The Blotter Presents

[KlavdiaVavilova]

Little did I know when I posted in this thread ^^^ about using genealogy websites to make DNA matches with missing persons and Does that right around that time they were solving the GSK case with that exact method.   With all the trawling we did of local newspapers for tidbits, its a pity no one apparently came across the news story about the Sacramento area cop who was a dead ringer for one of the Maggiore sketches fired for shoplifting dog repellent and a hammer six months or whatever before the murders started ... he would've been everyone's fave suspect immediately. 

Enjoy the retirement you deserve, Joe.

Edited April 27, 2018 by KlavdiaVavilova

[Primetimer]

Two bank-robbery cases, no waiting: Toby Ball and Sarah D. Bunting on Erie's pizza-delivery heist and Seattle's string of 'Hollywood' bank robberies.

View the full article

[veronicamers]

Watched the first two episodes of Evil Genius tonight. Really enjoyed it and thought it very well executed. The note/scavenger hunt was just...bonkers. Loved all the law enforcement talking heads. They all came across as professional, focused, and humble which can be a rarity in true crime properties these days.

I'm with you Sarah, I read everything I can get my hands on about art crimes, forgery, financial crimes, non-murderous heists, etc. Loved the aside about you being a currency nerd. I get it totally. 

[Sarah D. Bunting]

Aw, my people.

 

Watched the last two yesterday; found them a bit of a letdown, which I think probably wouldn't have been the case if I hadn't had the big gap between viewings. Has anyone else streamed the whole thing yet?

[starri]

I watched one episode last night and the final three this morning.  I also heeded the warning from you and Toby to avoid Wikipedia-ing the case, and I think that helped as well.  It held my interest a lot more then Wild Wild Country did, but then it also had the advantages of being shorter.

I remember hearing about the actual bank robbery and bomb part back when it first happened, and I think another podcast, probably My Favorite Murder presented the entire story as well, but it didn't make much of an impression, because almost all of the later stuff seemed like new information.  Since I don't want to spoil anyone who's not familiar with the case, I'm only going to say that I agree 100% with the movie's conclusions, and like would have even without the 4th episode's big reveal, for one simple reason: 

Spoiler

Rothstein called in the pizza order to the real address, which would have been unnecessary had Brian Wells been in on it.

There is still one huge unanswered question, and we'll never know, and that's always going to drive me nuts.

My professional curiosity would have made me interested in talking to Marjorie, but seeing the video conference of her talking to the world's most patient lawyer, it just looked exhausting.  Also, really fuck the first attorney blaming the mental health system for not locking her up.

[rwgrab]

Great discussion on the podcast as usual.  It made me super-excited for the Netflix debut of Evil Genius, and I promised myself I wouldn't binge it all on Friday.  But then two episodes became three, and then I definitely watched the fourth one over breakfast on Saturday!

It really did seem kind of anticlimactic to me once all the pieces started coming together because they kept showing all the pictures and connecting them with lines.  Big high point towards the end, though, with the reveal from Wells' friend and her role in the series of events.  On the whole, I enjoyed going for the journey discovering all the players and their roles.  But you know, we're dealing with a large gang of lying lairs who lie, so it almost seemed naive that the filmmakers weren't more skeptical of all the stories that were flying around.  Marjorie is clearly very smart, but also clearly a few sandwiches short of a picnic!  I'm not saying she's definitely lying, but what incentive does she have to tell the truth during recitation number 200 of "the facts"?  Yes, they confront her a little bit towards the end, but I felt like they propelled the story forward on the wings of whatever she had chosen to reveal leading up to that.

I prefer when a documentary (or documentary series) allows the viewer to draw conclusions or critically evaluate what's presented along with the program.  Here, the film presents such a strong case for how they think it definitely went down that it's hard to argue with it.  That's it's right, of course, but I wouldn't have minded some more questioning or critical examination of the evidence (particularly because one of the filmmakers is making the choice to insert himself into the proceedings).  I'd still say it's worth a watch, but I'm more tempted to go on a Google frenzy now to try and fill in the blanks.  

[Glade]

I had to stop watching in ep2 when Marjorie started ranting about her and Bill's sex life...too gross, too much information, too little distance from these creepy psychos and from what boils down to the most horrific episode of Hoarders ever.

[ooh.boo]

Ann Rule wrote a book about the Hollywood bank robber. It’s called The End of The Dream.

[Sarah D. Bunting]

Thanks for the book rec; someone on Twitter mentioned it also.

 

@rwgrab, that was my issue too. The fact is, there's just a big hole at the center of things where someone who might have been convinced to tell the truth -- even against his best interest, and primarily to show off to l.e., but still -- died years ago and can't fill things in. Without Rothstein, it's functionally impossible to get at what might have been going on.

 

And I had hoped they would get into more detail about Wells, i.e. whether he had a delay or some sort or struggled with substance abuse, and I suspect getting his family's cooperation was not really on the table given everything else they felt about the handling of the case/his remains...but here again we have a Duplass-produced project that seems to leave big gaps that make it much more difficult to speculate.

 

Definitely very watchable, but these serieseses do have a certain frustrating element to them in that way.

[LisaW]

Great podcast as usual. The reason the silent alarm was not triggered while he was in the bank is because you do not want the bank robber to be trapped in the bank with the customer/employees(hostages). I worked in a bank for 12 years and was trained that you give them the money without hesitation, let them leave then lock the doors so they can not come back in before your trigger the alarm.

[Primetimer]

Dan Patrick Brady on Oxygen's latest competent, but misnamed, Saturday series -- plus a scavenger hunt for his UM episode!

View the full article

[Sarah D. Bunting]

Thank you, that makes complete sense.

[veronicamers]

I happened to catch Abuse of Power over the weekend. I knew about the Tokars case because it was covered on American Justice and I've seen every episode of that show more than once (love ya Bill Kurtis). I agree with y'all that hearing directly from the sons was very moving. I'd always found it just absolutely horrific that Sara was killed in front of her two very young children who then had to scramble to get help.

Okay, I will accept the Unsolved Mystery/Dan Patrick Brady challenge. I'm about to change jobs and will have a bit of down time so I can do some Amazon Prime investigating. Perhaps it is me who holds the key to this mystery.

[Sarah D. Bunting]

[Stack voice] Update! Listener Beth found him in S02.E16, at about the 42-minute mark (he's on the left):

 

 

[Stowaway]

4 hours ago, Sarah D. Bunting said:

[Stack voice] Update! Listener Beth found him in S02.E16, at about the 42-minute mark (he's on the left):

 

 

I hope it was worth the wait!

[Portia]

5 hours ago, Sarah D. Bunting said:

[Stack voice] Update! Listener Beth found him in S02.E16, at about the 42-minute mark (he's on the left):

 

 

Lookin' GOOD!

[Sarah D. Bunting]

The man himself doesn't care nearly as much about this as I do, but was pleased to find he actually had lines plural. Now I'm walking around the house drawing down on the cats and barking, "WHERE'S THE ACETONE?!" 

[rwgrab]

Oh man, that's so awesome that the segment has been found.  Maybe this news will trigger a new wave of residual checks headed your way!

And Dan, thank you so much for saving us from the early Unsolved Mysteries episodes where the "actual family members and police officials have participated in recreating the events."  Let's leave the acting to the professionals! 

[Portia]

On 5/11/2018 at 9:49 PM, veronicamers said:

Watched the first two episodes of Evil Genius tonight. Really enjoyed it and thought it very well executed. The note/scavenger hunt was just...bonkers. Loved all the law enforcement talking heads. They all came across as professional, focused, and humble which can be a rarity in true crime properties these days.

I completely agree about the LEOs of Evil Genius, and I'd add that they're articulate and--dare I say it?--charismatic (at least by documentary cop standards).

Why hasn't this story been made into a feature film? Roseanne Barr should make it happen, because she was born to play Marge. 

Edited May 18, 2018 by Portia

[starri]

The UM theme is my ringtone. I ain’t ashamed. 

[rwgrab]

3 hours ago, starri said:

The UM theme is my ringtone. I ain’t ashamed. 

Me too!  The early version!

[EAG46]

You shouldn't forget to cash the residual checks, Dan! 5 bucks is 5 bucks!

[smmoe1997]

I know this isn't TV, but Sarah, have you seen this? I got it from Book Riot's Today in Books newsletter.

Publisher Claims To Know 1971 Plane Hijacker’s Identity

There’s only one still unsolved skyjacking in U.S. history: The identity of “D.B. Cooper” the man who hijacked a 1971 flight and parachuted out with $200,000. Carl Laurin’s publishing firm announced they cracked the case with a “memoir detailing the confessions of a longtime friend who supposedly committed the crime: Walter R. Reca, a former military paratrooper and intelligence operative.” (If reading about when plane hijackings were routine is your thing, you’ll probably be interested in The Skies Belong to Us: Love and Terror in the Golden Age of Hijacking by Brendan I. Koerner)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2018/05/17/a-new-d-b-cooper-suspect-yet-another-possible-identity-for-elusive-hijacker/?utm_campaign=Today in Books&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_term=.032c483a14f0

[Sarah D. Bunting]

I did see that, and read it while leaning on a boulder of salt (hee).

[MCMLXXVII]

On 10/10/2017 at 6:15 AM, MuuMuuChainsmoker said:

Holy hand grenade, is anyone else listening to the Dirty John podcast?  It’s BONKERS.  Not sure if this non TV property fits the Blotter mandate, but I’d love to hear @Sarah D. Bunting‘s take on it.  

I just listened last week, but apparently they’re bringing it to TV.

http://deadline.com/2018/04/eric-bana-cast-john-meehan-dirty-john-bravo-true-crime-anthology-series-1202357623/

[Primetimer]

First-time guest Rebecca Lavoie on 'the social-media case of the century,' and a show from the previous century that hasn't aged well.

View the full article

[Sarah D. Bunting]

Yep, I believe Connie Britton's also been cast.

[starri]

In addition to John Douglas being a bloviating gasbag, and ruining the otherwise excellent Criterion Collection Silence of the Lambs by turning it into a polemic on how awesome the death penalty is, I must point out, yet again, that he actually has precious little actual education in psychology or psychiatry, and is just part of the wave of FBI agents in the 70s who made shit up and called it science.

Rebecca has made her rant about profiling on Crime Writers On several times, and it delights me every time.  Just basically every single thing I feel about it.  The absolute nadir being some retired mechanical engineer who I guess is good at reading things he finds on Google and was billed as a profiler on that Killing Season show.

And thank you both for getting through a discussion of Casey Anthony without mentioning a certain harpy, formerly of HLN.

And I agree with both of you, that Hillary Duff episode of SVU is awesome.  Although nothing is going to top the one where they did the Spotlight sex abuse case with Eric Stoltz.

[Sarah D. Bunting]

She's going to be known as A Certain Harpy from now on.

[bosawks]

In fairness to her unmitigated level of suck I think we should defer to the definite article and go with The Certain Harpy....

[missy jo]

The gruesome amount of blood alone showed that it wasn't a fall down the stairs, imo. It was a total bloodbath. I've fallen down a staircase, landed on concrete and sustained a concussion, and it's blunt force trauma, not an excessive blood producing event. The Staircase documentary series was excellent and only further convinced me of his guilt. 

[Phoebe70]

Ann Rule wrote a book about the Hollywood bank robber. It’s called The End of The Dream.

No, this is a completely different bank robber. I loved Ann Rule's book though!

[Phoebe70]

I had to stop watching in ep2 when Marjorie started ranting about her and Bill's sex life...too gross, too much information, too little distance from these creepy psychos and from what boils down to the most horrific episode of Hoarders ever.

You should keep watching. I admit that part was gross, but there's no more mention of that luckily. Episodes 3 and 4 are where you really find out a lot about the heist.

[ooh.boo]

3 hours ago, Phoebe70 said:

No, this is a completely different bank robber. I loved Ann Rule's book though!

It’s about Scott Scurlock, so not a completely different bank robber. 

[rwgrab]

I know I'm biased because I have an interest in psychology, but I'm not so quick to dismiss the value of profiling.  Yes, they usually include broad statements, so they're not going to lead you to, say, this group of 20 possible people over here.  But they still might help you put together how a crime took place or where the perpetrator might hang out, etc. that would be better than just saying "well, hell, this guy could be anywhere!!"  In some cases, maybe all you have is who the victim is and how that person was killed.  Starting from there, I think a profile could start to generate some potential areas for investigation.  

I mean, point taken that they're not exactly dead-on or based on any hard science, but I think they're a better tool than, say, polygraphs or bite mark analysis.  I think dismissing them out of hand as useless might be a mistake.  I mean, just because we now know how faulty eyewitness testimony can be doesn't mean the police should stop interviewing people who witnessed a crime.  

[MCMLXXVII]

I’m just learning that a lone guy tried to kidnap Princess Anne in 1974 as well. Must have been a trend.

https://m.ranker.com/list/attempted-kidnapping-of-princess-anne/cleo-egnal?ref=collections_btm&l=2631327&collectionId=2447

[missy jo]

I watched The Casey Anthony special. It didn't add anything to what I already knew about the case. She's still guilty as sin and the jury should be ashamed of themselves. 

[starri]

On 5/25/2018 at 2:23 PM, rwgrab said:

But they still might help you put together how a crime took place or where the perpetrator might hang out, etc. that would be better than just saying "well, hell, this guy could be anywhere!!"  In some cases, maybe all you have is who the victim is and how that person was killed.  Starting from there, I think a profile could start to generate some potential areas for investigation.  

Read some of the hilariously inaccurate Unabomber profiles the FBI put together.  They got his age wrong, his education level wrong, his physical appearance wrong, his lifestyle wrong...And it did nothing for the investigation, he was caught because his brother turned him in.

The whole "theory" behind the thing is based on a bunch of interviews that John Douglas and Robert Ressler did with a bunch of inmates in California.  That's an incredibly biased sample, given that they can only interview criminals who were caught and convicted.  And while I know this veers towards Appeal to Authority, neither of the men had any real education in what they were claiming expertise in.

I understand completely why people find the idea fascinating.  The Silence of the Lambs influenced my career choice more than I care to admit, but science it isn't.  

[rwgrab]

4 hours ago, starri said:

The whole "theory" behind the thing is based on a bunch of interviews that John Douglas and Robert Ressler did with a bunch of inmates in California.

Yeah, I can understand that point of view, but I don't think they just stopped there and didn't move the ball forward after that.  I don't have firsthand knowledge, but I'm going to guess they continue to research and refine their findings to the present day.  This is an area of expertise that has had many contributors over the years beyond those two guys.  And believe me, if I never hear any more from John Douglas the rest of my life, I would be perfectly happy :)

But it's not just a theory that you can look at somebody's behavior and make some other determinations about them.  Take websites that collect personal data to target advertisements.  Companies spend a bunch of money on this data because they can build a profile of a person's interest and buying habits based on what that person clicks on.  Sure, those ads don't always appeal to that user, but sometimes they get pretty close.  Not perfect, but still worth the money to the company who's trying to get you to buy whatever they're selling.

I'm certainly not trying to argue that they're always dead-on or that they never need refinement midstream (I'm pretty sure somebody runs out of a room saying "the profile wasn't quite right!!" at about minute 47 of many episodes of Criminal Minds!).  But I also do think they have the potential to provide some value to a criminal investigation, which is why dismissing them altogether as an investigative tool isn't something I'm willing to do.  

[pigs-in-space]

I'm torn on the profiler thing, to be honest. Despite being a big true crime fan, I don't really know enough about it to say whether it's baloney or not, but I do know I've enjoyed what Jim and Laura have had to say in the past. Not so much recently, because I stopped listening to their podcast probably a year or so ago for the same reasons as everyone else. But Laura Richards' work with domestic violence and stalking and risk assessment models is something I really admire and I think is really useful to law enforcement in terms of homicide prevention.

I think my favorite part of this episode was Sarah saying for all of posterity that she once found Jim Clemente hot.  (Also appreciate the Lisa appreciation, though! She seems to have a thankless job at times.)

[Sarah D. Bunting]

Quote

she once found Jim Clemente hot

If he had just left that hat on its hook...

[FozzyBear]

On 5/26/2018 at 7:41 PM, missy jo said:

I watched The Casey Anthony special. It didn't add anything to what I already knew about the case. She's still guilty as sin and the jury should be ashamed of themselves. 

Totally get the sentiment here, but I always blamed the prosecution for bowing to public pressure and filing charges before they were really ready. I thought/think she was guilty too but I still remember feeling like the prosecutions closing argument(and a big chunk of their case) was “something bad happened and we don’t know what, but please convict this woman of being an asshole.” And while I wish we could, that’s not a crime. I felt for the jury. It wasn’t like I think they wanted to let her go, but damn. A theory of a the crime would have been nice. Some crime. Something that they were actually supposed to have found her guilty of other then fatal assholeness. All that being said I was shocked the jury didn’t find her guilty of fatal assholeness. I kind of thought they would.

Edited May 29, 2018 by FozzyBear

[Primetimer]

ID's four-part miniseries on the hunt for a serial killer, and ITV's look at Victorian poisoneuse Mary Ann Cotton, made Dan Patrick Brady and Sarah D. Bunting a bit queasy.

View the full article

[EAG46]

How about Sante and Kenneth Kimes, the mother-son grifter team convicted of at least one murder and possibly responsible for others?  [Sante died in prison in 2014; Kenneth is still alive.]  There were at least two made-for-TV movies about the case.     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sante_Kimes <---  as a start.  Her older son Kent Walker wrote a book "Son of a Grifter" about life with her which I've always wanted to read but could never get my hands on.

[Sarah D. Bunting]

Son Of A Grifter is a great read! Frustrating, but compelling. There are used copies on Amazon starting at a dollar.

 

Didn't Mary Tyler Moore play Sante or am I crazy?

[starri]

Shout out to The Poisoner's Handbook, which regularly trades places with Columbine and the Devil in the White City as my favorite True Crime book

[EAG46]

Mary Tyler Moore DID play Sante Kimes in the 2001 movie, with Jean Stapleton playing her victim, socialite Irene Silverman.   Talk about a powerhouse cast.  Thanks for the Amazon tip.

[EAG46]

On 5/29/2018 at 4:09 PM, FozzyBear said:

All that being said I was shocked the jury didn’t find her guilty of fatal assholeness. I kind of thought they would.

And I think the judge would have added that charge to the jury's instructions if he could have.   

[starri]

My dislike of Juan Martinez seems to have been for cause.

[Sarah D. Bunting]

..."Mr. Juan-derful"? Oh brother.