December 2, 2025 • 33 mins
In 1999, 26-year-old Yvonne Layne was found murdered in her Ohio home while her children slept. Her ex-boyfriend, David Thorne, was instantly a suspect as the father of one of her children, but he had a solid alibi. So the police found Joe Wilkes, a friend of David’s, who said David hired him to kill Yvonne. In 2000 with Joe’s testimony, David was sentenced to life without parole. But, our investigation has shown that almost everyone in Yvonne's life had a motive to kill her – like her own family, a creepy neighbor and even police officers.
New episodes of Death & Deceit in Alliance are available every Tuesday and Friday wherever you get your podcasts. To binge the entire season, ad-free, subscribe to True Crime Clubhouse on Apple podcasts.
Death & Deceit in Alliance is a production of Orbit Media Inc. in association with Signal Co. No1.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hi, There is Steve Fishman from Orbit Media, and we're
back with a fantastic new true crime series, Death and
Deceit in Alliance. This series is a little different from
others we've done. It's a live investigation, meaning that the
reporter host is publishing information almost at the same time
(00:20):
she learns it, and we her listeners, side by side
with her or ear by ear with her, are figuring
it out as the series unrolls. Luckily, we're in great hands.
Our host reporter is Maggie Freeling, who is one of
true crime's more interesting creators these days. Maggie won a
(00:41):
Pulitzer Prize for her work on Suave, a great podcast
you should check out. She's been a champion of the
wrongfully convicted since way before it was popular, and in
this show, it's that championing that leads to terrible complications
for the podcast and for herself. It broke me, she says.
(01:03):
This is Maggie's creator's cut of a show originally released
in twenty nineteen. For access to all fourteen episodes, ad
free and all at once, subscribe with Apple Podcasts on
our show page.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Enjoy the Worst Thing that Happened to Me As a
journalist occurred while making this podcast formerly called Murder an Alliance.
In twenty twenty one, myself and two private investigators embarked
on a real time investigation to see if a convicted
(01:36):
murderer was innocent. For twenty two years, he maintained that
he was. Initially, the case seemed straightforward, a scandal ridden
small town police department who used psychics and coercion to
get results. I was sure the wrong people were in prison.
In fact, I wasn't alone, many journalists did. But once
(02:01):
I was on the ground in Ohio with the pis interviewing, investigating,
setting up billboards and tip lines, I was not ready
for what we found. The deeper we dug, the more
unsettling our findings became. I found myself questioning everything. Were
my instincts wrong or was there something actually profoundly off
(02:24):
about this case? The conclusion broke me for a bit,
But now, almost five years later, I'm staring down this
case once more with a new lens because it remains
one of the most impactful events of my life. The
timing of release is also significant because I encounter this
(02:45):
exact issue in my latest investigation called Bone Valley. Graves County.
I encountered a journalist in my reporting who refused to
discuss his mistakes and instead doubled down. It made me
think of my own journey, and consequently I thought it
was the perfect time to re examine my mistake instead
(03:08):
of hide from it. It is crucial to discuss are
all two human fallibilities as journalists. It not only keeps
us honest, but it also keeps us humble.
Speaker 3 (03:22):
Today.
Speaker 4 (03:22):
Date of July fourteenth, nineteen ninety nine, Wednesday, it's thirteen
or nine hours. My name is Detective Bud Sampson. We're
in the we're avent a police department interview room.
Speaker 5 (03:31):
Along with me.
Speaker 4 (03:32):
Is Detective William Mucklow and Detective John Leach of the
Alliance Police Department. Also in the room is Joseph Isaac
Book and we're in best getting his honest side of
Yvonne Lee? Can you tell us you're part in this?
Speaker 2 (03:45):
The tape you're listening to is Joe Wilkes, a nineteen
year old boy confessing to murder.
Speaker 6 (03:51):
She was like, Hey, what are you doing here? She goes,
I haven't seen you in a long time. I was like, oh,
they did, just wanting need to stop buy and see
how things were. And then we're sitting talking for about
three to five minutes, and then okay, I know this
is gonna be hard.
Speaker 5 (04:11):
We got to go through and you tell me what
happened here.
Speaker 6 (04:16):
Where were you sitting when you're sitting upstairs or downstairs?
We were on the second floor, that the third one. Ok.
Speaker 5 (04:22):
And we're still doing the cops talking and story. Okay,
the cheek it up and trying to run why run
up the door?
Speaker 6 (04:37):
Did you try to run up the glass doors?
Speaker 5 (04:41):
And then.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
You it's saying we thought it so, Joe just said,
David told me to David as in David Thorn. On
(05:14):
April first, nineteen ninety nine, twenty six year old Yvonne
Lane was found with her throat slashed dead in her
home in Alliance, Ohio.
Speaker 7 (05:23):
Twenty six year old Ivonne Lane, a beautiful, vivacious woman,
found in a pool of her own blood, her throat
slashed while her children slapped.
Speaker 2 (05:33):
She was discovered by her mother, who had arrived to
take her six year old grandchild to kindergarten. Yvonne was
a mother to five kids. David Thorn was the father
of one of the children. Although he and Yvonne were
not together anymore.
Speaker 7 (05:48):
The murder of a mother of five in her own
home stunt the small town of Alliance, Ohio.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
David had recently been ordered to pay child support three
hundred and fifty one dollars a month, and Joe said
in his confession that he was hired by David Thorn
to kill Yvaughn so he didn't have to pay and
so he could have his son to himself, the.
Speaker 7 (06:11):
Father of one of the children. The motive child support
Thorn was ordered to pay.
Speaker 2 (06:16):
To the untrained listener at one point myself too. This
seems like a pretty clear cut case, someone confessing and
someone with a motive. But when you start deaking, going
through documents and talking to people, the more complicated things get,
(06:37):
and it seems like just about everyone around Yvonne also
had a motive to kill her. This is death and
deceit and Alliance a real time investigation into whether David
(06:58):
Thorn killed ev Lane. I'm Maggie Freeling. The murder of
Yvonne Lane and David Thorne's claims of innocence were never
the feature of a Netflix film or made for TV series,
(07:20):
but it wasn't a blip on the radar either journalists
were drawn to it.
Speaker 7 (07:24):
For years, the attack grabbed headlines as police hunted for
a killer.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
Like investigative journalist Dwayne Pullman, who you also heard in
the previous clips. Dwayne looked into David's claims for three years. However,
that was over a decade ago, and since then, former prosecutors,
private investigators, sleuth's and the like have all looked into
David's claim of innocence. Yet the question still remains.
Speaker 7 (07:52):
Did the system convict the wrong man?
Speaker 2 (07:55):
So here we are. Since Yvonne's murder, David has continued
n Nuali said he had no involvement. He says he
never paid Joe Wilkes or anyone to murder his ex
girlfriend and the mother of his child. When you make
it to David's official website WCODT dot org, you discover
(08:15):
that this was an incredibly brutal murder. Yvonn Lane's throat
was slit to the spine, almost decapitating her. Blood was
all over the house.
Speaker 4 (08:28):
She begins to spur blood, pumping blood violently out of
her neck.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
The living room where her body was found looks like
someone took buckets of blood and threw it around the room.
It just didn't look like a hit or a random
murder to me. This looked personal. Police had to process
this absolute mess of a room, which I'm sure was
not easy, especially because they also had to get four
(08:58):
of her kids out of the house, because all but
one of her children were home when she was killed,
but they were too young to be helpful to the police.
That is, except for one of them, a four year
old who'd play a part in the investigation. The police
say they tried to get the kids through the crime
scene without seeing their mother's body, So some flubs may
(09:21):
be understandable if they're focusing on the boys, but not
to the extent that happened here. Part of the problem
may just be in experience. Murders in Alliance are rare.
A bad year might see two homicides, but most the
city saw just one. If any I feel confident saying
(09:42):
at minimum they were not ready to deal with this
particular homicide. Police say they covered Yvonne's body with a
blanket from one of the bedrooms, potentially contaminating any evidence
on her. As every watcher of c as I knows,
this probably wasn't best practice. No one wore shoe coverings
(10:03):
or gloves to preserve evidence, and investigators went back and
forth stepping over Yvonne's body when crossing the room. A
bloody footprint between her legs apparently came from a detective,
not the killer, and the chief even brought a woman,
a civilian, into the crime scene. It was an absolute disaster.
(10:26):
Evidence was collected from the scene and never tested, and
the evidence that was didn't match David or Joe. Yet
the case still made it to trial, and that's thanks
to Joe's confession, the one you heard part of at
the top of the episode. The prosecutor said that David
(10:50):
hired Joe to kill Yvonne, and as you heard, that's
the story that Joe told. He said David gave him
three hundred dollars to kill Yvonne. His confession, Joe took
the police to the alleged murder weapon, a three inch
pocket knife that he said he tossed in a storm drain.
He also showed them where he disposed of the pants
he allegedly wore when he killed von Another key element
(11:14):
of the States case a witness who said she saw
Joe the knight of the murder. Rose Moore said, Joe
told her and her boyfriend that he was on his
way to kill someone. Will come back to this later,
but I just want to point out that, in this version,
the prosecution's version, this nineteen year old was so excited
(11:36):
about an evening out with his knife to kill someone
that he wanted even strangers to know about it. If true,
Joe's boast is pretty damning, but it's worth noting that
there was no physical evidence linking even Joe to the scene.
No fingerprints, no shoeprints or DNA. The pants Joe allegedly
(12:00):
war when he killed Vaughan, there was no blood on them,
much less anything linking David to the crime. Sure, Joe
took cops to a knife, but there's no evidence linking
that knife to the murder. In fact, the prosecution will
rest on witness testimony alone. But some witnesses were never called.
(12:21):
And here's a key one. Keep him in mind. A
neighbor who saw a man leaving Yvonne's house in the
morning after her murder. He told cops that man was
not David or Joe.
Speaker 8 (12:34):
I was not asked to test to find the trival
of David Thorne. I was shown a photo of David
Thorne in December of two thousand. That was not the
man I saw leaving the residents of nine sixty of mine.
I was showing a photo of Joseph Wilkes a contest
murder in December of two thousand. It was not the
man I saw leaving the residents of Maxix.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
The jury never heard this, and after deliberating just the
three hours, David was convicted of paying Joe Wilkes three
hundred dollars to murder Yvonne Lane. He was sentenced to
life without the possibility of parole. Joe took a plea
deal of thirty to life for his cooperation. He could
be out of prison very soon.
Speaker 7 (13:18):
It didn't take a jury long to convict David Thorn.
Wilkes pleaded guilty. Both are now serving life sentences.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
The entire conviction of David Thorn rests on Joe's testimony.
But was Joe telling the truth and if he was lying,
why he lost almost as much as David did. But
I'm skeptical. Hiring a hitman to kill your ex over
three hundred and fifty one dollars a month seems like
(13:48):
more risk than it's worth. Sure back then the amount
was more like six hundred and today's dollars, and that
might feel like a lot of money to fork over
monthly if you're working at an hour job, which David was.
But David was making decent money at a high end
car shop, and compared to the motives of other folks,
(14:10):
to me, David's alleged motive appears week. Evidence uncovered in
later investigations pointed to other potential killers, like any one
of the men who fathered Yvonne's four other kids, or
even members of law enforcement Yvonne was reported to be
sleeping with or the man scene leaving her house after
(14:34):
she's presumed dead. Journalist Dwayne Pullman was equally as intrigued.
Speaker 7 (14:40):
This case is filled with sex, secrets and surprises.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
And things only got more complicated when I talked to David.
All Right, you there, yep, a little loud on that way, Okay, So.
Speaker 5 (15:02):
How are you doing it?
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Not too bad? When I first spoke to David, he
had done twenty one years, almost half of his life
in prison, and there seemed to be no hope. Left
pretty much dead in the water.
Speaker 6 (15:17):
We need new evidence.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
David didn't have a lawyer anymore. He ran out of
money in all of his appeals. If David's going to
get out of prison by proving his innocence, he needs
a lawyer and investigator to find new evidence to show
he deserves a new trial.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
That's why I would have been pushing so hard is
to find a private investigator that would kind of go
ahead and kind of almost start the case anew.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
And that's proven difficult to find. Investigators can cost thousands,
and finding someone to take a case pro bono, that is,
without pay, is not exactly easy. And then there was me.
After talking to David and reviewing case files, I had
(16:05):
enough questions about his conviction that I couldn't let it go.
I kept thinking, there really needs to be an in
depth investigation. Other post conviction investigations didn't necessarily take the
entirety of the evidence into account. One investigation might focus
on forensics, while another would focus on timelines. And I
(16:29):
didn't want to piecemeal others' investigations together. I wanted to
find out for myself if there was any truth to
David's claims of innocence. So many people had a motive
to kill Yvon, and that shook me to my core,
to myself and others before it seemed the cops had
(16:50):
taken the easy way out. David was the obvious suspect,
and they didn't really focus on anyone else. I wanted
to know who did that neighbor see leaving Yvonne's house
in the morning? What happened to evidence collected at the scene.
There was a kitchen knife, a more likely murder weapon
than a pocket knife, with a fingerprint that was never
(17:13):
linked to anyone, condoms and wrappers, blood smears everywhere. None
of it matched David, and none of it matched Joe,
the supposed killer. So who did it match? And here's
the point I keep getting stuck on. Joe confessed to
killing Yvonne, but the connection to David is pretty slim.
(17:37):
Would David? Would anyone really hire a blabby teenager as
a hitman over three hundred and fifty one dollars in
child support? At trial, the social worker said that David
and Yvonne had a good relationship. So does the prosecution
theory sound credible to you? I'm not saying it's not
(17:58):
possible that child support is a motive, but is it
likely for David? I kept stewing turning over the facts
as I knew them, and the questions which seemed to
keep multiplying, and admittedly I became obsessed. One reason is
that I'm a journalist and this seems to be a
(18:18):
juicy story, but I'm also an advocate. When I see
it wrong, I will fight to make it right by
digging and reporting to expose the truth. It makes me
angry and I can't let it go. I found David's
case when I was researching for a Wrongful Conviction podcast.
I became interested in wrongful convictions after I reported on
(18:40):
Suave Gonzales, a juvenile who was sentenced to mandatory life
in prison for a homicide. After that, I started looking
into compelling stories of people who claim to be innocent
and needed help getting a second look, and David was
one one of many. The Innocence Project estimate it's that
(19:00):
anywhere from two to ten percent of incarcerated people in
the US may be factually innocent, which means tens or
even hundreds of thousands of individuals are doing time for
someone else. And I thought maybe David was, and if
he was, the world needs to know, and are wrong
(19:22):
needs to be made right. But I felt out of
my depth doing it alone, and then an opportunity arose.
What makes you want to continue doing this work? Literally
immediately upon getting out.
Speaker 4 (19:44):
Well, yeah, you know, I've always been a ballum.
Speaker 2 (19:47):
I flew down to Austin, Texas for Wrongful Conviction Day.
I was meeting with Jason Baldwin from the West Memphis Three.
Jason's case is one of the most notorious wrongful convictions
in the country, grabbing the attention of celebrities, activists, and
lawyers since three little boys were found murdered in Arkansas
in nineteen ninety three.
Speaker 3 (20:08):
They were convicted of murdering three boy scouts, hogtied and
left in a ditch a Satanic cult. Today, the West
Memphis Three walked free.
Speaker 2 (20:16):
Jason and I did a Facebook live together for Wrongful
Conviction Day to bring attention to the issue of wrongful convictions.
Oh and then people could see coming. Okay really tail Okay,
hello everyone, we are live.
Speaker 9 (20:31):
I am here Maggie Freeling in Austin, and I am
with Jason Baldon of the West Memphis Three, who was
convicted in nineteen ninety four release in twenty eleven.
Speaker 2 (20:40):
He is also the co founder Jason now has his
own organization helping to free the wrongfully convicted. He co
founded Proclaimed Justice with his friend and private investigator John hardin.
Speaker 3 (20:53):
Shall I keep chewing while you're recording? Really?
Speaker 2 (20:59):
They notably helped exonerate Daniel Viegis in twenty eighteen. He'd
been wrongfully convicted of a double homicide when he was sixteen.
Speaker 8 (21:07):
Verdict forim b leave the Jersey finally defended Daniel viegas
not guilty of friend.
Speaker 2 (21:13):
Knew at investigating wrongful convictions. I was excited to sit
down and meet with them to see the work they're doing,
the care and doggedness and the passion they have while
doing it. I saw that when we talked about a
few cases they were investigating.
Speaker 3 (21:28):
Yeah that works. Let me go get a laptop.
Speaker 2 (21:30):
You're going to say you need document? Yeah I need Yeah,
Like wow, you were very have it all together. We
went over Nicki Zinger and Daniel Rischer's case.
Speaker 5 (21:38):
We span of a.
Speaker 9 (21:39):
Month, a murderer took her mother away, and then the
state took.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
Her love away. Andres Muscaro, there's.
Speaker 3 (21:46):
Only two possibilities here. Either somebody is feeding him all
of those details, or he was there.
Speaker 2 (21:54):
And Marco Wilson, Well, we.
Speaker 3 (21:56):
Have gunshot residue on the victim's jacket, So how do
you get gunshot residue when when you're shooting from that
far and there.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
Are We went through files and they talked me through
the details of each case, and the days in Austin
weren't just work. I got to know the guys pretty well.
Speaker 9 (22:16):
My brothers Matt and Terry like had me and my
mom stand back to back with our so we could
see who was taller on my sixteenth birthday and they're like, oh, Mom,
Jason's almost as tall as you now, you know, and
you know, just having that family time and then got arrested,
you know, a couple months later.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
One of the things you fundamentally need to know about
wrongful convictions. It's easy to put someone in and nearly
impossible to get someone out. Convictions are designed and intended
to be final. One of the only ways convictions get
overturned is when someone finally digs deep and does the
(22:56):
investigation that was probably never done in the first place.
Every day of that trip, I kept thinking, is there
an appropriate time to bring up this case to them.
I didn't want to be that person who unsolicitly asks
these busy and in demand guys with a wait list
of cases for a favor. But this wasn't just a favor.
(23:18):
It's someone's life, a man who has spent twenty two
years in prison and says he didn't do it. And
if that's true, I can't look away. And so one evening, John,
Jason and I were having after work drinks and I
broached the topic, you know, there's this really crazy case
(23:41):
I'm looking into. Y'all might be interested. We talked a
little and I told them that the most heartbreaking part
is it's been almost twenty two years, and David said
his case is dead in the water. They seemed interested,
but I didn't want to push it. Maybe they were
just being nice to their out of town guest. I
left Austin, went back to New York and we stayed
(24:04):
in touch. All right, Well, I got to run, and
you send me the overview of witnesses. Awesome, Thank you, John.
I'll talk to you all right. I don't know when
or how, but at some point I must have said
to John, look, I think you guys should look at
the files. I wanted to know if he would see
(24:25):
what I saw a total mess of an investigation and
a potential wrong doing. David Thorns was a good case,
at least to me. So I sent over the thousands
of pages of case file documents and then I waited,
(24:46):
waited for them to have a moment in their busy
days working dozens of other cases to review David's file.
And two months later they.
Speaker 3 (24:55):
Called magg you missed America.
Speaker 7 (24:58):
Hello, Hi.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
John brought on another private investigator from Proclaimed Justice to
help Danny Waxler. Oh, it's sunny, it's sunny down there.
Speaker 10 (25:09):
Yeah, spicy out there.
Speaker 6 (25:11):
Wow, y'all come down, y'all come on like me.
Speaker 2 (25:14):
On the surface, they were into it, but they don't
just take a case. They have to investigate it first
and make sure it's a true innocence claim. They need
to confirm for themselves that David was indeed telling the
truth and the case had a leg to stand on
in court. And if David was innocent, then who did
(25:36):
kill Yvonne Lane? That was part of the puzzle, a
key part, and getting an answer would prove to be
a challenge. Remember, even if there was forensics at the
messy crime scene that weren't compromised and could be tested,
that wouldn't exonerate David. By all accounts, David was not
(25:57):
at the crime scene. It was an alleged murder for Higher,
so it doesn't matter if his prints aren't there. Getting
David back in court would come down to Joe proving
that Joe was either lying when he claimed that David
paid him to kill yvon or proving that Joe didn't
kill yvon The more.
Speaker 10 (26:17):
We can dismantle Joseph for Joe, whatever he goes by,
the stronger plight we have, and if.
Speaker 2 (26:25):
Joe didn't commit the murder, then the prosecution's whole case
falls apart, of course, Joe said he did it, but
Joe has said a lot of things over the years.
Joe has given multiple versions of what happened. In one story,
David hires Joe to kill yvon In another, Joe shows
(26:45):
up at Yvonne's house and she's already dead. And in
two thousand and one, just a year after conviction, Joe
even recanted his hitman for Higher confession and said he
was pressured by police and coached what to say to
implicate David.
Speaker 7 (27:03):
Scared and confused, Wilkes says this former detective forced him
to confess Wilkes was a friend of David Thorns, and.
Speaker 2 (27:12):
They had told me a general story about how to put.
Speaker 3 (27:16):
David in it.
Speaker 10 (27:18):
Maggie, did you reach out to Joe?
Speaker 2 (27:21):
I did not, because I also I just didn't want
to really tamper with anything. I did not reach out
to him. Now, let me clarify that I did not
reach out to Joe because I did not want to
engage in any kind of perceived witness tampering because in
my mind, the case wasn't dead in the water. It
(27:43):
could go back to court, and I didn't want to
mess anything up. And I'm glad I didn't because it
seems like Joe really is the key to the entire story.
Speaker 10 (27:55):
You know, I'd like David to tell us if he
was our newest investigator, how would he approach this. It's
always good to hear from our clients on what their
own thoughts are, how they would proceed with about what
we're about to launch ourselves into.
Speaker 2 (28:15):
David was on this planning call too.
Speaker 5 (28:18):
I mean, the thing that comes to the forefront of
mine is Joe's timeline.
Speaker 2 (28:22):
Different accounts and witnesses put Joe at multiple places that night,
So which version of the story is true. John and
Danny were ready to go to Ohio and find out
And then I had an idea. I suggested that I
document their investigation in real time. I wanted to see
how it was done, step by step, interview by interview,
(28:45):
as we try to put the pieces together. And they
agreed we were all going to hit the ground in Ohio.
Speaker 3 (29:02):
Okay, well, let's well, like I said, we'll stay in
touch is needed and as things come into focus as
far as what we want to get accomplished there and
time frame and all that stuff. But we will plan
on being there two weeks from today, guys.
Speaker 10 (29:17):
Okay, we'll regroup and be back in touch.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
All right, Okay, by guys, Good to see you too.
In two weeks, we'd be an alliance Ohio, starting the
investigation into Yvonne's murder from scratch, exactly what David said
he needed to move his case forward. What would we find?
There were so many questions. Danny and John poured through
(29:44):
case files trying to figure out where to start. They
sent me a recording of their discussion, and I want
you to hear it. I want you to hear how
they approach the case. What stood out to them right away,
you know.
Speaker 10 (29:56):
And taking this case, I think one of the first
things we always have to do is say, what do
we believe was the most significant part of what convicted
our clients?
Speaker 3 (30:04):
Yeah, yeah, and we know, just even if it's.
Speaker 10 (30:09):
Just preliminary research, we know it was the statement of
Jose Wilks. Yeah, yeah, yeah, because it's not like there's
an abundant there's no biological evidence, you.
Speaker 3 (30:18):
Know, right off the bat. A couple of things that
raise my eyebrows are the knife in the pants, how
did Joe lead them to the circumstances? And if it
was the murder weapon and Joe did lead them there,
then that's a big fucking deal, you know, just on
its face, that's one that I'm going to have to
(30:40):
have a satisfactory answer to you. How did Joe take
them to that knife? That's a hell of a thing
right there. Joe's got some explaining to do.
Speaker 6 (31:02):
This is all originating from an Ohio correctional institution and
maybe recorded or.
Speaker 7 (31:08):
Monitored what was with the knife, though, Joe, I don't.
Speaker 6 (31:13):
Know why I was my clothes gone it? Why was
I'm so worried about this?
Speaker 2 (31:20):
Yeah? I don't know. Coming up on death and deceit
in alliance.
Speaker 8 (31:34):
About she actually cheated on him a couple of times.
Speaker 7 (31:39):
In terms of the police force, my god, I had
eight or nine names of officers who were potential sexual
partners because she was murdered.
Speaker 9 (31:47):
And I, I mean, you could have just knocked me over.
Speaker 7 (31:50):
Any number of people could have been a suspect.
Speaker 4 (31:53):
He was seen by a neighbor standing at her front
door at five point thirty at a time of death
of seven, where he said that they put in a
room and they changed him to the wall by his
arm and fit on him, and they told him that
they wanted him to confess.
Speaker 7 (32:06):
The guy I knew they came into the post office
that threw up his.
Speaker 4 (32:09):
Hand away and grinned all the time, and he's just
the nicest guy ever. I thought, no, this can't be.
Speaker 7 (32:15):
Bret Turvey, a nationally no criminal forensics expert, picked apart
what he calls a botched case.
Speaker 2 (32:22):
I'm curious, why is you know so many guys you
never asked about that. I wondered about him.
Speaker 10 (32:27):
The officers were involved in the various activity and criminal activity.
The fact that it was never turned over to the
defense is shocking.
Speaker 7 (32:35):
The police controlled the narrative.
Speaker 8 (32:38):
I cannot get to the truth.
Speaker 5 (32:40):
Did you know who he identified?
Speaker 3 (32:42):
No?
Speaker 6 (32:42):
I don't.
Speaker 7 (32:43):
There's a police officer.
Speaker 6 (32:44):
It's like, no, something's missing here and what did the
prosecution turn this over on?
Speaker 2 (32:48):
What is going on here?
Speaker 3 (32:50):
So it makes me feel like there's more to the story.
Speaker 6 (32:52):
And although you thought that the evidence proved it, I
know in my heart and saw I did not do this.
Speaker 2 (33:06):
Death and deceit In Alliance is produced and reported by
me Maggie Freeling, with editorial consulting from Amber Hunt. Aaron
Case is our legal researcher. Our executive producer is Steve Fishman.
Our engineer and production coordinator is Austin Smith. Eric Axelrod
is our assistant producer.
Hi, There is Steve Fishman from Orbit Media, and we're
back with a fantastic new true crime series, Death and
Deceit in Alliance. This series is a little different from
others we've done. It's a live investigation, meaning that the
reporter host is publishing information almost at the same time
(00:20):
she learns it, and we her listeners, side by side
with her or ear by ear with her, are figuring
it out as the series unrolls. Luckily, we're in great hands.
Our host reporter is Maggie Freeling, who is one of
true crime's more interesting creators these days. Maggie won a
(00:41):
Pulitzer Prize for her work on Suave, a great podcast
you should check out. She's been a champion of the
wrongfully convicted since way before it was popular, and in
this show, it's that championing that leads to terrible complications
for the podcast and for herself. It broke me, she says.
(01:03):
This is Maggie's creator's cut of a show originally released
in twenty nineteen. For access to all fourteen episodes, ad
free and all at once, subscribe with Apple Podcasts on
our show page.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Enjoy the Worst Thing that Happened to Me As a
journalist occurred while making this podcast formerly called Murder an Alliance.
In twenty twenty one, myself and two private investigators embarked
on a real time investigation to see if a convicted
(01:36):
murderer was innocent. For twenty two years, he maintained that
he was. Initially, the case seemed straightforward, a scandal ridden
small town police department who used psychics and coercion to
get results. I was sure the wrong people were in prison.
In fact, I wasn't alone, many journalists did. But once
(02:01):
I was on the ground in Ohio with the pis interviewing, investigating,
setting up billboards and tip lines, I was not ready
for what we found. The deeper we dug, the more
unsettling our findings became. I found myself questioning everything. Were
my instincts wrong or was there something actually profoundly off
(02:24):
about this case? The conclusion broke me for a bit,
But now, almost five years later, I'm staring down this
case once more with a new lens because it remains
one of the most impactful events of my life. The
timing of release is also significant because I encounter this
(02:45):
exact issue in my latest investigation called Bone Valley. Graves County.
I encountered a journalist in my reporting who refused to
discuss his mistakes and instead doubled down. It made me
think of my own journey, and consequently I thought it
was the perfect time to re examine my mistake instead
(03:08):
of hide from it. It is crucial to discuss are
all two human fallibilities as journalists. It not only keeps
us honest, but it also keeps us humble.
Speaker 3 (03:22):
Today.
Speaker 4 (03:22):
Date of July fourteenth, nineteen ninety nine, Wednesday, it's thirteen
or nine hours. My name is Detective Bud Sampson. We're
in the we're avent a police department interview room.
Speaker 5 (03:31):
Along with me.
Speaker 4 (03:32):
Is Detective William Mucklow and Detective John Leach of the
Alliance Police Department. Also in the room is Joseph Isaac
Book and we're in best getting his honest side of
Yvonne Lee? Can you tell us you're part in this?
Speaker 2 (03:45):
The tape you're listening to is Joe Wilkes, a nineteen
year old boy confessing to murder.
Speaker 6 (03:51):
She was like, Hey, what are you doing here? She goes,
I haven't seen you in a long time. I was like, oh,
they did, just wanting need to stop buy and see
how things were. And then we're sitting talking for about
three to five minutes, and then okay, I know this
is gonna be hard.
Speaker 5 (04:11):
We got to go through and you tell me what
happened here.
Speaker 6 (04:16):
Where were you sitting when you're sitting upstairs or downstairs?
We were on the second floor, that the third one. Ok.
Speaker 5 (04:22):
And we're still doing the cops talking and story. Okay,
the cheek it up and trying to run why run
up the door?
Speaker 6 (04:37):
Did you try to run up the glass doors?
Speaker 5 (04:41):
And then.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
You it's saying we thought it so, Joe just said,
David told me to David as in David Thorn. On
(05:14):
April first, nineteen ninety nine, twenty six year old Yvonne
Lane was found with her throat slashed dead in her
home in Alliance, Ohio.
Speaker 7 (05:23):
Twenty six year old Ivonne Lane, a beautiful, vivacious woman,
found in a pool of her own blood, her throat
slashed while her children slapped.
Speaker 2 (05:33):
She was discovered by her mother, who had arrived to
take her six year old grandchild to kindergarten. Yvonne was
a mother to five kids. David Thorn was the father
of one of the children. Although he and Yvonne were
not together anymore.
Speaker 7 (05:48):
The murder of a mother of five in her own
home stunt the small town of Alliance, Ohio.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
David had recently been ordered to pay child support three
hundred and fifty one dollars a month, and Joe said
in his confession that he was hired by David Thorn
to kill Yvaughn so he didn't have to pay and
so he could have his son to himself, the.
Speaker 7 (06:11):
Father of one of the children. The motive child support
Thorn was ordered to pay.
Speaker 2 (06:16):
To the untrained listener at one point myself too. This
seems like a pretty clear cut case, someone confessing and
someone with a motive. But when you start deaking, going
through documents and talking to people, the more complicated things get,
(06:37):
and it seems like just about everyone around Yvonne also
had a motive to kill her. This is death and
deceit and Alliance a real time investigation into whether David
(06:58):
Thorn killed ev Lane. I'm Maggie Freeling. The murder of
Yvonne Lane and David Thorne's claims of innocence were never
the feature of a Netflix film or made for TV series,
(07:20):
but it wasn't a blip on the radar either journalists
were drawn to it.
Speaker 7 (07:24):
For years, the attack grabbed headlines as police hunted for
a killer.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
Like investigative journalist Dwayne Pullman, who you also heard in
the previous clips. Dwayne looked into David's claims for three years. However,
that was over a decade ago, and since then, former prosecutors,
private investigators, sleuth's and the like have all looked into
David's claim of innocence. Yet the question still remains.
Speaker 7 (07:52):
Did the system convict the wrong man?
Speaker 2 (07:55):
So here we are. Since Yvonne's murder, David has continued
n Nuali said he had no involvement. He says he
never paid Joe Wilkes or anyone to murder his ex
girlfriend and the mother of his child. When you make
it to David's official website WCODT dot org, you discover
(08:15):
that this was an incredibly brutal murder. Yvonn Lane's throat
was slit to the spine, almost decapitating her. Blood was
all over the house.
Speaker 4 (08:28):
She begins to spur blood, pumping blood violently out of
her neck.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
The living room where her body was found looks like
someone took buckets of blood and threw it around the room.
It just didn't look like a hit or a random
murder to me. This looked personal. Police had to process
this absolute mess of a room, which I'm sure was
not easy, especially because they also had to get four
(08:58):
of her kids out of the house, because all but
one of her children were home when she was killed,
but they were too young to be helpful to the police.
That is, except for one of them, a four year
old who'd play a part in the investigation. The police
say they tried to get the kids through the crime
scene without seeing their mother's body, So some flubs may
(09:21):
be understandable if they're focusing on the boys, but not
to the extent that happened here. Part of the problem
may just be in experience. Murders in Alliance are rare.
A bad year might see two homicides, but most the
city saw just one. If any I feel confident saying
(09:42):
at minimum they were not ready to deal with this
particular homicide. Police say they covered Yvonne's body with a
blanket from one of the bedrooms, potentially contaminating any evidence
on her. As every watcher of c as I knows,
this probably wasn't best practice. No one wore shoe coverings
(10:03):
or gloves to preserve evidence, and investigators went back and
forth stepping over Yvonne's body when crossing the room. A
bloody footprint between her legs apparently came from a detective,
not the killer, and the chief even brought a woman,
a civilian, into the crime scene. It was an absolute disaster.
(10:26):
Evidence was collected from the scene and never tested, and
the evidence that was didn't match David or Joe. Yet
the case still made it to trial, and that's thanks
to Joe's confession, the one you heard part of at
the top of the episode. The prosecutor said that David
(10:50):
hired Joe to kill Yvonne, and as you heard, that's
the story that Joe told. He said David gave him
three hundred dollars to kill Yvonne. His confession, Joe took
the police to the alleged murder weapon, a three inch
pocket knife that he said he tossed in a storm drain.
He also showed them where he disposed of the pants
he allegedly wore when he killed von Another key element
(11:14):
of the States case a witness who said she saw
Joe the knight of the murder. Rose Moore said, Joe
told her and her boyfriend that he was on his
way to kill someone. Will come back to this later,
but I just want to point out that, in this version,
the prosecution's version, this nineteen year old was so excited
(11:36):
about an evening out with his knife to kill someone
that he wanted even strangers to know about it. If true,
Joe's boast is pretty damning, but it's worth noting that
there was no physical evidence linking even Joe to the scene.
No fingerprints, no shoeprints or DNA. The pants Joe allegedly
(12:00):
war when he killed Vaughan, there was no blood on them,
much less anything linking David to the crime. Sure, Joe
took cops to a knife, but there's no evidence linking
that knife to the murder. In fact, the prosecution will
rest on witness testimony alone. But some witnesses were never called.
(12:21):
And here's a key one. Keep him in mind. A
neighbor who saw a man leaving Yvonne's house in the
morning after her murder. He told cops that man was
not David or Joe.
Speaker 8 (12:34):
I was not asked to test to find the trival
of David Thorne. I was shown a photo of David
Thorne in December of two thousand. That was not the
man I saw leaving the residents of nine sixty of mine.
I was showing a photo of Joseph Wilkes a contest
murder in December of two thousand. It was not the
man I saw leaving the residents of Maxix.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
The jury never heard this, and after deliberating just the
three hours, David was convicted of paying Joe Wilkes three
hundred dollars to murder Yvonne Lane. He was sentenced to
life without the possibility of parole. Joe took a plea
deal of thirty to life for his cooperation. He could
be out of prison very soon.
Speaker 7 (13:18):
It didn't take a jury long to convict David Thorn.
Wilkes pleaded guilty. Both are now serving life sentences.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
The entire conviction of David Thorn rests on Joe's testimony.
But was Joe telling the truth and if he was lying,
why he lost almost as much as David did. But
I'm skeptical. Hiring a hitman to kill your ex over
three hundred and fifty one dollars a month seems like
(13:48):
more risk than it's worth. Sure back then the amount
was more like six hundred and today's dollars, and that
might feel like a lot of money to fork over
monthly if you're working at an hour job, which David was.
But David was making decent money at a high end
car shop, and compared to the motives of other folks,
(14:10):
to me, David's alleged motive appears week. Evidence uncovered in
later investigations pointed to other potential killers, like any one
of the men who fathered Yvonne's four other kids, or
even members of law enforcement Yvonne was reported to be
sleeping with or the man scene leaving her house after
(14:34):
she's presumed dead. Journalist Dwayne Pullman was equally as intrigued.
Speaker 7 (14:40):
This case is filled with sex, secrets and surprises.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
And things only got more complicated when I talked to David.
All Right, you there, yep, a little loud on that way, Okay, So.
Speaker 5 (15:02):
How are you doing it?
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Not too bad? When I first spoke to David, he
had done twenty one years, almost half of his life
in prison, and there seemed to be no hope. Left
pretty much dead in the water.
Speaker 6 (15:17):
We need new evidence.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
David didn't have a lawyer anymore. He ran out of
money in all of his appeals. If David's going to
get out of prison by proving his innocence, he needs
a lawyer and investigator to find new evidence to show
he deserves a new trial.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
That's why I would have been pushing so hard is
to find a private investigator that would kind of go
ahead and kind of almost start the case anew.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
And that's proven difficult to find. Investigators can cost thousands,
and finding someone to take a case pro bono, that is,
without pay, is not exactly easy. And then there was me.
After talking to David and reviewing case files, I had
(16:05):
enough questions about his conviction that I couldn't let it go.
I kept thinking, there really needs to be an in
depth investigation. Other post conviction investigations didn't necessarily take the
entirety of the evidence into account. One investigation might focus
on forensics, while another would focus on timelines. And I
(16:29):
didn't want to piecemeal others' investigations together. I wanted to
find out for myself if there was any truth to
David's claims of innocence. So many people had a motive
to kill Yvon, and that shook me to my core,
to myself and others before it seemed the cops had
(16:50):
taken the easy way out. David was the obvious suspect,
and they didn't really focus on anyone else. I wanted
to know who did that neighbor see leaving Yvonne's house
in the morning? What happened to evidence collected at the scene.
There was a kitchen knife, a more likely murder weapon
than a pocket knife, with a fingerprint that was never
(17:13):
linked to anyone, condoms and wrappers, blood smears everywhere. None
of it matched David, and none of it matched Joe,
the supposed killer. So who did it match? And here's
the point I keep getting stuck on. Joe confessed to
killing Yvonne, but the connection to David is pretty slim.
(17:37):
Would David? Would anyone really hire a blabby teenager as
a hitman over three hundred and fifty one dollars in
child support? At trial, the social worker said that David
and Yvonne had a good relationship. So does the prosecution
theory sound credible to you? I'm not saying it's not
(17:58):
possible that child support is a motive, but is it
likely for David? I kept stewing turning over the facts
as I knew them, and the questions which seemed to
keep multiplying, and admittedly I became obsessed. One reason is
that I'm a journalist and this seems to be a
(18:18):
juicy story, but I'm also an advocate. When I see
it wrong, I will fight to make it right by
digging and reporting to expose the truth. It makes me
angry and I can't let it go. I found David's
case when I was researching for a Wrongful Conviction podcast.
I became interested in wrongful convictions after I reported on
(18:40):
Suave Gonzales, a juvenile who was sentenced to mandatory life
in prison for a homicide. After that, I started looking
into compelling stories of people who claim to be innocent
and needed help getting a second look, and David was
one one of many. The Innocence Project estimate it's that
(19:00):
anywhere from two to ten percent of incarcerated people in
the US may be factually innocent, which means tens or
even hundreds of thousands of individuals are doing time for
someone else. And I thought maybe David was, and if
he was, the world needs to know, and are wrong
(19:22):
needs to be made right. But I felt out of
my depth doing it alone, and then an opportunity arose.
What makes you want to continue doing this work? Literally
immediately upon getting out.
Speaker 4 (19:44):
Well, yeah, you know, I've always been a ballum.
Speaker 2 (19:47):
I flew down to Austin, Texas for Wrongful Conviction Day.
I was meeting with Jason Baldwin from the West Memphis Three.
Jason's case is one of the most notorious wrongful convictions
in the country, grabbing the attention of celebrities, activists, and
lawyers since three little boys were found murdered in Arkansas
in nineteen ninety three.
Speaker 3 (20:08):
They were convicted of murdering three boy scouts, hogtied and
left in a ditch a Satanic cult. Today, the West
Memphis Three walked free.
Speaker 2 (20:16):
Jason and I did a Facebook live together for Wrongful
Conviction Day to bring attention to the issue of wrongful convictions.
Oh and then people could see coming. Okay really tail Okay,
hello everyone, we are live.
Speaker 9 (20:31):
I am here Maggie Freeling in Austin, and I am
with Jason Baldon of the West Memphis Three, who was
convicted in nineteen ninety four release in twenty eleven.
Speaker 2 (20:40):
He is also the co founder Jason now has his
own organization helping to free the wrongfully convicted. He co
founded Proclaimed Justice with his friend and private investigator John hardin.
Speaker 3 (20:53):
Shall I keep chewing while you're recording? Really?
Speaker 2 (20:59):
They notably helped exonerate Daniel Viegis in twenty eighteen. He'd
been wrongfully convicted of a double homicide when he was sixteen.
Speaker 8 (21:07):
Verdict forim b leave the Jersey finally defended Daniel viegas
not guilty of friend.
Speaker 2 (21:13):
Knew at investigating wrongful convictions. I was excited to sit
down and meet with them to see the work they're doing,
the care and doggedness and the passion they have while
doing it. I saw that when we talked about a
few cases they were investigating.
Speaker 3 (21:28):
Yeah that works. Let me go get a laptop.
Speaker 2 (21:30):
You're going to say you need document? Yeah I need Yeah,
Like wow, you were very have it all together. We
went over Nicki Zinger and Daniel Rischer's case.
Speaker 5 (21:38):
We span of a.
Speaker 9 (21:39):
Month, a murderer took her mother away, and then the
state took.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
Her love away. Andres Muscaro, there's.
Speaker 3 (21:46):
Only two possibilities here. Either somebody is feeding him all
of those details, or he was there.
Speaker 2 (21:54):
And Marco Wilson, Well, we.
Speaker 3 (21:56):
Have gunshot residue on the victim's jacket, So how do
you get gunshot residue when when you're shooting from that
far and there.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
Are We went through files and they talked me through
the details of each case, and the days in Austin
weren't just work. I got to know the guys pretty well.
Speaker 9 (22:16):
My brothers Matt and Terry like had me and my
mom stand back to back with our so we could
see who was taller on my sixteenth birthday and they're like, oh, Mom,
Jason's almost as tall as you now, you know, and
you know, just having that family time and then got arrested,
you know, a couple months later.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
One of the things you fundamentally need to know about
wrongful convictions. It's easy to put someone in and nearly
impossible to get someone out. Convictions are designed and intended
to be final. One of the only ways convictions get
overturned is when someone finally digs deep and does the
(22:56):
investigation that was probably never done in the first place.
Every day of that trip, I kept thinking, is there
an appropriate time to bring up this case to them.
I didn't want to be that person who unsolicitly asks
these busy and in demand guys with a wait list
of cases for a favor. But this wasn't just a favor.
(23:18):
It's someone's life, a man who has spent twenty two
years in prison and says he didn't do it. And
if that's true, I can't look away. And so one evening, John,
Jason and I were having after work drinks and I
broached the topic, you know, there's this really crazy case
(23:41):
I'm looking into. Y'all might be interested. We talked a
little and I told them that the most heartbreaking part
is it's been almost twenty two years, and David said
his case is dead in the water. They seemed interested,
but I didn't want to push it. Maybe they were
just being nice to their out of town guest. I
left Austin, went back to New York and we stayed
(24:04):
in touch. All right, Well, I got to run, and
you send me the overview of witnesses. Awesome, Thank you, John.
I'll talk to you all right. I don't know when
or how, but at some point I must have said
to John, look, I think you guys should look at
the files. I wanted to know if he would see
(24:25):
what I saw a total mess of an investigation and
a potential wrong doing. David Thorns was a good case,
at least to me. So I sent over the thousands
of pages of case file documents and then I waited,
(24:46):
waited for them to have a moment in their busy
days working dozens of other cases to review David's file.
And two months later they.
Speaker 3 (24:55):
Called magg you missed America.
Speaker 7 (24:58):
Hello, Hi.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
John brought on another private investigator from Proclaimed Justice to
help Danny Waxler. Oh, it's sunny, it's sunny down there.
Speaker 10 (25:09):
Yeah, spicy out there.
Speaker 6 (25:11):
Wow, y'all come down, y'all come on like me.
Speaker 2 (25:14):
On the surface, they were into it, but they don't
just take a case. They have to investigate it first
and make sure it's a true innocence claim. They need
to confirm for themselves that David was indeed telling the
truth and the case had a leg to stand on
in court. And if David was innocent, then who did
(25:36):
kill Yvonne Lane? That was part of the puzzle, a
key part, and getting an answer would prove to be
a challenge. Remember, even if there was forensics at the
messy crime scene that weren't compromised and could be tested,
that wouldn't exonerate David. By all accounts, David was not
(25:57):
at the crime scene. It was an alleged murder for Higher,
so it doesn't matter if his prints aren't there. Getting
David back in court would come down to Joe proving
that Joe was either lying when he claimed that David
paid him to kill yvon or proving that Joe didn't
kill yvon The more.
Speaker 10 (26:17):
We can dismantle Joseph for Joe, whatever he goes by,
the stronger plight we have, and if.
Speaker 2 (26:25):
Joe didn't commit the murder, then the prosecution's whole case
falls apart, of course, Joe said he did it, but
Joe has said a lot of things over the years.
Joe has given multiple versions of what happened. In one story,
David hires Joe to kill yvon In another, Joe shows
(26:45):
up at Yvonne's house and she's already dead. And in
two thousand and one, just a year after conviction, Joe
even recanted his hitman for Higher confession and said he
was pressured by police and coached what to say to
implicate David.
Speaker 7 (27:03):
Scared and confused, Wilkes says this former detective forced him
to confess Wilkes was a friend of David Thorns, and.
Speaker 2 (27:12):
They had told me a general story about how to put.
Speaker 3 (27:16):
David in it.
Speaker 10 (27:18):
Maggie, did you reach out to Joe?
Speaker 2 (27:21):
I did not, because I also I just didn't want
to really tamper with anything. I did not reach out
to him. Now, let me clarify that I did not
reach out to Joe because I did not want to
engage in any kind of perceived witness tampering because in
my mind, the case wasn't dead in the water. It
(27:43):
could go back to court, and I didn't want to
mess anything up. And I'm glad I didn't because it
seems like Joe really is the key to the entire story.
Speaker 10 (27:55):
You know, I'd like David to tell us if he
was our newest investigator, how would he approach this. It's
always good to hear from our clients on what their
own thoughts are, how they would proceed with about what
we're about to launch ourselves into.
Speaker 2 (28:15):
David was on this planning call too.
Speaker 5 (28:18):
I mean, the thing that comes to the forefront of
mine is Joe's timeline.
Speaker 2 (28:22):
Different accounts and witnesses put Joe at multiple places that night,
So which version of the story is true. John and
Danny were ready to go to Ohio and find out
And then I had an idea. I suggested that I
document their investigation in real time. I wanted to see
how it was done, step by step, interview by interview,
(28:45):
as we try to put the pieces together. And they
agreed we were all going to hit the ground in Ohio.
Speaker 3 (29:02):
Okay, well, let's well, like I said, we'll stay in
touch is needed and as things come into focus as
far as what we want to get accomplished there and
time frame and all that stuff. But we will plan
on being there two weeks from today, guys.
Speaker 10 (29:17):
Okay, we'll regroup and be back in touch.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
All right, Okay, by guys, Good to see you too.
In two weeks, we'd be an alliance Ohio, starting the
investigation into Yvonne's murder from scratch, exactly what David said
he needed to move his case forward. What would we find?
There were so many questions. Danny and John poured through
(29:44):
case files trying to figure out where to start. They
sent me a recording of their discussion, and I want
you to hear it. I want you to hear how
they approach the case. What stood out to them right away,
you know.
Speaker 10 (29:56):
And taking this case, I think one of the first
things we always have to do is say, what do
we believe was the most significant part of what convicted
our clients?
Speaker 3 (30:04):
Yeah, yeah, and we know, just even if it's.
Speaker 10 (30:09):
Just preliminary research, we know it was the statement of
Jose Wilks. Yeah, yeah, yeah, because it's not like there's
an abundant there's no biological evidence, you.
Speaker 3 (30:18):
Know, right off the bat. A couple of things that
raise my eyebrows are the knife in the pants, how
did Joe lead them to the circumstances? And if it
was the murder weapon and Joe did lead them there,
then that's a big fucking deal, you know, just on
its face, that's one that I'm going to have to
(30:40):
have a satisfactory answer to you. How did Joe take
them to that knife? That's a hell of a thing
right there. Joe's got some explaining to do.
Speaker 6 (31:02):
This is all originating from an Ohio correctional institution and
maybe recorded or.
Speaker 7 (31:08):
Monitored what was with the knife, though, Joe, I don't.
Speaker 6 (31:13):
Know why I was my clothes gone it? Why was
I'm so worried about this?
Speaker 2 (31:20):
Yeah? I don't know. Coming up on death and deceit
in alliance.
Speaker 8 (31:34):
About she actually cheated on him a couple of times.
Speaker 7 (31:39):
In terms of the police force, my god, I had
eight or nine names of officers who were potential sexual
partners because she was murdered.
Speaker 9 (31:47):
And I, I mean, you could have just knocked me over.
Speaker 7 (31:50):
Any number of people could have been a suspect.
Speaker 4 (31:53):
He was seen by a neighbor standing at her front
door at five point thirty at a time of death
of seven, where he said that they put in a
room and they changed him to the wall by his
arm and fit on him, and they told him that
they wanted him to confess.
Speaker 7 (32:06):
The guy I knew they came into the post office
that threw up his.
Speaker 4 (32:09):
Hand away and grinned all the time, and he's just
the nicest guy ever. I thought, no, this can't be.
Speaker 7 (32:15):
Bret Turvey, a nationally no criminal forensics expert, picked apart
what he calls a botched case.
Speaker 2 (32:22):
I'm curious, why is you know so many guys you
never asked about that. I wondered about him.
Speaker 10 (32:27):
The officers were involved in the various activity and criminal activity.
The fact that it was never turned over to the
defense is shocking.
Speaker 7 (32:35):
The police controlled the narrative.
Speaker 8 (32:38):
I cannot get to the truth.
Speaker 5 (32:40):
Did you know who he identified?
Speaker 3 (32:42):
No?
Speaker 6 (32:42):
I don't.
Speaker 7 (32:43):
There's a police officer.
Speaker 6 (32:44):
It's like, no, something's missing here and what did the
prosecution turn this over on?
Speaker 2 (32:48):
What is going on here?
Speaker 3 (32:50):
So it makes me feel like there's more to the story.
Speaker 6 (32:52):
And although you thought that the evidence proved it, I
know in my heart and saw I did not do this.
Speaker 2 (33:06):
Death and deceit In Alliance is produced and reported by
me Maggie Freeling, with editorial consulting from Amber Hunt. Aaron
Case is our legal researcher. Our executive producer is Steve Fishman.
Our engineer and production coordinator is Austin Smith. Eric Axelrod
is our assistant producer.
Hosts And Creators
Dax-Devlon Ross
Steve Fishman
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.