he just believes,

1:10:21

that isn't true because, you know, we both

1:10:23

know that can happen. You believe something

1:10:25

is true, but it's not. So either

1:10:27

he believed what he was telling you

1:10:30

or there's some truth somewhere in

1:10:32

there. You know, we discussed this a little

1:10:34

bit yesterday. I feel like I'm 80-20. That 80%

1:10:39

is doubt, like

1:10:41

some real doubt, like

1:10:42

I'm not sure that I believe him. But

1:10:44

that other part, I think

1:10:46

that there could be things in there that are

1:10:48

true.

1:10:49

Like

1:10:52

I said,

1:10:53

I gauged the truth on things that we already

1:10:56

know and his emotional

1:10:59

reaction to what was happening. That

1:11:02

was impactful for me. I guess

1:11:04

the same question I'm going to throw to you. How

1:11:08

truthful do you think

1:11:10

that was?

1:11:13

It's hard for me to believe him. I

1:11:17

leave room for it being true. Like you said, 80-20,

1:11:19

80-19.

1:11:21

Yeah, I'd say there's some room on the table for

1:11:23

it to be, you know, the truth. I

1:11:26

struggle with his testimony at times where I

1:11:28

feel like you're not

1:11:30

being consistent and this isn't a type

1:11:33

of situation where you're not going to remember

1:11:35

specific things. Having a gun

1:11:37

held to your head. Certain individuals

1:11:40

in this testimony of his,

1:11:43

not all of them, but there are certain ones who

1:11:45

are not with us today who can't defend

1:11:47

themselves.

1:11:48

If he's not telling the truth, then what's the reason?

1:11:51

I know people in this situation,

1:11:53

I imagine there can be people who are selfish

1:11:56

and try to, which we've seen in the case of all plenty

1:11:58

of times.

1:12:00

go to jail. I have something to say about this. And

1:12:03

so do I think that that could be the what's

1:12:05

going on with Skylar? It could be, yeah,

1:12:07

very well fucked up.

1:12:10

Yeah, if that's what happened, yeah, 100%. We've

1:12:13

seen it in the case files many times and there's plenty

1:12:16

of leads and tips that we

1:12:18

didn't cover in the case file episodes.

1:12:21

At times where I'm like, who the heck is that?

1:12:24

And then you can say the same thing. Like, I don't know who that

1:12:26

is. And so we would dive into it. But when

1:12:29

you see this overwhelming

1:12:31

of tips that come in,

1:12:35

would Skylar's testimony, would

1:12:37

it be a surprise to me that he took advantage

1:12:40

of maybe a system to get out

1:12:42

of jail type of approach or go

1:12:44

get off on something? Yeah, that wouldn't surprise

1:12:47

me. I wouldn't be shocked by that. I don't agree with it.

1:12:49

Of course, messed up for you to do that, but it

1:12:51

doesn't surprise me. And

1:12:53

so, you know, the 80% portion,

1:12:56

one of the things that sticks out to me was that

1:12:59

a lot of the information he was providing

1:13:03

was things that were public

1:13:05

and were things that were on

1:13:07

her missing poster. So

1:13:09

that kind of stuck out to me. But

1:13:12

again, 80-20. And like

1:13:14

I said to you yesterday, do you gamble that?

1:13:17

Do you gamble that? And

1:13:19

do you give into

1:13:22

the 80 and walk away or do you give

1:13:25

into the 20 and you follow it?

1:13:28

And I think any good investigator follows

1:13:30

it. Yeah. This is why this case has taken

1:13:32

two years for us to like continue

1:13:35

to work leads. And I've told

1:13:37

you time and time again, like season one and season two,

1:13:39

we're not like this. And so this

1:13:41

is taking a lot of legwork.

1:13:44

Extra effort.

1:13:46

You know, the question was asked, do you feel like you have enough circumstantial

1:13:49

evidence? You feel like you got this good stuff,

1:13:52

but you could be moving too quickly to

1:13:54

go to trial.

1:13:57

You've run that risk of double jeopardy. I

1:14:03

don't know if this is a question to say

1:14:05

for you because I know earlier you said you don't feel like we

1:14:07

have enough. If the decision was yours

1:14:11

as a listener, would we be

1:14:13

running the risk of double jeopardy and is that something that

1:14:15

we're willing to do and say, okay, you

1:14:17

get one swing at this, you don't get it?

1:14:20

I am not really a gambler.

1:14:24

So no, no, I would not.

1:14:28

I think it's definitely on the table for me and

1:14:30

here's why.

1:14:33

I think that again, if

1:14:35

you're weighing out the percentages here and you're looking

1:14:37

at evidence direct,

1:14:40

circumstantial, there

1:14:42

is an overwhelming amount

1:14:45

of evidence

1:14:47

from testimonies,

1:14:50

digital footprints,

1:14:52

indirect, motive, alibis

1:14:55

and consistencies. You

1:14:58

have to explain why Eric, you have the back of

1:15:00

her J3. You're the person

1:15:02

who found it in the field. No

1:15:04

one else. So you have the

1:15:06

back plate to her phone. What happened

1:15:08

to it? Ashley,

1:15:10

you had her receipt from the night she went

1:15:13

and got gas.

1:15:15

What happened to it? It got taken away. It

1:15:17

just disappears. We

1:15:20

have all the digital footprints. I

1:15:23

think you can show motive. If

1:15:25

this was 49, 51, I

1:15:28

wouldn't be like, okay, I'm not that type

1:15:30

of gambler either. I'm not going to run that. I

1:15:32

want some more cushion there to say, yeah, I feel

1:15:35

confident. The likelihood again, the word that

1:15:37

he used was what the likelihood. And

1:15:40

I think with today's technology

1:15:43

evidence, I think you can, you have

1:15:45

a really strong case here. And

1:15:50

if you can imagine a wall full of

1:15:52

sticky notes of this lie, this lie,

1:15:54

this lie, and not just lies in general,

1:15:57

like just random ass shit I'm talking

1:15:59

about. lies pertaining to

1:16:02

relationship with Britney. I

1:16:04

won't swing unless I'm confident. Not a guarantee,

1:16:07

but I'm confident. And I can tell you, I'd be confident

1:16:09

if you, if I

1:16:11

wish I could argue that case. I mean, I

1:16:13

really do. I mean, I

1:16:16

can put every freaking lie on there and

1:16:18

I can point and I can say, we don't

1:16:20

have the proof of what they did. And I know

1:16:23

that that's a really, you sure you wanna swing that

1:16:25

bat? You sure? Where

1:16:27

else? And

1:16:30

I'm not saying, well, then we have to pick something. I'm

1:16:32

saying, look at the evidence, look

1:16:34

at the lies, look at the motive, look

1:16:37

at those sexual relationships that they had.

1:16:39

There's jealousy, anger from Eric,

1:16:41

divorce. He's not happy with Britney.

1:16:44

We have evidence of that. When

1:16:46

you go back to him having the back of her phone and

1:16:49

that's that plate that has the barcode

1:16:52

on it, that's the J337, whatever

1:16:55

happened to that. And that wasn't out there in that field

1:16:57

for that long. And thanks

1:16:59

to John crimes, he pointed that out.

1:17:02

That don't look like a phone has been sitting there since November 30th. That

1:17:05

looks pretty clean. Was not weathered. I

1:17:08

think you're always gonna run the risk of double jeopardy.

1:17:11

There's always that risk. You

1:17:14

ran that risk and this person's

1:17:17

convicted guilty.

1:17:19

What if you were wrong?

1:17:21

That's a big burden to carry.

1:17:24

I don't ever want that on my conscience.

1:17:27

I don't ever want that to ever be the situation.

1:17:31

But I spent

1:17:33

hours upon hours, not

1:17:35

just with Britney's case but other cases

1:17:38

that we have studied, watched

1:17:40

time and time and time again.

1:17:43

This is wild. This

1:17:48

case has been wild.

1:17:51

I've never seen anything like this before.

1:17:55

I'm gonna post something here pretty soon. I'm

1:17:57

waiting for the question. Do you hire

1:17:59

a... these people? I

1:18:01

know, I know.

1:18:02

And I would just like to say now, like I would never mess

1:18:05

with the family members heartstrings like that, fabricate

1:18:08

and make something up.

1:18:10

This is the wildest case I've ever seen

1:18:12

and certain things aren't just being done like questioning

1:18:14

the husband or following up

1:18:16

with video surveillance, looking at baking

1:18:19

history or ordering the right credit

1:18:21

history for the victim, using the right

1:18:23

social security number, not labeling the

1:18:25

husband as a brother. I look at and I say, if you

1:18:27

clean this up, you're gonna figure this out real

1:18:30

quick. You start applying pressure

1:18:32

and questioning people and interrogating

1:18:34

them the right and applying that pressure. I bet you,

1:18:36

I bet you, I'm not grasping

1:18:39

at straws. What I've challenged

1:18:41

Ashley to provide, she cannot provide.

1:18:44

I don't care how many times she wants to go on social

1:18:46

media, Reddit, YouTube, Facebook, whatever

1:18:48

you want to call it, doesn't matter how many times

1:18:50

she's confronted, she will always deflect,

1:18:53

redirect the conversation with a long-ass post

1:18:57

and never really answer the questions. And

1:19:00

so if you get her in a position where you

1:19:02

say no, we don't want to hear the rant

1:19:04

and the tangent of this relationship that led to this

1:19:06

rabbit trail of this person and this person being related,

1:19:09

we're done. We want the

1:19:12

facts. We don't care about your opinion. We don't care

1:19:14

about the relationships that you develop. We don't care about

1:19:16

what you have found. We want to ask the

1:19:18

questions because she knows you can't

1:19:21

take these questions. You'll go

1:19:23

on, you'll rant on with anybody else's one to

1:19:25

listen but you can't answer these questions.

1:19:30

Sorry I got hot there for a second.

1:19:33

I agree. I

1:19:36

think that, you know, back

1:19:39

to the original question, are you willing to

1:19:41

risk double jeopardy? I think

1:19:45

you're saying you are.

1:19:47

Yeah, I'm swinging in at that.

1:19:49

The hard part is that there's

1:19:52

all these other testimonies from other individuals.

1:19:55

Skyler, oh how do you know that's not true?

1:20:00

understand the certain are being done in the areas

1:20:02

where Skyler said she was supposed

1:20:04

to be. Yes. Places that he

1:20:06

said she was supposed to be. Yes.

1:20:09

I see less proof of these relationship

1:20:11

with some of those individuals

1:20:14

and who she was hanging out with at the time that

1:20:16

she went missing.

1:20:18

Yeah. And who she was getting her drugs from.

1:20:20

I see less relations, you know, less interactions or

1:20:22

even any relationships between those individuals and

1:20:24

Brittany which one's far which one's more likely,

1:20:26

right? It's

1:20:29

relationships that she has already that she's getting her drugs

1:20:31

from and that's Eric and Ashley.

1:20:36

I'm swinging, dude. I

1:20:37

am. What

1:20:41

are they doing now? Part of me, I don't

1:20:44

want that to be a part of my decision making, but part

1:20:46

of me also says, I

1:20:48

mean, maybe at this point they've questioned Eric, maybe they

1:20:50

haven't. He was supposed to do a polygraph

1:20:52

and as far as I know he didn't complete it. So

1:20:55

was Ashley. She didn't complete it. And

1:20:58

I hate even to be using the word risk. I'm

1:21:01

swinging with my odds right now. And,

1:21:04

you know, can that change?

1:21:08

Yeah.

1:21:09

Well, yeah. This

1:21:12

is one of the rare instances we don't agree. Yeah,

1:21:15

I know.

1:21:16

I really

1:21:19

think there's a case here. I

1:21:22

guess another thing that stood out

1:21:24

to me was Eric's own words to Sheldon. I'm

1:21:27

going to give that paperwork to the cops.

1:21:33

How many times are we going to look the other way

1:21:35

and say, oh, it's just being on drugs. How

1:21:37

many times are we going to do that? You know what I'm saying? Like,

1:21:39

well, how many times are we going to say that this is

1:21:41

just someone on drugs? Like, I

1:21:43

don't know. I don't see it that way. I think that in

1:21:46

an odd way, that's how Brittany is being on drugs. In

1:21:48

an odd way, that's how Brittany is being treated.

1:21:51

I guess that's a good point to wrap up.

1:21:54

You know, I was just thinking, you know,

1:21:56

as we were

1:21:58

discussing,

1:21:59

hanging, you know, Brittany, maybe,

1:22:02

you know, walking away from her life, running away,

1:22:05

choosing to disappear. I was

1:22:08

thinking about how

1:22:11

Ashley has kind of routinely

1:22:15

portrayed the

1:22:17

victim, Brittany, as

1:22:19

kind of being reckless, as

1:22:23

often being reckless. And when I

1:22:25

say reckless, I mean in her behavior, using

1:22:28

drugs, sleeping with multiple men, having, you

1:22:30

know, relationships

1:22:31

with multiple people, doing

1:22:34

things that are reckless. So

1:22:36

why,

1:22:37

why would you portray somebody,

1:22:40

especially a friend, as

1:22:42

routinely being reckless?

1:22:45

If you disappeared tomorrow, and

1:22:47

I had something to do with your demise, or knowledge

1:22:50

of it, or what have you, and I didn't

1:22:52

want to come clean about that, would

1:22:55

I portray you as a reckless person?

1:22:57

Yeah, probably. James was using

1:22:59

drugs. James was sleeping with all

1:23:02

of these women, and they were all

1:23:04

mad at him. So all of these women have a vendetta

1:23:06

against him, and they want to get back at him. And

1:23:09

maybe it was one of them. And, you

1:23:11

know, she was spending money,

1:23:13

he was spending money wildly and,

1:23:16

you know, whatever, whatever it is, portraying

1:23:18

the victim as reckless, acting

1:23:20

irresponsibly. That

1:23:22

kind of hits me differently

1:23:25

now that we're talking about somebody walking

1:23:27

away from their life. Because the

1:23:30

facts show, facts

1:23:32

and circumstances indicate a strong

1:23:35

possibility of

1:23:37

foul play.

1:23:38

And as your

1:23:40

friend,

1:23:41

if you disappeared tomorrow,

1:23:43

what I'm going to

1:23:45

put out there, knowing that there's this strong

1:23:48

possibility of foul play, we haven't heard from you

1:23:50

in five years. What

1:23:52

I'm going to put out about you is my best

1:23:54

efforts to

1:23:55

recover

1:23:58

you.

1:23:59

And that's not going

1:24:01

to include a

1:24:03

list of your dirty

1:24:05

doings

1:24:06

to the public. Portraying

1:24:08

the victim as living this reckless

1:24:11

life prior to their disappearance gives

1:24:14

a great illusion that

1:24:16

there may be a lot of

1:24:18

other reasons why

1:24:20

you disappeared other than what I know

1:24:23

or what I did. It almost

1:24:25

removes

1:24:27

my feeling

1:24:30

of guilt. James was doing

1:24:33

all these things. He was using

1:24:35

drugs. He was ripping

1:24:37

people off. He was stealing from people.

1:24:40

It didn't have to do with me. It wasn't really

1:24:42

me.

1:24:43

It was his lifestyle that

1:24:45

led him to this. There's two comments

1:24:48

that she makes and what reminds

1:24:50

me of the way that you just explained

1:24:52

that she was her mother's daughter.

1:24:55

Yes.

1:24:55

With the polygraph examiner.

1:24:58

And then there's a moment where she says, who knows?

1:25:01

And it's the way that she says it. When you're talking about

1:25:03

it could have been one, who knows?

1:25:06

And she says it and that's running

1:25:08

in my mind right now.

1:25:11

Whoever

1:25:15

said,

1:25:15

motivation is what gets you started.

1:25:18

Habit

1:25:20

is what keeps you going. It

1:25:22

may not have been fully on point. Motivation

1:25:25

certainly got us started, but it's not just habit

1:25:28

that keeps us going. Motivation

1:25:31

definitely has a big hand in keeping us going,

1:25:34

but so does justice.

1:25:38

Over the next several weeks, Sarah

1:25:40

and I prepare a PowerPoint presentation for

1:25:42

the sheriff's department, Detective Otten

1:25:44

and under sheriff Binghamton. We'll

1:25:47

be presenting it on the trip back to Sturgis.

1:25:51

Weeks of work solely focused

1:25:53

on making this presentation understandable,

1:25:56

cohesive, and maybe mis-presently.

1:25:59

PENETRIBLE There's

1:26:02

a lot to prepare for outside of the presentation as

1:26:04

well. Making sure everyone's

1:26:06

scheduled aligns, does Ethan have time,

1:26:10

will Shane be able to make the trip? Like

1:26:12

I said before, traveling with a crew is never really

1:26:14

easy to prepare for. Especially

1:26:18

in a circumstance like this. All

1:26:21

the equipment has to be accounted for, and some

1:26:23

have to be purchased. Pausing

1:26:25

arrangements need to be made, vehicles

1:26:28

need to be secured, and plane tickets need to be purchased. Ground

1:26:31

equipment needs to be available. Boots,

1:26:34

always the waters, shovels, and other tools. But,

1:26:38

most importantly, what's on

1:26:40

my mind is that I

1:26:42

need to make sure that everyone is safe. Safety

1:26:45

equipment. All of this

1:26:47

needs to be considered.

1:26:49

And once all of that's completed, I'm

1:26:52

straight back to preparing the PowerPoint with Sarah.

1:26:57

We

1:26:57

have multiple locations to visit. Plan

1:27:00

is to meet JJ, Skyler, Person

1:27:02

C. We'll visit the property where

1:27:04

Skyler claimed Brittany was taken, and

1:27:07

we'll circle our way back to the couple places we need to follow up

1:27:09

from our last trip at the cemetery, and

1:27:12

the homeowner who spoke to us about Eric. If

1:27:15

we get lucky, I might run into pocket.

1:27:19

Jeffrey K.

1:27:22

Ashley, or Eric. These

1:27:24

trips are hard to pull on.

1:27:27

And sometimes, you just might be surprised

1:27:29

who you run into.

1:27:32

But sometimes, the

1:27:35

people we run into are more surprised than we are.

1:27:41

Trip four.

1:27:42

And the return is surges.

1:27:45

Any next time,

1:27:46

I'll hide and save the movie.

1:28:02

Would you like to show your support

1:28:04

for the Hide and Seek podcast? Find

1:28:06

our Instagram and Facebook page by searching

1:28:09

Hide and Seek podcast.

1:28:10

And I can follow to

1:28:12

hear updates on past seasons as they become

1:28:14

available and stay up to date on

1:28:16

season three. Find our discussion

1:28:18

group by searching Hide and Seek discussion

1:28:21

group on Facebook.

1:28:25

The Hide and Seek podcast is hosted,

1:28:27

directed, edited, and

1:28:30

produced by James Basinger.

1:28:33

Written, edited, and produced

1:28:36

by Sarah Jo. Engineered,

1:28:39

mixed, and mastered by

1:28:41

Newdon's Audio Engineering.

1:28:44

Director of photography is Ethan

1:28:46

Schatz. Our graphic

1:28:48

design is created by Jordan Robinson.

1:28:54

Special thanks to all

1:28:55

those involved in our ground team and

1:28:57

to our Patreon supporters.

1:28:58

Thank you for helping make our investigations

1:29:01

possible.