0:01

Edit audio. This

0:04

podcast discusses murder and violence

0:06

against children. This specific episode

0:09

discusses sexual assault against children.

0:11

Please take care while listening.

0:15

It's a chilly Saturday evening on October

0:17

fifth nineteen ninety six. Sasol

0:20

Fielder breaks a tie with a seventh inning

0:22

single as the Yankee's Texas

0:24

six to four to win the American

0:27

League division series. John Weapon

0:29

has put out Dean Palmer and

0:31

Yankeys are moving on to the ALCS.

0:34

Local and national news reporters have been

0:36

in the media room of the Feeney County courtroom

0:39

for hours. Waiting for the twelve

0:41

person jury to reach a

0:42

decision. And it was very relaxed.

0:44

You know, we were watching the ball game

0:46

and then but just waiting on the verdict.

0:49

And I remember you know, when we knew we

0:51

had a verdict, then then everyone's

0:53

attention shifted to that courtroom

0:55

and and covering the verdict. And the

0:57

only thing I could think about was how quickly I

0:59

could get the information

1:01

and call the station and get on with a live report.

1:05

Don Lusader was local reporter KTTS

1:08

radio and was working pretty much

1:10

nonstop to cover this trial. After

1:13

nearly four hours of listening to closing

1:15

arguments, The jury retired

1:17

to its deliberation room at three fifty

1:19

five PM. At four

1:21

thirty PM, they requested the answering

1:23

machine tape from February twenty seventh

1:26

at the Feeney home.

1:28

Sure. Sure, John. Take

1:30

up. If anybody's in the house, please take

1:32

the phone up. We need to find out what's going on.

1:34

And then your brother does show what's

1:38

what's going on.

1:40

We take care of this job.

1:41

I'm really getting freaked out because I don't

1:43

can you call me Bradley? They

1:45

told me about work, and I can't

1:47

get a for sure if gonna

1:50

tell me if I Please

1:52

call me back. I Feeney, five seventeen and

1:54

ten five. At

1:57

four fifty, they asked for family

2:00

photo album. And at five thirty

2:02

four PM, they wanted photograph

2:04

of the wall. That said die and

2:07

bit in beige paint along

2:09

with the records of John's AT and T calling

2:11

card. At six thirty

2:14

they asked for the two hundred and fifty thousand

2:16

dollar insurance policy with

2:18

Cheryl's signature that the state

2:21

said was forged. At

2:23

seven fifteen, the jury requested

2:25

a map of Springfield, showing the

2:27

location of the Feeney's home. And

2:30

at 905 the

2:32

jury sent word. They had

2:34

a verdict. John

2:37

Feeney was found not guilty of

2:39

the murder of his wife and two children.

2:43

Cheryl's brother Doug was there with his family

2:45

as judge Feeney read the verdict. I

2:48

had to fight myself. John was just

2:50

over this rail, and I wanted

2:52

to go up right to the rail and smack him.

2:54

And I just I just felt it was him

2:56

all the time, and and I knew

2:58

that, you know, can't do that.

3:00

So I went I was angry,

3:02

went and sat down, and John

3:05

went they they read the verdict,

3:09

and John kinda gave

3:11

sigh of relief. And this

3:14

little smirk on his face, that

3:17

was awful.

3:20

Because I was close enough to kinda see

3:22

his reaction. I watched him.

3:25

And like I said, he gave a big sigh and

3:27

kind of a little smirk smile in it, then

3:29

he caught him myself. And,

3:33

yeah, we were all stunned. Prosecutors

3:37

had decided to try John for all three

3:39

counts of murder at the same time. Meaning

3:42

that at this moment, he was officially

3:44

a free man. This

3:52

is the Feeney Family Murders. An

3:54

Ozark's true crime story, and

3:56

I'm your host, Anne Roderick Jones. Though

4:09

John was found not guilty, it seemed

4:11

like many people in Springfield still held

4:13

onto a feeling that he got away with

4:15

murder. Here's Ron Davis.

4:17

Once he was acquitted, he thought everybody would believe

4:19

it, and most people didn't.

4:22

Cheryl's family was obviously devastated

4:24

by the verdict. And shortly after

4:26

John was acquitted, they filed a

4:28

wrongful death civil lawsuit against him.

4:32

John's criminal defense attorney, Sean Eskenazi,

4:35

asked Rod Lumer to defend John in the

4:37

wrongful death

4:37

suit. We've heard from Rod in past episodes.

4:40

I was aware of the case

4:42

because who wouldn't. And then one

4:44

day, I think it was a Thursday afternoon. After

4:46

the verdict came in, he called

4:48

me and said that he was exhausted

4:50

and that that his client was being

4:52

sued, John was being sued for wrong for death.

4:54

In cases where someone dies or

4:57

is killed due to the negligence or

4:59

misconduct of another person, the

5:01

survivors may sue for wrongful death.

5:03

These types of lawsuits seek compensation for

5:05

those suing, usually the family of

5:07

the deceased. Such as lost wages,

5:10

lost companionship, or funeral

5:12

expenses. And that he wanted to know

5:14

whether Joe Wingett and I would be willing to

5:16

handle the case. And so not

5:19

some reservations because I'd read the paper as

5:21

well. So he provided

5:23

me the file, which was as

5:25

big as his coffee table. And

5:28

it it contained some of the

5:30

transcripts of depositions, but primarily

5:32

the major case on file

5:34

and his own work product, if you

5:36

will. So between Thursday

5:38

and Monday, I

5:40

basically read the file It

5:42

was obviously extremely intriguing.

5:45

And I decided after reviewing the

5:47

file that I would be willing to participate in

5:49

the case because based on

5:51

what I had seen, obviously, they didn't have

5:53

enough evidence to convict him, and I was

5:55

convinced then and I am now that John Feeney

5:57

was innocent. John was

5:59

set to receive around four hundred

6:01

thousand dollars in insurance money following

6:03

the death of his family. In

6:05

fact, prosecutors argued that one of the

6:07

reasons John Feeney killed his family

6:09

was to collect the insurance money. In

6:12

total, the Feeney family took out four

6:14

insurance policies between the years

6:16

of nineteen seventy seven, up

6:19

until just a few months before the family was

6:21

murdered. There was also Cheryl's

6:23

pension of ninety nine dollars a month

6:25

that John would be set to start receiving on

6:27

November first of two thousand and

6:29

twenty four. John purchased

6:31

policies for himself and Cheryl on

6:33

September twenty ninth nineteen ninety

6:35

four, less than five months before

6:37

the homicides. Each in the amount

6:39

of two hundred and fifty thousand. Dollars

6:41

It was the purchase of this policy

6:43

that ignited suspicion from the police.

6:46

Cheryl and John had purchased policies

6:48

insurance on each other several

6:50

years earlier for for

6:53

death, accidental death. Which would include,

6:55

in this case, even her

6:57

being murdered. And so

6:59

the insurance companies owed

7:01

the money. There's no question about that,

7:03

they had. They'd been paid premiums and they

7:06

so they owed the money. The question that they

7:08

had was to whom. Two

7:11

handwriting experts were presented in the

7:13

trial. One of those experts, Don

7:15

Locke, said that Cheryl most certainly

7:18

filled out a portion of the policy, but

7:20

both experts agreed that Cheryl probably

7:22

did not sign the application. Donald

7:25

Fakke, the second expert, was unable

7:27

to say if John forged his wife's signature.

7:31

In nineteen ninety seven, Cheryl's

7:33

family and John eventually reached a

7:35

settlement. Each side got some

7:37

money. Some of the money was

7:39

intended to discharge debts.

7:41

Other some of the other money was, as I

7:44

recall, John wanted

7:46

to set aside out of the settlement

7:48

fifty thousand dollars to employ a

7:51

private detective just to

7:53

take another look at it. And so I

7:55

believe that was part of the settlement. I

7:57

asked Rod if he knew if this money was

7:59

ever spent on a private investigator. After

8:02

the settlement was done, I

8:04

probably had Ep7 in contact with him for a month

8:06

or so. And really, I think he moved

8:09

to South I don't know where he went, but

8:12

whether or not he used that money to

8:14

employ a private detective. I don't know that. But I

8:16

do know that was part of the settlement. So

8:26

we've gone over most of the details of this case,

8:29

but there's one aspect that we haven't brought up

8:31

until now. And that's because it's

8:33

hard to know where it fits in. One

8:35

of the most confusing pieces of evidence that

8:37

we came across concerned Tyler, John

8:39

and Cheryl's six year old son, and the

8:42

fact that he had hepatitis b.

8:45

Tyler's autopsy revealed that he had

8:47

contracted hepatitis b, a

8:49

disease caused by a virus that attacks

8:51

the liver. It's usually spread

8:53

through blood and bodily fluids.

8:55

Mother's can also pass it along to their

8:57

children if they have the virus. But

8:59

here's the confusing part. Neither

9:01

Cheryl nor John had hepatitis

9:03

b. I'm unsure

9:05

as to when exactly Cheryl was tested,

9:08

but most healthcare workers are tested as part

9:10

of the job, so it makes sense

9:12

that Cheryl could have been. Barbara

9:15

Hunter was the coordinator of the

9:17

epidemiological services for the Green County

9:19

Health Department. She testified

9:21

at John Feeney's trial that less than a

9:23

month after the killings She was

9:25

given a list of a hundred and fifty five names

9:27

of people that, quote, Tyler Feeney

9:29

knew. She compared

9:31

that list with people in the Missouri Department

9:33

of Health database, with

9:35

known cases of hep B and found

9:37

no matches. The thing

9:39

is, the people on the public health

9:41

registry would only have been those with known

9:43

cases of hep B, people who

9:45

had been specifically tested for the virus

9:47

and found positive. John

9:50

Feeney was tested as part of the investigation

9:52

and the results were negative,

9:54

but no one else in the family was

9:56

ever tested. Green County

9:59

medical examiner doctor James Spindler

10:01

testified in court that there was a significant

10:04

possibility Tyler contracted

10:06

hep B through a sexual assault sometime

10:08

before he was killed. Though there

10:10

were some signs that Tyler could have been

10:12

sexually assaulted, The medical

10:14

examiner could not determine it with any certainty.

10:16

Prosecutors once they found that the Tyler

10:19

Feeney had hepatitis b, but

10:22

they had the perfect

10:23

motive. He had

10:25

Ep7. John Feeney was molesting

10:28

him. Mom found out

10:30

that's why the family had to

10:31

die. And I

10:33

remember vividly how they had tested

10:35

him once,

10:36

and then they tested John Feeney

10:38

again. When the

10:40

test came back negative for hepatitis

10:42

b, they couldn't

10:44

figure out where they had gone

10:46

wrong because that was

10:48

the motive that made

10:50

sense to them. And they couldn't figure

10:52

out where else Tyler Feeney would have

10:54

gotten hepatitis B.

10:56

Because John Feeney didn't have hep B,

10:58

the defense pointed to this as being the

11:00

motive for the killing. They

11:03

suggested that whomever transmitted the

11:05

hepatitis b and potentially

11:07

assaulted Tyler is likely who killed

11:09

the family. I

11:11

brought this up a lot of my interviews to

11:14

those people who knew Tyler, as to

11:16

whether or not he had shown any signs of

11:18

abuse or if he was acting strangely.

11:21

As I was speaking with my mother-in-law,

11:23

who taught nursing school to Sheryl and had

11:25

three boys of her own, she made a

11:27

good point. Tyler was certainly

11:29

old enough to convey if something was

11:31

happening such as abuse. She felt

11:33

strongly that if Sheryl knew anything,

11:35

that she would have taken action for her son.

11:37

A former

11:39

teacher's assistant who helped to Tyler

11:41

school told me over the phone that he

11:43

was a sweet and charming child but

11:45

that he had some issues that she thought may

11:47

have been anxiety. She said

11:49

that one day she was walking with Tyler and

11:51

he kept pulling at the back of his underwear

11:54

and making what she just arrived as an

11:56

awful face. She told

11:58

the teacher about this, but no more was

12:00

said or done about the issue that she

12:02

knew about. So I asked Teresa,

12:05

Cheryl's friend and coworker, if she had

12:07

noticed anything strange about Tyler.

12:09

After all, she was around the family more than

12:11

most people.

12:12

When we would go

12:13

over to their house for the pool parties,

12:15

he would be swimming

12:17

in the pool just off to

12:19

the side never

12:21

really wanted to interact

12:24

or jump in and swim with the

12:26

girls. I thought it

12:28

as what's there's

12:30

something wrong. There's something not

12:32

right. But I didn't do

12:34

any digging. I didn't question her. I

12:36

didn't do any, you know, further

12:38

what's happening with him. And

12:40

to be quite honest, it

12:42

kinda came to surface

12:45

at the trial. You

12:47

know, there was suggestions.

12:49

There were things that came

12:51

out that led you to believe

12:53

and put two and two together

12:55

later. And was that,

12:58

like, possible sexual

13:00

abuse? Yes. I

13:06

wanted to

13:08

know more about the transmission of hep Ep7

13:10

and how Tyler could have contracted it.

13:12

Matthew Stark, a friend of mine, is

13:14

a pathologist at the Children's Hospital New

13:17

Orleans, and has been an expert

13:19

witness in six court cases. Dr.

13:22

Stark rather Matt explains that the

13:24

majority of hepatitis B infection is

13:26

due to something called perinatal transmission.

13:29

That's transmission between a mother and a

13:31

child. But this doesn't seem to be the

13:33

case here. Matt also told me

13:35

that it's very unusual to test for

13:37

hep b that especially after

13:39

death. So why did they test

13:41

Tyler? Transmission may

13:43

also happen between kids, from something

13:45

like cuts or scrapes, or

13:47

could transmitted due to unknown exposure

13:50

with body fluids of close household

13:52

members or other infected children.

13:54

So I want to make sure I have this right,

13:56

mostly because is a huge red flag

13:58

to me. My initial understanding

14:00

here is that hep b can be transmitted

14:02

on

14:02

playgrounds, schools, etcetera. Not

14:05

only through sexual contact per initial

14:07

findings. Then you're assuming that Tyler

14:09

Feeney was molested, and that's how he

14:11

got hepatitis b. It

14:13

could just be his mom was a nurse.

14:15

I don't know how he got hepatitis

14:18

b. He was five years old.

14:20

That doesn't really make any

14:21

sense.

14:22

once they found out that John Feeney didn't

14:24

have it, they backed away from

14:26

that aspect because there

14:28

really wasn't much It wasn't

14:30

gonna link them to John Feeney.

14:33

But again, these tests were never

14:35

performed and never came up in trial.

14:37

Here's Myles Feeney, the judge who

14:40

presided over the case. Obviously,

14:42

the the hepatitis brings up an

14:44

entirely different story Is it

14:46

normal to not look into these other

14:48

things and to put all of your eggs in

14:50

one

14:50

basket? I don't know about what they did

14:53

look. I just it didn't come up

14:55

and try me. The fact that those

14:57

things did not come up in the trial

14:59

is no indication that they were

15:01

not investigated. They

15:03

very likely very likely

15:05

where I'd certainly hope you do.

15:07

If Tyler was sexually abused,

15:09

this changes a lot in terms of

15:11

motive and who could have done this. But

15:13

the weird thing about all of this is

15:15

that it remains inconclusive. Hep

15:17

b is a motive theory, was never

15:20

stigated. The defense claim that

15:22

whomever had the hep b was likely the

15:24

killer, yet another suspect was

15:26

never presented. And here's

15:28

a thought. If you father of two young

15:30

children who had been murdered and the

15:32

defense believed that the person who did this was

15:34

the one with hep b, Would

15:36

you not exhaust all attempts to find

15:38

out who that person was and work to have

15:40

more people

15:40

tested? Maybe this

15:43

happened and we just don't know about it.

15:45

There's a chance that this is unrelated

15:47

and that Tyler contracted it from

15:49

somewhere else, but it's really hard

15:51

not to speculate how this case

15:53

could have turned out differently if they had tested

15:55

other people in the family aside from just

15:57

John Feeney, given that the

15:59

police were so sure of the personal nature of

16:01

the crime. When I

16:03

told Matt or doctor Stark about

16:05

the testing, he said point

16:07

blank, a person might be tested if they

16:09

were in a hospital. But it's

16:11

doubtful that anyone else besides healthcare

16:13

workers have been tested. He

16:15

asked me if I had, I seriously don't

16:17

think so. At least not to

16:19

my knowledge, Was

16:21

it a mistake that more people close to

16:23

the Feeneys weren't tested for hep b?

16:26

On that same line of thinking, Was it

16:28

a mistake for John to be tried for all

16:30

three murders at the same time, giving

16:32

the prosecution only one shot to

16:34

convict the only suspect they'd identified

16:36

in the

16:37

case? They did what they did with

16:39

the evidence they had. It surprised

16:41

me that they charged them with all three

16:43

and kept all three charges. I

16:45

mean, there were a lot of people that were

16:47

thinking in terms of strategy, charge

16:49

him with murdering one of his kids.

16:51

If he's acquitted, you still have two more

16:54

murder charges. This was an

16:56

all or nothing effort. And there

16:58

were plenty of local lawyers who told

17:00

the prosecutor going in you're

17:02

gonna lose this case and big because you don't

17:04

have a jack on this

17:05

guy, and they went ahead.

17:07

And I think

17:10

they did maybe because of the missing

17:12

woman in part, they wanted to show

17:14

people that they knew how to

17:16

solve a big

17:16

crime. And instead,

17:19

They had a guy walk out, acquitted

17:21

of three counts of first degree murder, which

17:23

I had never seen.

17:26

Here's

17:26

Rita Sanders. Now, being

17:29

an attorney, I I would tell you that Sean

17:31

probably would have filed a motion to

17:33

join all of those cases.

17:36

But I think he

17:38

Daryl should've at least tried because

17:40

I think it was a mistake

17:42

to try all all three of them

17:44

together. Here's Darrel

17:47

Moore.

17:47

Why did the

17:50

prosecution choose to try

17:52

all three cases at one

17:53

time? Because they were interrelated well,

17:56

first of all, the first discussion we had

17:58

after over twelve months of

18:00

investigation is should we proceed Or

18:03

should we wait and see if

18:05

anything else comes up? And I remember having

18:07

that we had this by way, I

18:09

met Cindy Rachowski one of the

18:11

assistant prosecutors and she helped me try the case and did a

18:13

great job. But we had Cindy and I had

18:16

discussions with law enforcement, and

18:19

with

18:19

Don and Lynn Sheryl's parents.

18:21

I

18:21

don't remember if Doug

18:22

was present. And I don't

18:23

believe we did those conversations with the

18:26

law enforcement and Sheryl's

18:28

parents at the same time. I think we had separate in any event,

18:30

we had conversations with both

18:33

groups. With the law enforcement group,

18:35

do we believe that's any

18:37

other evidence is going to turn

18:37

up, should we wait?

18:40

Should we just let us sit there and hope that

18:42

over the years, maybe

18:44

some other witness pops up that can put

18:46

him near the scene or

18:48

he makes a statement to somebody that

18:50

we find out about But

18:52

the conclusion law enforcement was the odds of

18:55

anything new being discovered was

18:57

probably minimal.

18:59

We talked to the family and made it clear to them

19:01

that there's a risk factor here

19:04

that if we proceed and there's a not

19:06

guilty, then jeopardy attaches and

19:09

we're done. On the other hand, we could but there's no

19:11

guarantee that as time goes on, that

19:13

any new evidence will come

19:15

up. So the issue is, do we wanna try to go

19:17

forward

19:17

now? While we

19:18

have witnesses, even though they

19:21

may be circumstantial, witnesses

19:23

whose memory is fresh versus

19:26

letting it drag on for years when memories

19:28

fade. Maybe even some

19:30

of the investigating officers die so

19:32

you don't have chain of custody

19:34

anymore. Ultimately, the decision was made to try

19:36

it, and the decision was made

19:37

that we should go ahead and try all three

19:40

counts because in any you were gonna

19:42

refer to all three. I mean, that's the bottom

19:44

line. So we saw no point in trying

19:46

them separately. We always viewed

19:48

that there was one shot. If we were gonna try it,

19:50

there was one shot. And so the

19:52

best shot was to try all three at

19:54

once. Do you still feel like that was the right

19:56

decision? Yes. Because there's been no new

19:58

evidence. And I you know, a few years ago, I

20:00

kept bringing people saying, well, it's it's a cold case

20:02

or

20:02

unthought. Well, no, it's

20:03

not. Dray found him not guilty. Dray

20:06

did not say he was innocent. There's a

20:08

big difference between being found not guilty. And

20:10

innocent, the jury instruction doesn't say we

20:12

find we the jury find the defendant innocent. It

20:14

says we the jury find the defendant not

20:15

guilty, which basically means

20:18

they didn't believe the state proved

20:20

his case beyond a reasonable

20:23

doubt. In

20:26

the next episode of the Feeney Family

20:29

Murders, we find out where John is

20:31

today.

20:33

I got to know about his past when

20:36

he tell the whole glass about

20:38

what happened to his family, he

20:40

was kind of shocking, you know. Everybody

20:42

was job dropping, and hope, like,

20:44

was job dropping, really. So

20:46

but no one says to him, like, they

20:49

were sorry or something like that, you know. We

20:51

just shop Feeney

21:06

family murders is part of the edit original

21:08

series Ozark's True Crime. It is written

21:10

and hosted by me and Roderick Jones.

21:13

This episode was produced by Allie

21:15

Ciiroir and Kathleen Specker,

21:17

and was edited mix and mastered by Allie

21:20

Seerwal. Our executive producer is Steph

21:22

Colburn. Thank you immensely

21:24

to the entire edit audio team

21:26

in Patrick Grindel for the theme music.

21:28

To those who generously share their

21:30

time and information with me, thank

21:33

you. If you wanna get in touch with us, you

21:35

can email us at how at edit

21:37

odd dot I o. That's

21:39

HELL0 at EDITAUD

21:43

dot I

21:48

o.