# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A high-school senior named Hae Min Lee disappeared one day after school in 1999, in Baltimore County, Maryland. A month later, her body was found in a city park. She'd been strangled. Her 17-year-old ex-boyfriend, Adnan Syed, was arrested for the crime, and within a year, he was sentenced to life in prison. The case against him was largely based on the story of one witness, Adnan's friend Jay, who testified that he helped Adnan bury Hae's body. But Adnan has always maintained he had nothing to do with Hae's death. Some people believe he's telling the truth. Many others don't.

Sarah Koenig sorted through thousands of documents, listened to trial testimony and police interrogations, and talked to everyone she could find who remembered what happened between Adnan Syed and Hae Min Lee. She discovered that the trial covered up a far more complicated story than the jury - or the public - ever got to hear. The high school scene, the shifting statements to police, the prejudices, the sketchy alibis, the scant forensic evidence - all of it leads back to the most basic questions: How can you know a person's character? How can you tell what they're capable of? In Season One of Serial, she looks for answers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A high-school senior named Hae Min Lee disappeared one day after school in 1999, in Baltimore County, Maryland. A month later, her body was found in a city park. And two weeks after that, her former boyfriend and classmate, 17-year-old Adnan Syed, was arrested for the crime.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is the place where we'll collect all the visual stuff in this story - maps, timelines, and a few pertinent documents that might pique your interest. You can click on each one to see it at a much friendlier size.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Was Adnan Syed Wrongly Convicted For Murder? | True Crime Recaps

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Who Killed Serial’s Hae Min Lee? These Are the 5 Best Theories

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Here’s what people are speculating about the murder at the heart of HBO’s new docuseries.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An anonymous letter writer terrorizes a small town, threatening to expose their rumored dark secrets.

Starting in the late 1970s, Circleville, Ohio, residents opened their mailboxes to find mysterious letters meant to terrorize them. This letter reads in part:
"You have been watched: Failure to comply and you shall suffer: no one can help: no one can protect you: Obey: Obey:"

The Poison Pen

One letter to Mary Gillispie reads:
This is your last chance to report him: I know you are a pig and will prove it and shame you out of Ohio: A pig sneaks around and meets other womens husbands behind their backs, causes families and homes and marriages to suffer:"

A Letter to Ronald Gillispie

The letters sent to Mary Gillispie didn't stop and they became increasingly threatening. Her husband, Ronald Gillispie, began receiving them too. The writer, who was adamant that an alleged affair was happening between Mary Gillispie and Gordon Massie wrote to Ronald Gillispie:
"You should catch them together and kill them both."

Another Day, Another Sign

Mary Gillispie always denied having an affair with Gordon Massie, but after her husband's death, she says they began seeing each other. That's when the threats against her escalated.

On February 7, 1983, Mary Gillispie was driving her bus route to pick up kids. This is the intersection where she saw an obscene sign about her 13-year-old daughter. Mary Gillispie tried to pull the sign down from a fence, but she noticed it was rigged with twine and a box. She took the box home and opened it. Inside was a gun ready to go off.

"Whatever Remains" Podcast

Marie Mayhew is the host of the "Whatever Remains" podcast, where she discusses the Circleville letters. She tells "48 Hours" there's only one piece of evidence connecting Paul Freshour to the booby trap. "I think the gun is probably - to me in the entire scope of the investigation ... the strongest evidence," said Mayhew.

Tormenting Letters Continue

Although Paul Freshour was never charged with writing the letters, at trial the judge allowed in 39 of the letters. It was a break for the prosecution who claimed the writing on the booby trap shared similarities to those letters.

Freshour was convicted of attempted murder and everyone presumed the letter writer was now behind bars, but the letters never stopped.

Is the Writer Still Out There?

Paul Freshour served 10 years in prison for the attempted murder of Mary Gillispie. He wasn't allowed pens or paper while behind bars but the letters still continued. Even Freshour received one.

The letter to Freshour reads in part: "F reshour: Now when are you going to believe you arent getting out of there: I old you two years ago when we set em up: they stay set up:"

Clues to the Writer

Former FBI profiler Mary Ellen O'Toole looked at the letters that continued while Paul Freshour was in prison. After nearly 20 years, the letters stopped in 1994 when Freshour was released from prison. Over the years, Freshour still maintained his innocence.

"If a crime continues on and you have someone in custody for a long period of time, you have to say, "Somebody else is sending these letters. They're not happening by magic. Somebody else is writing the letters," said O'Toole.

First published on August 24, 2021 / 10:06 AM

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Circleville letters: You've got hate mail

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An anonymous letter writer terrorizes a small town, threatening to expose their rumored dark secrets. Starting in the late 1970s, Circleville, Ohio, residents opened their mailboxes to find mysterious letters meant to terrorize them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
All the pomp and circumstance of the pageant scene became tainted with holiday murder in the unlikeliest of homes - and at the heart of it was an innocent six-year-old child.

The discovery of JonBenét Ramsey's brutally murdered body on the morning after Christmas in 1996 in a spare room in the basement of the family's 7,000-square-foot home in the Chautauqua neighborhood of Boulder, Colorado, shocked the nation. But it was the events that unfolded after that truly raised eyebrows and scratched heads - to the extent that there is no definitive answer as to what happened on that winter evening more than two decades ago.

While the timeline of events leading up to the discovery of the body are unclear, those that transpired after are all we know of who killed JonBenét.
December 23, 1993: A 911 call is made from the Ramsey home
Three days before the body is found, a 911 call is made from the home. But on January 10, it's reported that it was likely a mistake made by a drunk party guest, according to CNN.
December 25, 1996: The Ramseys attend a Christmas party at a family friend's house
JonBenét gets a bike for Christmas. After attending a Christmas party hosted by family friend Fleet White, the Ramseys go home - and JonBenét goes to bed.

Some theories say she snuck back downstairs and fought with her brother over a late-night snack of pineapple. Indeed, the undigested tropical fruit was found in her stomach.

December 26, 1996: JonBenét goes missing

5:30 a.m.: When Patsy gets up to make coffee, she discovers a two-and-a-half page handwritten ransom note on the back stairs leading to the kitchen that says her daughter has been kidnapped, according to the Denver Post. "You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills," the note demanded, according to Psychology Today. Oddly, that was the exact amount of John's Christmas bonus. The note also said to not call the police. Patsy calls 911.

Before 6 a.m. Police officer Rick French arrives at the home and does a search. He pauses by the door that JonBenét was later found behind, but doesn't open it, according to .

Early Afternoon: The first detective on the scene, Linda Arndt, pulls aside John and White, who had come over to console his friends. Arndt tells them to do a "top to bottom" search of the home. It was during that search that John opened the door to the basement's spare room (ironically where the Christmas presents had been hidden) and saw JonBenét's body.

It looked like she had been strangled and her mouth and neck were covered with duct tape. He picked up the body and ran screaming upstairs. Arndt later moved the body closer to the Christmas tree upstairs - by bringing her upstairs and leaving the basement door open, much of the evidence became tainted.

10:45 p.m. The Boulder County coroner's team removed the young girl's body from the house.
December 28, 1996: The Ramseys cooperate with authorities
The family goes to the Boulder police station and they willingly give hair, blood and handwriting samples.

The police later state that John's grown children, John Andrew and Melinda, were out of town when the murder occurred, so are not suspected.
December 29, 1996: The family flies to Atlanta
Just days after the murder, the Ramseys go back to their former hometown of Atlanta.

December 31, 1996: JonBenét's funeral is held

The six-year-old is laid to rest in Marietta, Georgia, next to her older half-sister Elizabeth, who had died in a tragic car accident in 1992. About 200 family and friends attend a ceremony at the family's old church.

Photo: ZUMA Press, Inc./Alamy Stock Photo

January 1, 1997: John and Patsy give a New Year's Day interview
JonBenét's parents give a "very difficult" 45-minute long interview to CNN from Atlanta, where they were now staying with family. While the Boulder police had been reassuring the community there wasn't a murderer on the run, Patsy said on television, "There is a killer on the loose... if I were a resident of Boulder, I would tell my friends to keep - keep your babies close to you, there's someone out there."

She added, "America is suffering because have lost faith in the American family," citing the example of the mystery of what had really happened with O.J. Simpson. "We are a Christian, God-fearing family. We love our children. We would do anything for our children."
January 2, 1997: Investigators follow the family to Georgia
A team of five detectives from Boulder fly to Atlanta, according to CNN. Investigators were shocked the Ramseys granted the TV interview since they had claimed to be too emotional to talk to the police.

January 3, 1997: Detectives reveal the ransom note was written inside the house

Detectives announce that the note was written on a paper pad from inside the house, meaning it was likely written after the murder.

John and Patsy return to Boulder.

Boulder cops also go to Charlevoix, Michigan, to search through a summer home the Ramsey family owns.
January 6, 1997: School resumes at JonBenét's school
After the Christmas and New Year holidays, class resumes at JonBenét's former school. Teachers and counselors help the young children try to understand what happened, even though it continues to be a mystery.
January 8, 1997: News comes out that there may have been a "practice" ransom note
Reportedly there is evidence that the person who wrote the ransom note first practiced it on another piece of paper.
February 27, 1997: JonBenét's half-brother is questioned
The alibi of John Andrew is reexamined, even though he was allegedly out of town when it happened.
March 8, 1997: The police search the Ramsey's Michigan home again
March 7, 1997: A handwriting analysis eliminates John, but not Patsy
April 3, 1997: DNA testing takes place
Based on expert analysis, detectives confirm that John didn't write the ransom note, but say there is a chance Patsy may have.

The police head back there, reportedly looking for "unrehearsed" handwriting samples to see if Patsy wrote the ransom note.

While there had already been a DNA test done by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, a secondary one was done by Maryland's Cellmark laboratories, according to the Denver Post.
April 30, 1997: Patsy is questioned for six-and-a-half hours
April 19, 1997: JonBenét's parents become the prime suspects
May 2, 1997: John and Patsy speak to local media
John and Patsy become the prime suspects of the investigation, according to CNN. "Obviously, the focus is on these people," Boulder's D.A. Alex Hunter says.

Photo: Helen H. Richardson/ The Denver Post

May 14, 1997: The DNA results have "no surprises"
"Formal interviews" are conducted with John for two hours and Patsy for six-and-a-half hours. These new statements replace the initial ones made right after the murder.
July 12, 1997: JonBenét's bedroom furniture is moved to Atlanta
The victim's parents talk to the local press, including 9News. John stumbles over his daughter's name and addresses the rumors of her possibly being sexually molested, calling those "most hurtful innuendos." Patsy says, "I'm appalled that anyone would think that John or I would be involved with such a hideous and heinous crime, but let me assure you I didn't not kill JonBenét."
July 14, 1997: Autopsy reports are released
Sources report that there are "no surprises" in the results of the DNA test, but don't specify what that means.
January 15, 1998: The Ramseys refuse to interview with authorities
The former child beauty queen's belongings are moved across the country on a moving truck.
January 29, 1998: John and Patsy submit the clothes they were wearing
The previously sealed autopsy results are released. They confirm "a deep ligature around the victim's neck and another around the right wrist - evidence she was bound and strangled" and also say that "blood and abrasions were found in the girl's vaginal area - and that she was struck on the head violently enough to cause bleeding and an 8.5-inch fracture to her skull," according to CNN.

The Ramseys ask to review evidence before giving more interviews to the police. Their request is rejected, according to the Denver Post.

Two months after the police requested the parents hand over the clothes they were wearing the night of the crime, the Ramseys turn in two shirts, a pair of pants and a sweater.
June 3, 1998: Evidential investigations continue
March 12, 1998: A grand jury investigation is called

Investigators formerly call for a grand jury investigation since 15 months have already passed since the murder.

The case's lead investigator, Mark Beckner says there are "significant results" from the 1,058 pieces of evidence taken from the home. Details are not shared.
August 6, 1998: Denver detective Steve Thomas resigns, calling the case "crippled"
June 10-12, 1998: JonBenét's brother Burke is questioned
August 19, 1998: White asks for Hunter to be dismissed
JonBenét's older brother Burke, who was 9 at the time of the crime and the only other one known to be in the house that night, is also questioned for the first time. He's now 11.
August 20, 1998: Burke's voice is reportedly overheard on 911 call
Detective Steve Thomas writes an eight-page resignation letter, saying that Hunter's office has "crippled" the case since elements have been "thoroughly compromised," according to the Denver Post. Governor Roy Romer inquires as to whether he needs to step in. He eventually does.

Family friend White asks to have someone other than Hunter assigned to the JonBenét case.

Originally, the Ramseys had said Burke was asleep the morning his sister was discovered missing - and didn't wake up until the police arrived. However, in the 911 tape that has now been enhanced, Burke's voice is reportedly heard in the background.
September 24, 1998: Another detective quits
September 15, 1998: The grand jury begins their investigation
October 13, 1998: The grand jury begins hearing forensic evidence
Even though they were selected five months prior, the grand jury starts their investigation, according to CNN.
October 20, 1998: John faces Stephen Miles in court
Citing too much focus on the Ramsey parents, homicide detective Lou Smit quits and says in his resignation letter that a "very dangerous killer is still out there." This gives the Ramseys the fuel they need to convince authorities to shift the focus of the investigation.
December 3, 1998: More family DNA is collected
The grand jury starts hearing the case - learning about forensic evidence, like DNA, hair and fibers from the scene. They also tour the family's home in Boulder nine days later.
January 28, 1999: A teddy bear takes center stage
Two stories in the National Enquirer had said an anonymous source said John believed photographer Stephen Miles killed JonBenét. John goes back to Colorado to face Miles in the civil case.
March 18, 1999: The first detective on the case resigns
Almost two years after the killing, DNA evidence is requested of five Ramsey family members. Though they are not suspects though - investigators simply want to try to identify who the DNA in the house belongs to.

Investigators appeal to the online community to try to find information about a Santa Claus teddy bear that was reportedly found in JonBenét's bedroom. They hope by finding the manufacturer and where it was sold, they can link more dots.

Yet another resignation. Arndt resigns because of all the criticism.
September 13, 1999: Detective Arndt says he knows who killed JonBenét
May 19, 1999: Burke is no longer a suspect
September 30, 1999: JonBenét's half-siblings testify
Now 12 years old, Burke is secretly questioned by the grand jury - and he is officially declared a witness only, not a suspect.

In an interview on Good Morning America, Arndt says she knows who the killer is, but won't say who.

John Andrew and Melinda - who had already been cleared in March 1997 - testify in front of the grand jury.
March 17, 2000: The Ramseys publish a book
October 13, 1999: The district attorney says there is no "sufficient evidence"
May 24, 2000: John and Patsy hold a press conference
Hunter says that there isn't "sufficient evidence" to charge anyone in the murder.

John and Patsy release The Death of Innocence about their daughter's murderer, along with a publicity campaign to promote it.

JonBenét's parents hold a news conference to announce that lie detector tests confirm they are innocent in the death of their daughter. However, the test wasn't run by the FBI and not acceptable to investigators.
June 29, 2006: Patsy is buried next to JonBenét
June 24, 2006: Patsy dies of cancer
September 12, 2016: Burke breaks his silence - but reveals no answers
With no answers in sight at the time of her death, JonBenét's mother Patsy - a former pageant queen herself - passes away at the age of 49 from ovarian cancer. She had been diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer in 1993.
Watch Who Killed JonBenet? on Lifetime Movie Club
Patsy is buried in Marietta, Georgia, next to her daughter JonBenét.

After 20 years, JonBenét's brother Burke sits down for an interview with Dr. Phil. "It probably was some pedophile in the pageant audience," he said - twice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
JonBenét Ramsey's Murder: Timeline of the Child Pageant Star's Death and Investigation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
All the pomp and circumstance of the pageant scene became tainted with holiday murder in the unlikeliest of homes - and at the heart of it was an innocent six-year-old child. The discovery of JonBenét Ramsey's brutally murdered body on the morning after Christmas in 1996 in a spare room in the basement of the family's 7,000-square-foot home in the Chautauqua neighborhood of Boulder, Colorado, shocked the nation.

# data[].attributes.headline
Everything You Need to Know About the Victims and Suspects

# data[].attributes.subject
Everything You Need to Know About the Victims and Suspects

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Creepy Letters That Exposed A Town’s Juiciest Secrets — And Ended In Murder

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In late 2007, the eyes of the world were drawn to the Italian city of Perugia for the gruesome murder of a foreign exchange student and twisted tales of sex games gone wrong that emerged from its picturesque facade of steep mountain streets and centuries-old buildings.

Meredith Kercher, a 21-year-old from Surrey, England, had been sexually assaulted and stabbed to death, with her 20-year-old American roommate, Amanda Knox, and Knox's boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, emerging as primary suspects. Although all conclusive physical evidence pointed elsewhere, Italian prosecutors focused on the alleged wrongdoings of the University of Washington student, whose MySpace nickname of "Foxy Knoxy" spawned countless stories of her being a promiscuous man-eater.

Knox and Sollecito were eventually acquitted, but only after they were twice convicted and spent years in jail over a nightmare of a case that covered the better part of a decade and failed to satisfy the families of both the accused and the victim.
September 20, 2007: Knox moves into her Perugia cottage
The cottage, already occupied by Kercher and two Italian women in the upstairs apartment (and four male students in the one below), is said to be in a " bad neighborhood," with drug dealers lingering at the nearby basketball court.
October 25, 2007: Knox meets Sollecito at a classical music concert
Following Kercher's early departure, Knox begins talking to the shy, 23-year-old computer science student she described as an "Italian Harry Potter." Sollecito later visits a bar called Le Chic, where Knox is working part-time as a bartender, setting their brief but intense relationship in motion.

November 2, 2007: Kercher's body is discovered

After Knox returns to the cottage in the late morning to find her roommate's door locked and an unflushed toilet in a bloody bathroom, Italian postal police break down the door to discover a semi-naked Kercher under a blanket, her throat slashed.
November 6, 2007: Knox, Sollecito and bar owner Diya "Patrick" Lumumba are arrested
Following a night of grueling interrogation, Knox signs a confession which she admits to being in another room of the cottage while her Le Chic boss, Lumumba, killed her roommate.

Along with the confession, Knox and Sollecito's problems are complicated by their changing accounts of the night in question - at first they claimed they were together all night, then they said they were apart for a few hours, then they couldn't remember - and the seemingly carefree attitude they displayed in the murder's aftermath by going lingerie shopping.
November 15, 2007: An incriminating kitchen knife is reported to have been found at Sollecito's home
The eight-inch knife has traces of Kercher's DNA on the blade and Knox's DNA on the handle. Sollecito later writes that he had once "accidentally pricked [Kercher's] hand" while the three of them were cooking.
November 20, 2007: Rudy Guede is arrested
Guede, a 20-year-old student Perugia, is pulled from a train in Germany after investigators find his DNA on bloody prints at the crime scene and inside Kercher's body. Guede says that he had consensual sex with the victim that night and that he was in the bathroom when an unidentified man entered and killed Kercher. Meanwhile, Lumumba is released from custody, though he remains a suspect.
January 10, 2008: Sollecito's DNA is reported to have been found on Kercher's bra clasp
The clasp, retrieved from Kercher's room nearly seven weeks after the murder, bolsters the prosecution's assertion that the suspects engaged in a dangerous sex game with the victim, though it also supports the defense's criticisms of a sloppy investigation and contaminated crime scene.
October 28, 2008: Guede is sentenced to 30 years in prison; Knox and Sollecito are ordered to stand trial
Guede had elected to undergo a "fast-track" trial separate from the other defendants. That same day, a judge determines that there is enough evidence for Knox and Sollecito to stand full trial on murder charges.

January 16, 2009: The Kercher murder trial begins

After 14 months in jail, Knox and Sollecito appear in a Perugia court for the start of the murder trial. The presiding judge determines that the high-profile proceedings can be held with the media present, but no live television coverage.
June 12, 2009: Knox testifies in her defense
Taking the stand for the first time in the case, Knox testifies that she spent the night of the murder at her boyfriend's home, where they smoked marijuana, made love and fell asleep. She also refutes the accusation that she and Kercher didn't get along, and insists that she signed the confession that implicated Lumumba only because she was under intense pressure from the police.
November 18, 2009: Guede places Knox at the crime scene
The Knox-Sollecito trial nearing its end, Guede makes headlines during his separate appeal with a spontaneous statement in which he recounts Knox and Kercher getting into an argument before the latter's killing by an unidentified man. Guede later sees his sentence reduced to 16 years.

December 4, 2009: Knox and Sollecito are convicted

At the conclusion of a trial that saw more than 50 hearings and dozens of witnesses called, the defendants are convicted of Kercher's murder, with a teary Knox sentenced to 26 years and Sollecito receiving a 25-year sentence. Additionally, the two are ordered to pay more than $7 million to Kercher's family, and Knox ordered to pay Lumumba around $60,000 for defamation.
June 27, 2011: The Appeal Begins
Knox and Sollecito's appeal opens with Guede testifying against his former two co-defendants. He also denies a claim by another convict that Guede had confided to him that Knox and Sollecito were innocent.
July 25, 2011: Forensic experts call the evidence into question
Two court-appointed experts testify that the knife reportedly used in the attack carried no trace of blood and that there was no DNA on the bra clasp that police used to implicate Sollecito.

October 3, 2011: Knox and Sollecito's convictions are overturned

An appellate court jury of six citizens and two judges overturn the convictions of Knox and Sollecito in Perugia. Knox, who had delivered a tearful statement in Italian earlier in the day, is overcome by emotion and assisted out of the court.
March 26, 2013: Italy's highest court orders a new trial
Italy's Court of Cassation reopens the case by overturning the acquittal. Knox, who had since returned to Seattle, Washington, and was set to release a book about her ordeal, decried such a ruling "when the prosecution's theory of my involvement in Meredith's murder has been repeatedly revealed to be completely unfounded and unfair."
Sept 30, 2013: The re-trial begins
Three months after the Court of Cassation issues its reasoning that criticized the "deficiencies, contradictions and illogical" conclusions of the appeals court, a new trial opens in Florence without Knox and Sollecito present.

January 30, 2014: Knox and Sollecito are re-convicted of murder

Following 11 1/2 hours of deliberations, a jury convicts Knox and Sollecito for a second time, the judge tacking on two-and-a-half years to the former's sentence. Sollecito is ordered to surrender his passport, while Knox, legally in Seattle, will not have to worry about extradition unless the ruling is upheld.
March 27, 2015: The convictions are again overturned
The Court of Cassation ends the long-running legal saga by overturning the convictions of Knox and Sollecito, save for the former's defamation of Lumumba. Knox released a statement describing her as "tremendously relieved and grateful" for the outcome.
January 24, 2019: Italy is ordered to pay damages to Knox
While her legal problems were already resolved, the European Court of Human Rights adds icing to the victory cake by ordering Italy to pay Knox more than $20,000 in damages for the harsh interrogation she endured early in the investigation. "I am grateful for their wisdom in acknowledging the reality of false confessions, and the need to reform police interrogation methods," Knox writes afterward in her blog.
Watch Amanda Knox: Murder on Trial in Italy on Lifetime Movie Club

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Amanda Knox: A Complete Timeline of Her Italian Murder Case and Trial

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In late 2007, the eyes of the world were drawn to the Italian city of Perugia for the gruesome murder of a foreign exchange student and twisted tales of sex games gone wrong that emerged from its picturesque facade of steep mountain streets and centuries-old buildings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the early morning hours of December 26, 1996, John and Patsy Ramsey awoke to find their six-year-old daughter JonBenét Ramsey missing from her bed at their home in Boulder, Colorado. Patsy and John had woken up early to prepare for a trip, when Patsy discovered a ransom note on the stairs demanding $118,000 for their daughter's safe return.

Despite the note's warning not to involve police, Patsy immediately called them, as well as friends and family in order to aid in the search for JonBenét Ramsey. Police arrived at 5:55 AM and found no signs of forced entry, but did not search the basement, where her body would eventually be found.

Before JonBenét's body was even found, there were many investigative mistakes made. Only JonBenét's room was cornered off, so friends and family roamed the rest of the house, picking up things and potentially destroying evidence. The Boulder Police Department also shared evidence they found with the Ramseys and delayed conducting their informal interviews with the parents. At 1:00 PM the detectives instructed Mr. Ramsey and a family friend to go around the house to see if anything was amiss. The first place they looked was the basement, where they found JonBenét's body. John Ramsey immediately picked up his daughter's body and brought her upstairs, which unfortunately destroyed potential evidence by disturbing the crime scene.

During the autopsy it was discovered that JonBenét Ramsey had died from asphyxiation due to strangulation, in addition to a skull fracture. Her mouth had been covered in duct tape and her wrists and neck were wrapped with a white cord. Her torso had been covered in a white blanket. There was no conclusive evidence of rape as no semen was found on the body and her vagina appeared to have been wiped clean, although a sexual assault had occurred. The makeshift garret was made using a length of cord and part of a paintbrush from the basement. The coroner also found what was believed to be pineapple in JonBenét's stomach. Her parents do not remember giving her any the night before she died, but there was a bowl of pineapple in the kitchen which had her nine-year-old brother Burke's fingerprints on it, however this meant little since time cannot be attributed to fingerprints. The Ramseys maintained Burke was in his room all night asleep, and there was never any physical evidence to reflect otherwise.

There are two popular theories in the Ramsey case; the family theory and the intruder theory. The initial investigation focused heavily on the Ramsey family for many reasons. The police felt that the ransom note was staged as it was unusually long, written using a pen and paper from the Ramsey's house, and demanded almost the exact amount of money that John had received as a bonus earlier that year. Additionally, the Ramseys were reluctant to cooperate with police, though they later said this was because they feared the police would not conduct a full investigation and target at them as easy suspects. However all three members of the immediate family were questioned by investigators and submitting handwriting samples to compare to the ransom letter. Both John and Burke were cleared of any suspicion of writing the note. Although much was made that Patsy could not be conclusively cleared by her handwriting sample, this analysis was not further supported by any other evidence.

Despite a larger pool of suspects, the media immediately focused on JonBenét's parents, and they spent years under the harsh limelight of the public eye. In 1999, a Colorado grand jury voted to indict the Ramseys on child endangerment and obstruction of a murder investigation, however the prosecutor felt that the evidence did not meet the beyond a reasonable doubt standard and declined to prosecute. JonBenét's parents were never officially named as suspects in the murder.

Alternatively, the intruder theory had lots of physical evidence to support it. There was a boot print found next to JonBenét's body which did not belong to anyone in the family. There was also a broken window in the basement which was believed to be the most likely point of entry for an intruder. Additionally, there was DNA from drops of blood from an unknown male found on her underwear. The floors in the Ramsey's home were heavily carpeted, making it plausible for an intruder to have carried JonBenét downstairs without waking the family.

One of the most famous suspects was John Karr. He was arrested in 2006 when he confessed to killing JonBenét by accident, after he had drugged and sexually assaulted her. Karr was eventually dismissed as a suspect after it was revealed that no drugs had been found in JonBenét's system, police could not confirm he was in Boulder at the time, and his DNA did not match the profile generated from the samples found.

Much of the recent investigation in the case revolves around the DNA profiles developed from the sample found in her underwear and the touch DNA later developed from her long johns. The profile from her underwear was entered into CODIS (the national DNA database) in 2003, but no matches have been identified.

In 2006, Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacy took over the case. She agreed with the federal prosecutor that the intruder theory was more plausible than the Ramseys killing their daughter. Under Lacy's lead, investigators developed a DNA profile from touch DNA (DNA left behind by skin cells) on her long johns. In 2008 Lacy released a statement detailing the DNA evidence and fully exonerating the Ramsey family, saying in part:

"The Boulder District Attorney's Office does not consider any member of the Ramsey family, including John, Patsy, or Burke Ramsey, as suspects in this case. We make this announcement now because we have recently obtained this new scientific evidence that adds significantly to the exculpatory value of the previous scientific evidence. We do so with full appreciation for the other evidence in this case.

Local, national, and even international publicity has focused on the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. Many members of the public came to believe that one or more of the Ramseys, including her mother or her father or even her brother, were responsible for this brutal homicide. Those suspicions were not based on evidence that had been tested in court; rather, they were based on evidence reported by the media."

In 2010 the case was officially reopened with renewed focus on the DNA samples. Further testing has been conducted on the samples and experts now believe that the sample is actually from two individuals rather than one. In 2016 it was announced that the DNA would be sent to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation to be tested using more modern methods and authorities hope to develop an even stronger DNA profile of the killer.

In 2016, CBS aired The Case of JonBenét Ramsey which implied her then nine-year-old brother Burke was the killer despite the fact he was cleared by the DNA evidence that proved the existence of an intruder. Burke filed a $750 million-dollar lawsuit against CBS for defamation. The case was settled in 2019, and while the terms of the settlement were not disclosed, his lawyer stated the case was "amicably resolved to the satisfaction of all parties."

The JonBenét Ramsey case is still open and remains unsolved.

Read Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacy's full 2008 statement:
Ramsey Press Release

Back to Crime Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JonBenét Ramsey In the early morning hours of December 26, 1996, John and Patsy Ramsey awoke to find their six-year-old daughter JonBenét Ramsey missing from her bed at their home in Boulder, Colorado. Patsy and John had woken up early to prepare for a trip, when Patsy discovered a ransom note on the stairs demanding...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Museum is offering a $10 million reward for information leading to the recovery of the stolen works.

# data[].attributes.headline
Letter Writer tied to Strange Crash Victim

# data[].attributes.subject
Letter Writer tied to Strange Crash Victim

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
MYSTERY still surrounds the identity of an anonymous letter writer who terrorized an Ohio town for decades with threatening letters claiming to expose residents' dark secrets.

The Circleville letter writer began their reign of terror in the 70s and was believed to have been linked to a chilling call made to one of his victims hours before the man died in a car crash.

The terror first began in March of 1977 and by the time the final letter was sent in the 90s, it is believed that close to a thousand were received by locals.

Most of them were postmarked in Colombus, Ohio, 30 miles north of the sleepy town.

The first victim to receive a letter was bus driver Mary Gillispie, who received the bulk of the threatening mail over the first few years.

The first notes accused her of having an affair with the School Superintendent, Gordan Massie.

"Stay away from Massie: Don't lie when questioned about meeting him," one horrifying letter read.

"I know where you live: I've been observing your house and know you have children. This no joke. Please take it serious. Everyone concerned has been notified. It will be over soon"

"Mr. Gillispie, your wife is seeing Gordon Massie. ... You should catch them together and kill them both. ... He doesn't deserve to live," a letter to Gillispie's husband Ron read.

"We know what kind of car you drive ... We know where your kids go to school."

Mary and Ron were well respected in the community, having been high school sweethearts, and stayed in the area to raise their children.

"You wouldn't find a better person than Ronnie Gillispie" Janet Cassidy, a local resident told 48 Hours.

According to Marie Mayhew, a podcast host who focuses on the case, the letters eventually escalated to phone calls and offensive signs along the way of Mary's bus route.

"Ron would have to go out and ... he would have to find and pick up all the signage about his wife and kids around Circleville," Mayhew said.

The couple began going to the police who tapped phones, watched houses, and tried to work with the USPS to see where the mail was coming from.

CAR CRASH DEATH

By August 1977, when Mary was on vacation to Florida with her sister-in-law, Ron had had enough.

He got in his truck and drove off, telling his children he was going to confront the letter writer.

"Ron had told [Mary] he knew who the letter writer was and he was going to take care of this problem while they were in Florida," Mayhew said.

It is also reported that Ron had received an anonymous call at home just before he rushed out bringing his gun with him.

The identity of the caller has never been found but is believed to have been the letter writer.

Ron was later found dead having reportedly crashed into a tree in a single vehicle accident.

A .22 caliber revolver that had been fired just once was found near his body.

He had almost twice the legal limit of alcohol in his blood, journalist Martin Yant said on 48 Hours.

"A number of people told me that he was not a heavy drinker," Yant said.

CONSPIRACY THEORY

The coroner ruled Ron's death an accident.

However, some have claimed Ron was shooting at the letter writer and was murdered

"The letter writer had made threats to ... Ron Gillispie that .... he could end up dead. And then he ended up dead" Yant said on 48 Hours.

Among those who reportedly believed Ron was murdered, was his brother-in-law, Paul Freshour.

"He wanted the truth about Ron's death. He wanted to know who was writing the letters too," said Pam Stanton, a long-time family friend.

After Ron's death, Mary admitted she began to have a romantic relationship with Massie but claimed that it had only started after the letters began.

The harassment only grew.

"Everyone knows what you have done. If you don't believe us, just make them mad and find out for yourself," one letter read.

"It's your daughter's turn to pay for what you've done," said another.

MURDER ATTEMPT

It escalated even further by 1983 when a murder attempt was made on Mary's life.

On February 7, 1983, Mary was driving her school bus when she saw an obscene sign about her daughter hanging on the fence.

Horrified, she pulled over and tried to pry the sign off the fence, only to discover the contraption was connected with twine and a mysterious box.

When she got home, she found a loaded gun in the box that police said was a booby trap.

Firearm examiners at BCI -- Ohio's Bureau of Criminal Investigation discovered the serial number of the gun belonged to none other than Paul Freshour's coworker, who admitted to police he sold Paul the gun, according to 48 Hours.

After questioning Paul's wife Karen - who was divorcing him - she told cops that he was responsible for the letters and was furious with Mary over her being involved with Massie.

"She had found one letter torn up in a commode and she had found a couple of other letters hidden in the house," Yant said.

According to 48 Hours, Paul was cooperative with investigators.

He admitted that it was his gun but said it was stolen, and did not ask for a lawyer.

Paul even allowed them to search his house and car and gave them samples of his handwriting.

However, when he agreed to take a polygraph, he failed.

ON TRIAL

Paul was arrested for Mary's attempted murder but no charges were ever brought for the letters after they continued following his conviction.

At trial, Mary was allowed to testify about the letters and answer questions from the defense about them, which experts say was very damaging to Paul's case.

The judge allowed 39 letters to be brought up at trial, due to the fact the writing on the booby trap was similar to the block letters used in the handwritten letters.

"They had handwriting analyses that indicated that the letters could have been written by Paul Freshour and a second expert - originally a defense witness - agreed," Yant said.

Paul's fingerprints were never found on the booby trap or the box with the gun.

He had, however, been off from work on the same day the booby trap was found, and the industrial size chalk box in which the gun was found was similar to those seen at Paul's workplace, Anheuser Busch.

Yet no one saw Paul near the booby trap.

"He had a pretty good alibi for most of the day," Yant said.

"Paul Freshour didn't take the stand, but multiple defense witnesses testified to seeing him at home.

"He was having work done on his house. The reason, he said, he took that day off."

DISBELIEF CONTINUES

Paul was sentenced to 7 to 25 years for attempted murder.

Yet some people in the community doubted his guilt, as they considered him a family man who was never in trouble with the law.

"It's just preposterous. ... there's no way," Stanton said.

"He wasn't dumb enough to put his own gun in a booby trap," Janet Cassidy, a neighbor, said.

"Anybody could have gotten that gun."

The letters continue to come in droves even after Paul was in prison, despite being banned from using paper and pens.

The sheriff was convinced it was him, but couldn't answer how he was able to do it.

Paul's warden said it was "impossible."

Eventually, Paul himself received a letter boasting about how they had set him up

"When we set him up, we set him up good," it read.

Paul believed his ex-wife Karen, who reportedly got the worse end of the divorce financially as well as losing custody of their daughters, was behind the alleged setup.

It was also argued that she did not keep the alleged letters she found and told cops about.

NEW WITNESSES

Yant also said he discovered evidence in police reports of an alternate suspect which another female bus driver spotted at the time of the incident

"She said ... she saw a man standing beside an ... El Camino ... but the man turned away from her and acted like he was going to the bathroom ... So, she didn't get a good look at him," Yant explained.

"She said he was a large man with sandy hair. And Paul was not large, and he had very dark hair."

It was reported that Karen had a boyfriend with sandy hair and that her brother also had an El Camino.

She was never named a suspect by police.

Paul reportedly told a friend said he thought his son Mark with the one who stole his gun.

"Paul ... get his son in trouble? No, Uncle Paul would've never done that," Stanton said.

"Uncle Paul would have died before he had seen Mark go to jail."

Mary Ellen O'Toole, a former FBI investigator said she believes the writer could be a female and was not educated due to many of the typos in the messages.

"Sitting here today, I'd say I can't rule him out," she said of Paul, however.

"But I'm ... looking at other reasons that tell me ... it might in fact be somebody different.

Yet forensic document expert Beverley East compared Paul's letters to a friend with the horrifying threats.

"The G...is a very unusual G. Looks like a six, a number six," she said.

She also noticed a pattern in the zip codes.

"It's like he's not sure if it's 4-2-1-1 2 or 4-3-1-1-3. ...In the anonymous letters on the zip code ...I found the same mistake."

"I would go into court and swear on the Bible on the evidence that I found," she said of her belief Paul was behind the letters.

"I would say one person wrote all of these. And the one person is this person."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shock twist as crash death 'tied to hate letters' that terrorized town for YEARS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
MYSTERY still surrounds the identity of an anonymous letter writer who terrorized an Ohio town for decades with threatening letters claiming to expose residents' dark secrets. The Circleville letter writer began their reign of terror in the 70s and was believed to have been linked to a chilling call made to one of his victims hours before the man died in a car crash.

# data[].attributes.headline
Everything You Need to Know about the Amanda Knox Case

# data[].attributes.subject
Everything You Need to Know about the Amanda Knox Case

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Everything You Need to Know About the Amanda Knox Case

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Refresh your memory before the Netflix documentary is available to stream.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Authorities say new information on a 1991 cold case murder has provided fresh clues that may lead to the culprits behind the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum Heist, reports Bob Ward for Boston 25 News.

The 1990 theft was the biggest art heist in modern history. On the night of March 18, two thieves dressed as policemen walked into the poorly secured Boston museum after midnight. After duct-taping two hapless security guards, the men escaped with 13 paintings valued today at some $500 million dollars, including priceless works by Rembrandt van Rijn and Johannes Vermeer.

Over the years, investigators have established several likely suspects that may have been involved in the crime. Yet despite a Netflix television series, a hit investigative podcast from the Globe and WBUR and a $10 million reward promised by the FBI, the location of the stolen paintings themselves remains a mystery. "The FBI said it believed the artwork was moved through organized crime circles to Philadelphia, where the trail went cold around 2003," reported Shelley Murphy of the Boston Globe last fall.

Now authorities might be one step closer to solving it. Anthony Amore, chief of security for the Gardner museum, tells Boston 25 News that a recent tipster prompted officials to take another look at the murder of career criminal Jimmy Marks, a known career criminal, because the killing may have possible links to the heist.

On a February evening 11 months after the heist, Marks was gunned down while unlocking the front door to his apartment in the Boston suburb of Lynn, Massachusetts. The killer had unscrewed the lightbulb over the door to ensure that the victim wouldn't see what was coming, "making Marks the victim of a classic mob-style hit," reports Boston 25 News.

The assailant shot Marks twice in the back of the head and fled the scene. The crime remains unsolved.

According to the tip Amore received, just days before he died, Marks was reportedly heard bragging about possessing two of the stolen paintings and that he had hidden some of the stolen artworks, reports Edmund H. Mahony for the Boston Herald.

What's more, "[Marks] had connections to subjects suspected of being involved in the Gardner museum heist," Lynn deputy police chief Mark O'Toole tells Shelley Murphy, reporting this month for the Boston Globe. "We don't know what, if any, role he had," O'Toole cautions. "But very likely it was related" to his death, the official says.

Amore tells 25 News that Marks was friendly with a fellow mafia man, the late Robert "Bobby" Gaurente, who has long been a prime suspect in the heist case, and his family. Gaurente and his friend Bobby Donati might have helped to transport some of the stolen paintings from Boston to Connecticut and eventually Philadelphia.

Marks spent time in prison for a bank robbery in the 1960s, per the Boston Globe. As a drug dealer with many connections among the Boston criminal elite, Marks also spent a significant amount of time at the home of the Guarentes in Maine, Amore tells 25 News.

Marks' niece, Darlene Finnigan, who was 26 at the time of the murder, tells the Globe that shortly before his death, Marks told her that he "had something big coming up and he wasn't sure if he was going to do it." At the time, Finnigan had assumed Marks was referring to selling cocaine.

Another connection between Marks and the theft emerged in 2015, when Elene Gaurente-Bobby's widow-pointed to a picture of Marks during an interview with investigators and declared that her husband had killed him. (Bobby Guarente died in 2004 and Elene died in 2018.)

"She was very emotional when she talked about the fact that he had been killed by her late husband," Amore, who participated in the interviews, tells Boston 25 News.

Amore brought these findings to the media with the hopes that renewed press attention might yield more clues, he says. Those who might have information about the circumstances of Marks' death or the fate of the Gardner paintings in general can contact the museum's tip line at [email protected] .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Tantalizing Clue Emerges in the Unsolved Gardner Museum Art Heist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Authorities say new information on a 1991 cold case murder has provided fresh clues that may lead to the culprits behind the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum Heist, reports Bob Ward for Boston 25 News. The 1990 theft was the biggest art heist in modern history.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
INFAMOUS: Circleville Letters | Crime Junkie Podcast

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An anonymous letter-writer antagonized residents of Circleville, Ohio for years, singling out the school superintendent and a local bus driver.

# data[].attributes.body
Careful: Lots of bias in this one, but a good example of all of the different opinions people have.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Debate.org is a dynamic social community where you can voice your opinion on today's hottest issues.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ex-DA Opens Up About Why She Cleared the Ramsey Family of Murder

# data[].attributes.subject
Ex-DA Opens Up About Why She Cleared the Ramsey Family of Murder

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ex-DA Opens Up About Why She Cleared the Ramsey Family of JonBenet’s Murder

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JonBenet Ramsey was found dead on Dec. 26, 1996.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Local
A retired jeweler and fine art appraiser said he saw one of the stolen pieces about a month after the theft.

More than 30 years after the legendary art heist, a man has come forward with a possible new clue about the artwork stolen from the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, according to The Boston Globe.

Paul Calantropo, a retired jeweler and fine art appraiser, said in 1990 a friend of his named Bobby Donati brought him an eagle finial to appraise that seemed to be one of the items stolen about a month earlier from the museum.

He said he told Donati he couldn't appraise the gilded bronze sculpture meant to sit atop a flagpole - the piece was worthless because the whole world knew it was stolen, Calantropo told the Globe.

"Jesus, Bobby why didn't you steal the Mona Lisa?" Calantropo recalled asking him.

A little more than a year later, Donati was attacked outside his Revere home, according to the paper. His body turned up days later in the trunk of his Cadillac.

The Globe noted that the FBI believed at the time that Donati was targeted because of his connections to reported mobster Vincent Ferrara. Donati had a police record that stretched back to the 1950s, and included convictions for armed robbery and arson.

For years Calantropo was reluctant to speak about the conversation with Donati, fearing for his safety. However, he recently recounted what transpired that day for the FBI, according to the paper.

Calantropo is now part of a group of four men - including a retired law enforcement official, two former convicts, and retired Globe investigative reporter Stephen Kurkjian - investigating the heist.

They hope to solve the mystery of what happened to the stolen artwork and claim the $10 million reward offered by the Gardner Museum. Today the stolen items would be worth about $500 million.

According to the Globe, early on the morning of March 18, 1990, two men dressed like police officers talked their way into the museum, restrained two guards, and left with 13 pieces, including three Rembrandts, among them his only seascape, "The Storm on the Sea of Galilee"; Vermeer's "The Concert"; works by Flinck, Manet, and Degas; an ancient Chinese vase, and the finial.

Since the theft, there have been numerous theories about who stole the artwork and where it ended up. There have also been several reported sightings of the stolen masterpieces, but few of those have been considered credible by authorities, according to the paper.

Donati has long been a suspect in the theft and the FBI did search his last residence in Revere, according to the Globe.

Members of the group told the paper they gave the FBI several addresses Donati had a connection to in the area. In August, the FBI searched one of them, but didn't find anything.

"I was pretty crestfallen," Calantropo told the Globe. "I believe the secret of the location died with Bobby."

An FBI spokesperson declined to comment on Calantropo's account or what, if any, connection Donati may have to the legendary art heist.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Possible new clue emerges in Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum heist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Local More than 30 years after the legendary art heist, a man has come forward with a possible new clue about the artwork stolen from the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, according to The Boston Globe .

# data[].attributes.body
https://youtu.be/1hCz21GCFdw

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Circleville Letters Mystery | Why can't we solve this?

# data[].attributes.body
Amanda Explains her "Odd" Behavior

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Amanda Knox Explains Why She Acted So Weird After Her Roommate’s Murder

# data[].attributes.headline
70 Points Burke Ramsey says Prove His Innocence

# data[].attributes.subject
70 Points Burke Ramsey says Prove His Innocence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
BOULDER, Colo. -- It's been 20 years since the murder of 6-year-old Boulder beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey, but the still-unsolved mystery captured the nation's attention again in recent months when several networks aired specials about the case. Some claimed to introduce new evidence regarding the murder, allegedly implicating potential suspects - the victim's brother, Burke Ramsey, among them.

But Ramsey, who was 9 when his sister died, has maintained he did not commit the crime. In fact, he's taken to court all five media outlets that have run with stories pointing the finger at him.

Ramsey has successfully settled outside of court with each media outlet, save for the most recent lawsuit he filed on Wednesday against CBS. In addition to the undisclosed settlements, Ramsey's legal efforts have resulted in outlets writing retractions or pulling stories, in some cases.

Ramsey's legal team has been able to prove their points with a 12-page list of what they call "Key Facts About The Murder of JonBenet and the Law Enforcement Investigation."

Ramsey has maintained he is innocent, and he says the facts support his claim. The facts he and his legal team stand behind are as follows:

1. On the night of Dec. 25, 1996, the Ramsey family attended a Christmas dinner at the home of their friends Fleet and Priscilla White

2. After the family returned home, John and Patsy Ramsey put the children to bed and soon went to bed as well.

3. The family had a planned vacation and flight for the next day to Charlevoix, Michigan.

4. John and Patsy Ramsey woke up at about 5:30 a.m. on the morning of Dec. 26 to prepare for the trip.

5. Neither John and Patsy, nor Burke woke up during the night that led into Dec. 26.

6. Burke did not leave his bedroom that night.

7. After waking up on Dec. 26, Patsy went down two flights of stairs from her room to the main floor, locating near the bottom of the stairs a two-and-a-half-page, handwritten ransom note stating that JonBenet had been kidnapped.

8. Patsy screamed and rushed to check JonBenet's bedroom, prompting John to rush in. The room was empty.

9. The two checked on Burke, who they said appeared to be sleeping in his room.

10. At 5:52 a.m., Patsy called 911, "breathlessly imploring the operator to send help."

11. After calling for help, Patsy called family friends who then came to the home.

12. Police arrived after friends had arrived, and "failed to properly secure the crime scene, a failure that seriously compromised the crime scene."

13. The ransom note stated the kidnappers would call between 8 and 10 a.m., but the call never came.

14. Boulder Police Department Detective Linda Arndt asked John to search the home for anything unusual to "keep him occupied." The home had already been searched by police and a family friend.

15. John and and a family friend named Fleet White began to search the basement of the home.

16. John and Fleet, while searching the playroom, located a broken ground-level window and a suitcase beneath that window that was normally stored in a different location.

17. Eventually, John searched the "wine cellar" in the basement, which the family used as a storage area. Boulder Police did note the cellar in the previous search, but did not open the door because it was locked from the outside. In another search, Fleet opened the cellar but did not turn on the light.

18. John when searching the cellar did turn on the light, locating JonBenet's body. John cried out in shock after discovering the body of his young daughter.

19. Duct tape covered JonBenet's mouth, her wrists tied above her head and she had a sexual torture device embedded in her neck.

20. John picked JonBenet up and carried her upstairs, crying out for help.

21. Detective Arndt informed John that JonBenet was dead, observing the body.

22. JonBenet was "strangled to death with a torture and bondage device known as a garrote."

23. The garrote was "made from a nylon cord and a wooden handle fashioned from the middle of a paintbrush discovered in Patsy's paint tray in the boiler room in the basement. The end of the nylon cord was tied to this wooden handle and, on the other end, was a loop with a slipknot, with JonBenet's neck within the loop." JonBenet's neck within the loop."

24. Until her autopsy, the family's facts say "It was not visually apparent that JonBenet also suffered a massive blow to her head that fractured the right side of her skull -- and injury that has been described as the equivalent to an injury resulting from a fall from the third floor of a building. JonBenet also suffered a massive blow to her head that fractured the right side of her skull -- and injury that has been described as the equivalent to an injury resulting from a fall from the third floor of a building.

25. A pathologist who performed an autopsy discovered that "JonBenet was sexually assaulted through penetration with the broken wooden handle of a paintbrush." JonBenet was sexually assaulted through penetration with the broken wooden handle of a paintbrush."

26. JonBenet's body reportedly "showed many signs of struggle with her attacker."

27. JonBenet was "brutally tortured, assaulted and murdered."

28. John and Patsy were both at one point under suspicion by Boulder Police in connection with the investigation.

29. During the investigation, John and Patsy attempted to cooperate with investigator, including by signing "more than 100 releases for information requested by the police and providing all evidence and information in their possession requested by the police."

30. John and Patsy gave Boulder Police historical handwriting samples and supervised written examples.

31. John and Patsy did give hair, including pubic hair, and DNA samples to police.

32. Burke also gave a DNA sample to police.

33. John and Patsy consented to multiple interviews by law enforcement, and Burke was interviewed without his parents in attendance at least three times.

34. On Dec. 26, 1996, John gave both a writing sample and the notepad Patsy had used in their home. Police eventually determined the ransom note had been written on that pad.

35. Law enforcement used six "qualified and highly respected experts in the field of handwriting analysis who performed extensive analysis on the handwriting" of Patsy, John and Burke's samples.

36. According to the Ramsey family, "all six experts conclusively eliminated John and Burke as authors of the ransom note...they could not determine with 100 percent certainty that Patsy did not author the ransom note." However, none of the six experts concluded that Patsy wrote the note, and the Ramseys say the investigators called the chances that she wrote the note "very low."

37. On Dec. 25, 1996, the Ramsey family did not turn their home alarm system on, meaning the home was unlocked. At least seven windows and a door were found unlocked on the morning of Dec. 26.

38. On the ground level of the Ramsey home there was a removable grate over three windows that opened into the playroom area of the basement. The center window had a broken pane.

39. Law enforcement were said to have "found scuffmarks ... beneath the center window leading to the playroom area of the basement.

40. Police said the "area around the window showed clear evidence of a disturbance."

41. "Leaves and white Styrofoam packing peanuts that had pooled in the window area appeared to have been cleared from, or brushed to either side of, the window sill.

42. A leaf and a multiple packing peanuts were found in the wine cellar area where JonBenet's body was located.

43. The end portion of the wooden handle and the cord used to construct the garrote were never located in the Ramsey home. The Ramsey family said the perpetrator removed these items after the murder.

44. The duct tape covering JonBenet's mouth was never sourced to the Ramsey home.

45. Fiber evidence suggests that the chord and duct tape were at one time in the second floor area, near JonBenet's bedroom.

46. Fibers consistent with the cord to make the garrote were found in JonBenet's bed.

47. Other items not belonging on the second floor of the Ramsey home were found there on the day after the murder.

48. A rope was found inside a brown paper sack in the guest bedroom on the second floor.

49. Small pieces of the brown paper sack were found in JonBenet's bed and in the body bag that was used to transport her body from the scene.

50. John and Patsy said they had no knowledge of the rope and said they did not own it.

51. A baseball bat that the Ramseys did not own was located in the house.

52. Brown cotton fibers found on JonBenet's body, the garrote handle, the duct tape and the wrist ligatures were not sourced to and didn't match anything in the Ramsey home.

53. Found in the basement in mold on the floor were shoeprints containing a "HI-TEC" brand marking, and neither John, Patsy or Burke owned any shoes with that brand at the time of the murder.

54. "The DNA of an unidentified male was found under JonBenet's fingernails."

55. The Ramsey family said investigation found the DNA didn't match John, Patsy or Burke.

56. Other DNA evidence of a sexual assault on JonBenet was sourced to an unidentified man, which wasn't sourced back to John Patsy or Burke.

57. Hair from an unidentified Caucasian male was located on the blanket covering JonBenet's body, and it didn't match anybody in the home.

58. Multiple pieces of DNA evidence that linked back to the unidentified male were linked back to one another.

59. The medical examiner found that JonBenet died from asphyxia by strangulation, and was alive when she was strangled.

60. "There were physical findings on her body that strongly suggest that JonBenet struggled with her attacker and was conscious at the time she was garroted."

61. In addition to that struggle, the Ramsey family said JonBenet had burn-like marks on her face and back consistent with a stun gun.

62. Wood fragments from the paintbrush used to create the garrote were found inside JonBenet Ramsey, leading the family and investigators to believe she had been sexually assaulted.

63. JonBenet's body showed signs of sexual damage that caused bleeding.

64. In addition to all the physical evidence of the night -- much interest has taken place in the 911 recording. Ultimately, investigators and more could not hear anything from the background of the phone conversation.

65. Law enforcement developed two primary theories: That an intruder killed JonBenet, or Patsy killed JonBenet. John was not a suspect after the initial investigation.

66. Multiple investigators believed that an intruder subdued JonBenet with a stun gun and then sexually assaulted, tortured and brutally murdered the 6-year-old in her basement.

67. Several people have taken up the mantle of investigation since the original investigation, and Burke has not been a suspect.

68. "Burke has never been suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death.'

69. A grand jury had voted to recommend that John and Patsy be indicted by the Boulder DA for "committing a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation which posed a threat of injury to the child's life or health" and for "rendering assistance to a person with the intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such a person knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the first degree and child abuse resulting in death."

70. "As made abundantly clear by the public statements of Boulder prosecutors familiar with all of the evidence developed in the case and presented to the grand jury, no evidence existed to support a finding that Burke killed his sister and, therefore, the grand jury did not vote to indict John and Patsy based on a belief that the evidence established that they engaged in a cover-up to prevent the discovery that Burke killed JonBenet."

--------- Sign up for Denver7 email alerts to stay informed about breaking news and daily headlines.

Or, keep up-to-date by following Denver7 on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
70 Points Burke Ramsey says prove his innocence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
BOULDER, Colo. -- It's been 20 years since the murder of 6-year-old Boulder beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey, but the still-unsolved mystery captured the nation's attention again in recent months when several networks aired specials about the case. Some claimed to introduce new evidence regarding the murder, allegedly implicating potential suspects - the victim's brother, Burke Ramsey, among them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over 30 years ago, at 1:24 am on March 18, 1990, two men dressed as police officers walked into the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum. 81 minutes later they walked out with $200 million worth of artwork (now valued at $500 million). They forced the night guards into the basement, and duct-taped their hands, eyes, and ankles. The guards were not discovered until the new shift came to relieve them around 8 am. When the police examined the gallery, they noticed that the missing paintings had been cut from the frames, instead of carefully removed. None of the pieces have ever been recovered.

13 pieces were stolen from the museum. The value of the pieces makes this the biggest art theft in the history of the world. Click on any of the images below to see a larger version and learn more. The museum is offering $10 million in reward money for information leading to the recovery of the stolen items. If you have verifiable information about the location of any of these items, please contact the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum security chief Anthony M. Amore at reward@gardnermuseum.org.

The case has puzzled crime solvers for years. How did the thieves know where the timed security alarm printouts were? How did they know when the alarm went off in the museum that it wouldn't alert the police? The average art heist takes 10 minutes. So, why did they take so long? Why were they confident enough to take two trips to their car?

In 2015, the FBI has stated they believe they know who committed the robbery: George Reissfelder and Leonardo DiMuzio. But both Reissfelder and DiMuzio died within a year of the heist. The FBI believe the art was transported to Connecticut and Philadelphia through organized crime connections to try to sell the items on the black market. But after those attempted transactions, there hasn't been a trace.

Evidence suggests that the Italian mob in Boston was behind the theft. Reissfelder and DiMuzio were known associates of the now deceased mobster Carmello Merlino. At the time, organized crime members seemed excited about the idea that they could trade a stolen painting in exchange for no jail time, if they were ever caught doing more unsavory business. But several of them did get caught, and no one seemed to know anything about the artwork. Several others died not too long after the heist, and seem to have taken their secrets to the grave. Even with the $10 million reward for the safe return of the items, no one has come forward with credible information.

Isabella Stewart Gardner famously stipulated in her will that nothing in the museum galleries should be permanently changed. No new items should be bought, nor should any items be sold. So, for now, those frames hang empty in the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, a reminder of the still missing artwork.

The whole thing is a puzzling mystery and no one seems to have any fresh leads. Some people think the items are hiding in someone's attic. Others think the pieces have left the country and are hiding in a rich oligarch's house. Many believe the pieces are separated and are not all together. What do you think?

To learn more about the robbery, check out these items:
Last Seen- a 10 episode podcast by WBUR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Boston's Greatest Unsolved Mystery: The Gardner Museum Art Heist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over 30 years ago, at 1:24 am on March 18, 1990, two men dressed as police officers walked into the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum. 81 minutes later they walked out with $200 million worth of artwork (now valued at $500 million). They forced the night guards into the basement, and duct-taped their hands, eyes, and ankles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Credit: YouTube/Dan Cummins

The Circleville Letters

The Circleville Letters were a series of anonymous letters sent to residents of Circleville, Ohio, in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The letters caused fear and turmoil within the community, and despite numerous investigations and even a criminal conviction, the true undisputed identity of the letter writer has not been determined.

The case remains one of the most intriguing unsolved mysteries in Ohio's history, and it serves as a reminder of the power of anonymous letters and the damage they can cause.

Background

The first letter was sent to Mary Gillispie, a school bus driver, in 1976. The letter contained accusations of the recipient having an extramarital affair with the school superintendent. Mary denied the allegations and went to the police for help. However, the letters continued to be sent to other residents of Circleville, including Mary's husband, who was also accused of infidelity.

As the strange correspondence proliferated, the community became increasingly fearful and paranoid.

Impact on the Community

The letters were not only sent to individuals but also to local businesses and organizations. Many residents changed their phone numbers and unlisted them in an attempt to avoid being targeted.

Some of the letters contained eerily specific, private details, leading investigators to suspect that the perpetrator was someone who was familiar with the community and had access to personal information.

In addition to accusations of infidelity, the letters also contained threats of violence and even death.

Investigations

The Circleville Letters case was investigated by the local police department for several years, but despite their efforts, the identity of the perpetrator was never discovered.

The police conducted numerous interviews with residents, including those who had received letters, in an attempt to identify potential suspects and gather information about the case. They also examined handwriting samples and forensic evidence, but were unable to find any conclusive evidence linking a specific individual to the letters.

The police also offered a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of the person responsible for the letters, but it produced no actionable leads. Investigators went as far as to use handwriting analysis, polygraph tests and even hypnosis to try and identify the letter writer, but all those efforts were in vain.

An Arrest and Conviction

In 1983, a local businessman, Paul Freshour, was arrested and charged with writing the letters. He was convicted and sentenced to prison, but he maintained his innocence and claimed that he was being framed. Freshour spent a decade in prison and, incredibly, the letters continued while he was incarcerated.

Then, in 1994, soon after his release, the letters stopped. This raised questions about the validity of his conviction, and it is still a point of controversy.

Theories

Over the years, a number of theories have been put forward to explain the Circleville Letters.

A Group of People

One theory is that the letters were not written by one person, but rather by a group of people. This theory is based on the idea that it would have been difficult for one person to have access to all of the personal information contained in the letters. This theory could also explain why the letters continued to be sent even after Paul Freshour was arrested and convicted.

A Marketing Campaign

Another theory is that the letters were part of a marketing campaign gone wrong. According to this theory, a marketing company or individual was attempting to generate buzz and interest in a product or service by sending the anonymous letters.

The theory suggests that the letter writer intended for the letters to be seen as a joke or prank, but they quickly spiraled out of control and caused real harm to the community.

Personal Grudge

Some people believe that the letters were written by someone with a personal grudge against the community or specific individuals. This theory is based on the idea that the letters were intended to cause harm and that the letter writer had a personal motivation for writing them.

Mental Illness

It's possible that the letter writer suffered from some form of mental illness or personality disorder that led them to write the letters. The person might have been in a delusional state and believed that the letters were necessary to expose certain secrets or bring about some form of justice or public disclosure.

Government Conspiracy

And, as expected, some people believe that the letters were part of a government conspiracy, possibly involving a secret organization or agency. This theory is based on the idea that the private information contained in the letters was too specific to be the work of a civilian individual, and that the effort was somehow connected to a larger plot.

However, there is no concrete evidence to support this theory, and it remains largely speculative.

It's important to note that none of these theories have been proven and they are all speculative. The true identity of the letter writer and the reason behind the letters may never be known, but the case serves as a reminder of the power of anonymous letters and defamatory accusations and the damage it can cause to a small community.

In 2022, 48 Hours tackled the case, interviewing podcasters and investigators with new information about the Freshour trial and analysis of the letters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Unsolved Mystery of the Circleville Letters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Circleville Letters were a series of anonymous letters sent to residents of Circleville, Ohio, in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The letters caused fear and turmoil within the community, and despite numerous investigations and even a criminal conviction, the true undisputed identity of the letter writer has not been determined.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Topline

Rudy Guede, the only person who remains convicted of killing British student Meredith Kercher after her American roommate Amanda Knox's conviction for the murder was overturned, was freed by an Italian judge Tuesday.

Rudy Guede is greeted by an unidentified person as he leaves the penitentiary for a temporary ... [+]
ASSOCIATED PRESS

Key Facts

Guede served 13 years of his 16-year sentence with time off for good behavior, his lawyer Fabrizio Ballarini told the New York Times.

Starting in September 2019, Guede took part in a work-release program for a year before being put on probation, which allowed him to work during the day and live independently, according to the newspaper.

Guede was convicted in 2008 after police found his DNA on Kercher's body and clothes, along with his bloody fingerprint in her bedroom.

His 2008 sentence was originally 30 years in prison, but was reduced to 16 years on appeal in 2009.

Guede has continuously maintained his innocence in the 2007 murder.

Key Background

Kercher was found murdered in her bedroom in 2007 while studying abroad in Perugia, Italy. Knox and her Italian boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, were tried separately from Guede and convicted of Kercher's murder twice, first in 2009 and again by an appeals court in 2014. Prosecutors accused them of killing Kercher during a satanic sex game gone wrong. Knox and Sollecito spent four years in prison amid battles with the Italian legal system before their conviction was first overturned in 2011, at which point Knox returned home to Seattle. She did not return for the 2014 retrial. The pair's convictions were overturned for the final time in 2015 by Italy's supreme court over a lack of viable biological evidence tying them to the crime.

Tangent

Kercher's murder and the ensuing investigation kicked off an international media frenzy that portrayed Knox as a " Luciferina," and outlets around the world published salacious stories examining the 21-year-old's sex life and dating history. Since returning to the U.S., Knox has become a vocal advocate for the wrongfully convicted, and has spoken out against the sexism she faced from the media and the Italian legal system.

Further Reading

Italy Frees Convicted Killer of U.K. Student Meredith Kercher ( New York Times)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Man Convicted Of Killing Amanda Knox's Roommate Released In Italy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rudy Guede, the only person who remains convicted of killing British student Meredith Kercher after her American roommate Amanda Knox's conviction for the murder was overturned, was freed by an Italian judge Tuesday. Guede served 13 years of his 16-year sentence with time off for good behavior, his lawyer Fabrizio Ballarini told the New York Times.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What happened to JonBenet Ramsey remains one of the most notorious and unsolved cases of modern times.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Shadiest Things About Amanda Knox Revealed

# data[].attributes.body
How the Italian media treated Knox

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
ROME, Italy (CNN) -- The Italian media call her "Foxy Knoxy," portray her as a "devil with an angel's face," and there are 11 Facebook pages dedicated to her, all in Italian.

Amanda Knox, 21, is an American college student from Seattle, Washington, who is on trial for murder in Perugia, Italy. The case has given Knox almost pop star status there.

She was voted the top woman in an online "person of the year" poll by an Italian TV channel in December, beating out Carla Bruni, the Italian-born French first lady.

Seven of the 11 Facebook pages champion her innocence; four seem convinced that Knox is pure evil. A sampling of comments: "No to Amanda. No to her superstardom" ... "She's a sociopath" ..."Everyone is not sure if she is guilty or not and that she will lead us to a new existential awareness. Please shout with me your anger. ... Let's say no. Let's say Knox."

Knox and former boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito, 24, are charged with murdering and sexually assaulting one of Knox's roommates, British exchange student Meredith Kercher, on November 1, 2007. They insist they are innocent and are disputing the allegations.

Knox and Sollecito are due back in court today. The last time Knox appeared before the panel of eight judges, she wore a T-shirt quoting The Beatles: "All you need is love."

Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini alleges that Kercher, 21, was killed because she refused to participate in a drug-fueled sex game played by Knox, Sollecito, and a third man, Ivory Coast native Rudy Hermann Guede. In court papers, prosecutors stated that Sollecito held Kercher by her wrists while Knox poked at her with a knife and Guede sexually assaulted her.

The case is being tried in Perugia, a university town about 115 miles north of Rome that is better known for its chocolate than for its scandalous murder trials.

According to the prosecutor's office, Kercher had been in Italy for two months as part of a year-long course with Leeds University, where she was working toward a degree in European Studies. She shared a house with Knox, a University of Washington student in the same exchange program, and two Italian housemates.

The crime scene, which has become a tourist attraction, has been broken into twice, police say.

Knox and Sollecito were arrested November 6, 2007, and were kept in prison while an investigation continued. The judge overseeing the investigation found both were capable of committing the crime again, fleeing the country or tampering with the evidence.

Police sought charges in July 2008, and they were ordered to trial in October. The trial began January 16 and has been held mostly on weekends.

Italian newspapers assigned their top crime reporters, and the case has received unprecedented international coverage. Knox has appeared on the cover of People magazine, which shares a corporate parent with CNN.

A random sampling of women on the streets of Rome showed that all of them had heard of the case and most believed Knox and Sollecito were at the very least implicated in the slaying.

The superheated publicity surrounding the case helped make Knox a household name in Italy. She is usually portrayed as a femme fatale. Consider these headlines:

* "Sex, lies and stabbings"
* "Lovers without any inhibitions"
* "And in prison, she even tries to sun tan"

Italian journalists also have plastered their newspapers with photos they found of Knox on the Internet, especially images that showed her as a "wild girl." They pounced on the "Foxy Knoxy" nickname they found on her MySpace page, even though her parents later explained the high school moniker came from the way Knox played soccer, quick like a fox.

Although Italian law limits the publication of court and police records, the media ban is less strict than in many European countries. While it is not exactly legal to publish police investigative reports, no journalist has gone to jail in Italy for doing it.

Among the items leaked: Knox's diary, various police interrogations, photos of Kercher's body, video of Kercher's body (which wound up on YouTube but has been pulled), and video of the Italian forensic police carrying out their investigation. Eventually, even the leaks made headlines, leading to more speculation.

Knox can do no right in the Italian media. If she appears reserved and timid in court, she is portrayed as someone with plenty to hide. If she smiles or laughs in court, she's called disrespectful. As far as the Italian media is concerned, Knox is the mastermind who manipulated those around her and seduced her Italian boyfriend and led him astray.

While Knox and Sollecito's preliminary hearings were being held in October, Guede was convicted of murder after a fast-track trial. His lawyers had hoped that the speedy resolution of the case would give him a break at sentencing. He got 30 years in prison.

According to testimony at Guede's trial, his fingerprints were found in the house, and his DNA was linked to Kercher's body. He has never denied being in the house the night of the slaying but insists he didn't kill her. He says he had an "appointment" with her that night and was in the bathroom when she was killed.

Sollecito and Knox say they weren't at the house the night of the slaying. They say they both were at Sollecito's house. But the alibi has been contradicted by witnesses at the trial.

Eighty-six media outlets sent 140 journalists to cover the opening of the trial in January, but publicity has waned since then. The Italian 24-hour news channel TG24 no longer breaks into its programming with multiple updates. Knox, for now, has been relegated to the pages preceding the sports or weather report.

But Italians love their murder cases, and attention has shifted to other crime news. A mother is accused of killing her toddler son, a husband and wife are accused of multiple killings. Their courtrooms are now filled with spectators who wait in line an hour or more.

The Perugia courtroom still is packed, but the long line is gone. That is likely to change, however, as testimony shifts to the defense case.

All About Amanda Knox * Meredith Kercher * Criminal Trials

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Murder case brings 'Foxy Knoxy' infamy in Italy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ROME, Italy (CNN) -- The Italian media call her "Foxy Knoxy," portray her as a "devil with an angel's face," and there are 11 Facebook pages dedicated to her, all in Italian. Amanda Knox, 21, is an American college student from Seattle, Washington, who is on trial for murder in Perugia, Italy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Amanda Knox Is Completely Innocent And The Italian Justice System Is Utterly Insane

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Most people know that Amanda Knox - "Foxy Knoxy" - is the pretty American student who was arrested and found guilty of the stabbing death of her British roommate in Italy, during a "sex game" gone wrong, when the pair were on study-abroad programs several years ago.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Amanda Knox: The fine line between guilt and innocence | CNN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many questions linger in Knox case, despite an Italian court ruling Friday to overturn the latest guilty verdicts for Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The recent Amanda Knox verdict and the response by much in the media and public is an interesting lens into how many people allow their own biases to get in the way of objectivity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 2014, Serial brought podcasting into the mainstream with its gripping telling of a Baltimore murder case with a number of suspicious flaws and puzzles. Its first season has become a true crime story for the history books, but how many people even know the basic Serial timeline?

Even without all the legends and speculation, the story of Hae Min Lee and Adnan Syed is a fascinating one. In the span of less than a year, they went from teenage sweethearts to victim and chief suspect of a murder investigation, respectively. The exact events that brought them there are clouded in mystery, but the public knows the people and places they touched along the way.

With the release of HBO's The Case Against Adnan Syed and additional court hearings piling up each year after the podcast's premiere, it's clear we haven't heard the end of this story. If you want to understand where it's going, you have to get acquainted with the basic facts.

Both strong students and athletes, Lee and Syed began dating in March and attended prom together in April 1998. Although both came from conservative, strict families, they had secret phone calls and snuck off to go on dates.

Their feelings were intense. Lee wrote in her diary, "I think I might just love him," while Syed wrote her a poem that included the phrase, "I cherish this love that I have found."

On October 30, Lee and Syed attended the Woodlawn High School homecoming dance together, but Syed's parents caught wind of the lovebirds' plan and crashed the event. They publicly chastised both teenagers, displeased at their secret relationship and Syed's appearance at a mixed-gender dance.

Opinions vary on whether this event caused Syed to become ashamed and angry, or whether he was able to laugh it off with his friends.

Lee also began working at a local LensCrafters that month and met an older man named Don who she became attracted to.

Lee felt overwhelmed and upset by the events of homecoming, and within days, had broken up with Syed. Journal entries and information given by friends suggest they weren't done for good, however.

Like most teenagers, they got back together at least once, and Lee sent Syed several loving messages throughout December. But by Christmas vacation, the split seemed to become permanent.

Lee also began spending a lot of time with an older man named Don during this month, and they went on their first date on January 1, 1999.

The precise series of events that took place on January 13, 1999 are highly disputed - they're the reason Syed's later conviction is so controversial. One thing is certain, however: Lee was supposed to pick up a young cousin from daycare at 3:30 that afternoon, only she never arrived.

When Lee's family found out, they quickly called the police. Multiple friends recalled talking to her at school as late as 2:25, but no one at her LensCrafters job, including her new love interest, Don, had seen her that day. That meant something had happened to Lee in a very brief span of time.

Police began searching for Lee, but there were only minor developments over the first few weeks.

A concrete worker identified only as "Mr. S" on Serial found Lee's partially buried body in Leakin Park, less than a mile away from Woodlawn High School. Suspicious circumstances surrounded Mr. S's discovery, including his prior indecent exposure convictions and the location of the body, but in the end, police cleared him.

Lee's cause of death was manual strangulation. Police began searching for a culprit, particularly among Lee's ex-boyfriends.

In the course of their investigation, Baltimore police obtained call records from Syed's cell phone. Several calls apparently took place between Syed and Jennifer Pusateri, a classmate.

When police first interviewed Pusateri, she denied she knew anything about the case. Pusateri later said, "You know, I didn't really want to face it - was hoping I could just do anything to make it go away."

A second interview on February 27 pressured Pusateri into opening up. She admitted her friend Jay Wilds had told her Syed was the one who strangled Lee. Wilds also told her he had a role in disposing of the evidence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Complete Timeline Of The Case Against Adnan Syed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2014, Serial brought podcasting into the mainstream with its gripping telling of a Baltimore murder case with a number of suspicious flaws and puzzles. Its first season has become a true crime story for the history books, but how many people even know the basic Serial timeline? Even without...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On Jan. 13, 1999, Hae Min Lee, an 18-year-old high school student from Baltimore, went missing. About a month later, police uncovered her body in a nearby park; an autopsy would later find that she was choked to death. Lee's ex-boyfriend, Adnan Syed, 17, became the primary suspect in her homicide after an anonymous caller told the police to investigate him. In February of 2000, Syed was found guilty of murdering Lee. Syed is currently serving a life sentence.

The star witness at Syed's trial was Jay Wilds, a former classmate who testified that he helped Syed dispose of Lee's body. Jay's testimony was critical to the state's case; indeed, without his testimony it's virtually impossible that the state could have even brought Syed to trial.

Syed's trial, and Jay's testimony, became the focus of a "This American Life" spinoff series, the 12-part podcast "Serial," broadcast in the fall of this year.

Jay chose not to be formally interviewed by either "This American Life" or by "Serial" host and producer, Sarah Koenig. In the podcast Koenig pointedly challenged Jay's account of events and his motivation for assisting Adnan. Jay feels strongly that he was unfairly depicted by Koenig and that she painted a highly misleading portrayal of him and his role in the case.

This interview is the first time Jay has spoken publicly about events surrounding Lee's death and the trial that ended in Syed's conviction. We met over the weekend at his two-story suburban home. Jay's wife and mother entertained the couple's young children while Jay and I spoke in the family living room.

This is the first part in a multipart interview. The following has been edited and condensed for clarity.

--
How old were you when you first met Adnan Syed?
It was just at the end of my junior year, so about 16. I knew him because I knew Muslims in the community from playing basketball at the mosque.
In "Serial" you are depicted as a petty weed dealer. Is that why you didn't initially cooperate with the police? It doesn't seem like enough of a reason to not talk to the police.
It wasn't just like I was selling a nickel bag here and there. At the time, this was Maryland in the '90s, the drug laws were extremely serious. I saw the ATF and DEA take down guys in my neighborhood for selling much less than I was at the time. And they were getting sentenced to three and five years. I also ran the operation out of my grandmother's house and that also put my family at risk. I had a lot more on the line than just a few bags of weed.

The other thing to understand is something about the culture of Baltimore-this is where the 'Stop Snitching' video comes from. This is where it was produced. It went national, but it was produced in Baltimore. This is where people would have their house firebombed and still tell the police they knew nothing about it rather than to try to make some sense of what's going on. And that's not necessarily me-but that is my family, that is my uncles and cousins. It's where I'm from.
What was your life like during 1998 and 1999?
I worked a lot. I rode BMX freestyle. Got called an Oreo. I had friends but the groups were small. Never really a big group of friends. I played lacrosse, was a bit of a jock. The group of people I hung out with were different from the group of people I was from. I went to concerts, like anything from Wu-Tang to Warped Tour. I was a bit of an outdoorsman, adventure seeker, fishing, camping, learned to ride a motorcycle. Went canoeing. By the time I graduated [Woodlawn] high school in 1998, I wasn't exactly angry, but I did resent the school.
Why?
When Woodlawn put in the magnet thing, they took out all the vocational classes. Before you would just go down there for drafting, shop, and everyone would co-mingle, and all the students interacted. But when they put the magnet wing in, it was kinda like 'these people were different from us.' And they didn't have to interact with us anymore. They didn't have to go by us, except to come to lunch, and that was it. But their gym, lockers, parking, was down in the magnet wing. And I found that to be a bit of a slap in the face. Because I knew football had paid for all of that, but there were few football players down there. Football paid for everything at the school.

I didn't resent the students, I resented the school for setting it up like that.
When was the first time you hung out with Adnan?
I met him while I was still at Woodlawn, so around 1998. Stephanie [Jay's girlfriend] came to me and said 'Adnan is pretty cool,' plus he wanted to buy some weed. I said, 'Isn't he a paramedic?' And she said, 'Nah, he's cool, plus he wants to buy.'

I didn't trust him at first, since he wasn't like the people I knew - pot smokers you know? I made him smoke one time, he got a little high, got a little weird. Didn't say that much. He just seemed like someone who didn't smoke weed too much. He had a professional job in high school, he was a paramedic or something [ Ed. note: Adnan worked as an emergency medical technician, not a paramedic.]
From your perspective, what was Adnan's reputation at Woodlawn?
He was a little pompous, a little arrogant, but he seemed really driven as far as his academics, but all those magnet students were. He was magnet. He seemed a little bit more uptight than the other Muslim kids that I knew. He seemed under a lot of pressure to please. I got the feeling the few times of interacting with Adnan that there was this enormous pressure from somewhere trying to make him into something he didn't want to be.
When did you two get closer to each other?
There was never a real friendship. I only smoked with him two or three times. It wasn't like, 'Oh, we're down in the park, come on down.' We were friendly, we were cool. I might have sat next to him in a class, and joked or something. But he didn't call me unless he needed something. It wasn't like, 'Oh, we're going bowling, and let's call it in before we go bowling and call the rest of our friends and call Jay.' I don't remember ever going to any kinds of functions or endeavors together, or any concerts or clubs together, you know.
What did you know about Adnan and his relationship with Hae Min Lee?
I think that was his first real girlfriend, and I think that's why his reaction was so strong. I don't think it meant that much to her. I don't think that's wrong, it's high school, you know. She's a high school girl, 'Oh, he's cute, Oh, whatever'-things fizzle out. I think there was another dude or something, or whatever. I really didn't know much about their relationship, if they hung out, where they hung out, when they hung out.
How do you remember Hae?
For our age group, she was really independent. I believe she had a job also. But she seemed to be more mature, like she was two, three, four years older than us. Like she was a junior in college. The way she moved and went about her day. She just seemed like an older chick who happened to be in high school. She also wasn't on the magnet side of the demographic.
When did he first talk to you about hurting her?
It was at least a week before she died, when he found out she was either cheating on him or leaving him. We were in the car, we were riding, smoking. He just started opening up. It's in the evening after school, we never hung out in the morning. Just normal conversation like, 'I think she's fucking around. I'm gonna kill that bitch, man.' Nothing real pointed or anything, not like, 'I know his name,' or 'I caught her.' But I just thought he was just shooting off like everyone else shoots off when they're mad at their girlfriend. He never said anything like, 'Hey, what gauge gun should I use?' or 'How many minutes am I supposed to hold somebody under the water for?' or, 'Is there a statute of limitation on murder?' I thought he was just blowing off steam and bullshitting. I thought at worst he'd throw a rock through her window or something. Normal high school 'I'm mad at her and I'll scratch her car' sort of stuff.

I had never known anybody who had killed anybody else, so there's no way I could have known.

But look, if we start speculating what he was thinking that far ahead - I don't know. He might really have just been bullshitting at the time. I don't know what happened, what occurred between them that day. I don't know if she said something he couldn't handle, and he went off the edge or if he had been seriously speculating about it. I don't feel comfortable drawing conclusions like that. You can't start drawing conclusions like that.
A big part of the 'Serial' podcast is to speculate on Adnan's motive. What do you think?
I don't necessarily know if he meant to kill Hae before he did it or if it was a sudden moment thing, but looking at his life, from what I saw, he seemed to be far out of his realm when it came to Hae leaving him.

From the way he carried himself, at least, it looked like he had never lost anything before. And it was really hard for him to deal with being on the losing end. In that situation, he was the loser. And people were starting to find out he was a loser, 'Oh, you and Hae aren't together anymore. She got a new boyfriend?' And he didn't know how to deal with that.

And the other thing about it, I mean, there looked like there was real hurt and pain. What else could motivate you to choke the life out of someone you cared about? He just couldn't come to grips with those feelings. However he ended up doing it-whether it was premeditated, an involuntary reaction at that point in time-he just couldn't come to grips with being a loser and failing. He failed; he lost the girl.

I know that he came from a very strict religious background and that he was uneasy with some of the things he was doing. He was having a hard enough time with that itself. There were some big forces going on that didn't have anything to do with Hae.

But, like I said, I don't know how to come up with this story about how Adnan did it, why he did it, what he was thinking, how he was thinking, and why he was thinking that. I'm not a lawyer and I'm not a cop. It's not my job to figure that out.
When Adnan loaned you his car on Jan. 13, 1999, did he tell you it was because he planned on murdering Hae?
No. I didn't know that he planned to murder her that day. I didn't think he was going to go kill her. We were in the car together during last period-he was ditching the last period. And I said, 'Hey, I need to run to the mall 'cause I need to get a gift for Stephanie.'

He said then, 'No, I gotta go do something. I'm going to be late for practice, so just drop me off. Take my car, take my cellphone. I'll call you from someone else's phone when I'm done.'

I said, 'Alright, cool.' I dropped him off at school, went to the mall, then when I was done, I go back to my friend Jenn's house, where I normally go, sit and smoke with my friend.

Then he calls me and says, 'Come pick me up.'

So I go to pick him up, and when I get there he says, 'Oh shit, I did it.' I say, 'Did what?' He says, 'I killed Hae.'
At the Best Buy?
Yes.
Is this when you first saw Hae's body in the trunk of her car?
No.I saw her body later, in front of of my grandmother's house where I was living. I didn't tell the cops it was in front of my house because I didn't want to involve my grandmother. I believe I told them it was in front of 'Cathy's [not her real name] house, but it was in front of my grandmother's house. I know it didn't happen anywhere other than my grandmother's house. I remember the highway traffic to my right, and I remember standing there on the curb. I remember Adnan standing next to me.
Let's back up, tell me what happened when you arrived at the Best Buy to pick up Adnan.
I pick him up - he doesn't have any car with him. Like, he's not in a car or anything.
Where was Hae's car? Was it in the Best Buy parking lot?
Hae's car could have been in the parking lot, but I didn't know what it looked like so I don't remember. When I pick him up at Best Buy, he's telling me her car is somewhere there, and that he did this in the parking lot. But that, according to what I learned later, is probably not what happened.

Wherever her car was at the time I picked him up from Best Buy, it probably stayed there until he picked me up later that evening.
Then what happens, and what time is it roughly?
It's starting to get dark, so between 3p.m. and 4p.m. We drive over to Cathy's house to smoke. Cathy has people over when we get there. Now I don't wanna tell the people at Cathy's that this guy I'm with just killed his girlfriend and the cops just called because then they would all be a part of this fucked up thing.
Who was at the Cathy's apartment?
Cathy, Jeff, Laura and Jenn.
Ok, so you arrive at Cathy's with Adnan after he tells you he murdered Hae?
Yeah. We're sitting there smoking and he receives a phone call from the police and gets all panicky. I say, 'Well we need to part ways.' I don't remember if he dropped me off at my house or if I got a ride from somebody else.
What time do you get back to your place?
I think - and, look, it's been 15 years - about 6 p.m.
Ok. So then you and Adnan parted ways?
Yes. He left in his car and I was trying to collect myself at my [grandmother's] house. I was pretty distraught, fucked up, feeling guilty for not saying nothing. I don't know whether he calls me when he's on his way back to my house, or if he calls me right outside the house. He calls me and says 'I'm outside,' so I come outside to talk to him and followed him to a different car, not his. He said, 'You've gotta help me, or I'm gonna tell the cops about you and the weed and all that shit.' And then he popped the trunk and I saw Hae's body. She looked kinda purple, blue, her legs were tucked behind her, she had stockings on, none of her clothes were removed, nothing like that. She didn't look beat up.
Hae was in the trunk of her own car?
Yes.
Ok. Then what happened?
Adnan says, 'Just help me dig the hole.' And I'm still thinking, 'Inner-city black guy, selling pot to high school kids.' The cops are going to fry me. They're gonna pin me to the fucking wall. I had cops show up and harass me before at my house. I told [Adnan] that I wouldn't touch her car, or any of her possessions, and I say, 'Fuck it. I'll help you dig the hole.'
Why did you agree to help Adnan bury Hae?
Because at the time I was convinced that I would be going to jail for a long time if he turned me in for drug dealing, especially to high school kids. I was also running [drug] operations from my grandmother's house. So that would ruin her life too. I was also around a bunch of people earlier the day [at Cathy's], and I didn't want them to get fucked up with homicide. So I said, 'Look man, I'm not touching [Hae]. You're in this on your own. I'm being manipulated into what's being done right now.'
Did you go to Leakin Park immediately after agreeing to help?
No. Adnan left and then returned to my house several hours later, closer to midnight in his own car. He came back with no tools or anything. He asked me if I had shovels, so I went inside my house and got some gardening tools. We got in his car and start driving. I asked him where we're going and he says, 'Didn't you say everyone gets dumped in Leakin Park?'

I said, 'Drug dealers, people who get killed by drug dealers,' and I'm thinking to myself, 'When did I ever say that?' So, as I'm riding with him to the park and it starts raining and I'm thinking to myself as he pulls over-and I'm thinking this is the spot he's chosen. I'm also thinking, 'What's making him think I'm totally okay with this?' Like if a car goes by, and I jump out and wave at them saying, 'Hey, this is a murderer right here.' But I didn't. I'm pretty sure it was my fear of going to prison for having a bunch of weed in my grandma's house. He knew I was afraid of that.
Did you and Adnan dig the grave?
Yes we dig for about 40 minutes and we dig and dig, and he's digging less and less. And at a certain point I say, 'Well fuck, I'm finished. I'm fucking done.' And Adnan's like, 'Oh, well, you're not going to help me move her are you?' And I'm like 'No, I'm not gonna help you move her.' He says, 'Ok, well, I'm gonna need you to drive back to her car."
Where was Hae's car?
Somewhere up around a corner up a hill, parked in a strange neighborhood. It's just on the street. I didn't know it was that close. He said, 'I'm gonna drive back down there [to the grave]. You follow me some of the way, and then I'll take care of it.'
You drove him to Hae's car nearby?
Yes. We get into his car, and he drives up around the corner to Hae's car. He says, 'OK, follow me halfway back down the hill [towards the grave site]," so he doesn't have to walk all the way back up the hill to get back to me in his car. I follow him halfway back down the hill, park, smoke some cigarettes. He's gone with Hae's car.

It takes him about half an hour, 45 minutes, and he comes back with gloves on, panting, like, 'She was really heavy.' That's all he says. That's about burying her.
Adnan had just buried Hae on his own?
Yes. When we were digging the hole, it's not like Hae's body was just lying next to us. She was still in the trunk.
OK. Then what?
And he's like, 'I've gotta put her car somewhere.' So I follow him around for a few minutes, and he just picks a place at random behind some row houses, leaves her car, gets into his car, takes me home.
Why is this story different from what you originally told the police? Why has your story changed over time?
Well first of all, I wasn't openly willing to cooperate with the police. It wasn't until they made it clear they weren't interested in my 'procurement' of pot that I began to open up any. And then I would only give them information pertaining to my interaction with someone or where I was. They had to chase me around before they could corner me to talk to me, and there came a point where I was just sick of talking to them. And they wouldn't stop interviewing me or questioning me. I wasn't fully cooperating, so if they said, 'Well, we have on phone records that you talked to Jenn.' I'd say, 'Nope, I didn't talk to Jenn.' Until Jenn told me that she talked with the cops and that it was ok if I did too.

I stonewalled them that way. No - until they told me they weren't trying to prosecute me for selling weed, or trying to get any of my friends in trouble. People had lives and were trying to get into college and stuff like that. Getting them in trouble for anything that they knew or that I had told them - I couldn't have that.

I guess I was being kind of a jury on whether or not people needed to be involved or whatever, but these people didn't have anything to do with it, and I knew they didn't have anything to do with it.

That's the best way I can account for the inconsistencies. Once the police made it clear that my drug dealing wasn't gonna affect the outcome of what was going on, I became a little bit more transparent.
Did you make the anonymous call to the police to tip them off about Adnan?
No.
Do you know who did?
I don't know. But there was a grand jury hearing on this case, and I have an idea who might have based on that hearing.
COMING NEXT: PART 2, Jay's theory on the anonymous caller, why he agreed to testify in the state's case against Adnan, and how "Serial" showed up at his front door. Correction: The original version of this story incorrectly stated that Adnan Syed went to trial in December 2000. Syed was actually convicted in February 2000. A December 1999 trial ended in mistrial. Matt Tinoco provided research for this interview. Photo: Natasha Vargas-Cooper for The Intercept

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Exclusive: Jay, Key Witness from 'Serial' Tells His Story for First Time, Part 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On Jan. 13, 1999, Hae Min Lee, an 18-year-old high school student from Baltimore, went missing. About a month later, police uncovered her body in a nearby park; an autopsy would later find that she was choked to death. Lee's ex-boyfriend, Adnan Syed, 17, became the primary suspect in her homicide after an anonymous caller told the police to investigate him.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Essential Facts You Need To Know About The Adnan Syed Case

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From the Serial podcast to a new HBO documentary, Adnan Syed's role in the murder of Hae Min Lee continues to captivate with one question: "Is he guilty or innocent?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Revisiting the crime scenes featured in season 1 of ‘Serial’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It’s a true crime story that captivated a nation, and even though its final episode aired in December, season one of the podcast “Serial” continues to make news. At the heart of the story is Adnan Syed, convicted in 1999 of killing his high school girlfriend, Hae Min Lee. Justin George, a Baltimore…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sarah Koenig today updated fans of the wildly popular, game-changing podcast series Serial with an update on the new shows, yet another award they won and the recent news about the case against Adnan Syed. Syed was the subject of the podcast and is currently serving a life sentence, 15 years in, for the murder of his ex-girlfriend, 17 year-old Hae Min Lee.

While there have been plenty of websites salivating over the recent update on Syed's case, including Huffington Post, The Frisky, and a few others, there is still a glaring flaw in the story that began with Serial and continues with the media covering the story.

What was never covered? That this was a domestic violence case. Violence against women is and has always been off the charts, particularly in relationships. Usually there is prior abuse but in this case there wasn't any. Or was there? Serial left out almost every single piece of evidence that pointed to Syed as someone who was possessive, controlling and unable to let go of Hae Min Lee. Koenig left it out probably because she didn't want to incite a mob but it's something the media has never covered. They treat this case like your standard wrongful conviction case, like The Thin Blue Line or the Memphis Three. In fact, the case against Syed is strong. The evidence overwhelming. Why isn't anyone in the media talking about this?

When the website The Intercept covered the story from a different angle, two of its reporters Natasha VC and Ken Silverstein found that the state indeed had a strong case. They interviewed the prosecutor, Kevin Urick, and the state's witness, the one upon whom everyone freely lays blame, Jay Wilds. Once it was known that Glenn Greenwald's site was defending the state and not the victim, Adnan Syed, the two were put through turmoil and resigned. That's how badly the media wants this to be - NEEDS THIS TO BE - a wrongful conviction case. The thing is, okay, if that's so, show me. So far, no one - not the lawyers on Undisclosed (the self-appointed defense team's biased podcast that is working to sway public opinion and rip apart the case), not Koenig's Serial. After all of this time, Asia McClain is what they're going with. That and Adnan Syed never being given the chance to appeal his case.

You have to do some digging on your own because you won't find it listening to Serial (unless you listen multiple times and carefully). You have to read the trial transcripts and pore over the interviews. You have to look logically at what happened that day, where the cell phone pinged (butt dial my ass) and who lied about what. Further complicating matters is that there are many missing pages from the transcripts that many have been trying to obtain to fill the gaps. These have yet to be released and there is some speculation that they are being deliberately withheld to mitigate potential damage until the courts work through this latest appeal. Maybe there is nothing on the missing pages. Maybe there is something. With this case, the more you read the more damning the case against Adnan Syed becomes. Most people don't know this. The journalists writing their updates stories on or about the case certainly don't know this.

What is unforgivable both in Serial's coverage of the story and in the recent coverage by the media is to overlook what likely caused Lee's death and many women and girls just like her.

Here is what Serial just put up on their website about the Syed update:

Adnan appealed the circuit court's decision to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, and was due to have a hearing next month. But last week, the Court of Special Appeals essentially paused the case, saying that Adnan can ask the circuit court to re-open his post-conviction proceeding so he can present a new statement from Asia. In January of this year, after Serial finished airing, Asia reiterated in an affidavit that she'd seen Adnan at the public library on the day Hae Min Lee went missing in 1999. And she also stated that Kevin Urick, a prosecutor, had discouraged her from testifying at Adnan's post-conviction hearing. "Urick convinced me into believing that I should not participate in any ongoing proceedings," Asia says in the affidavit.

Once again, Serial talks about Asia McClain without bringing up the contradictory evidence that she says, on Serial, "I would not have remembered if not for the snow." She then adds "It was the first snow of the year." Well, it didn't snow on January 13th. There was an ice storm in the early morning hours of the 14th but no one would have noticed it on the 13th, certainly not waiting in the library. The first snow of the year and also a day school was closed was the week before, January 8th.

Serial did not check the weather before recording episode 1 and only updated their website to report on the weather. Even they conclude it probably wasn't the 13th, yet no mention of that here on Koenig's update which seems to suggest that Serial is responsible for the swaying of public opinion and/or pressure on the courts to allow McClain's testimony to be examined.

Even more problematic for McClain as a witness, though, and the prosecutors have made this abundantly clear in their response to the recent inclusion of McClain, her testimony was conditional. She made it clear numerous times that she would only testify in Adnan's favor if she knew for a fact he was not guilty. She offered her "help." Yeah, no. The truth doesn't work that way. You were there, you weren't. You saw him, you didn't." She was such an unreliable witness, Syed's defense attorney would have been a rookie to put her on the stand. The prosecution would have eviscerated her.

And finally, McClain might have even seen Syed in the library - that doesn't exonerate him from having murdered Hae Min Lee. They don't want to find something to exonerate him. They don't need to. They merely have to show that he did not get a fair trail and hopefully get him out of jail.

Whether he gets out of jail or not is not my concern, personally. I do care about the truth and I do care about the murder of a promising, intelligent young 17 year-old. And I do think Serial and every piece of mainstream media coverage that has come after it has ignored what very likely happened to Hae Min Lee and continues to happen to women all over the world every minute of the day.

Here are the pieces of the story Serial left out, inexplicably, and what everyone else is leaving out - completely ignoring the dynamics that might have led up to the murder.

In order to find proper coverage of the relationship I had to dig down deep in the main Serial Reddit sub to find a post that lays out things pretty clearly - a statement by "Debbie"-

Adnan was very over protective of Hae. He never made her sustain from seeing her friends but he did suggest she spent more time with him. He wanted to know where she was going, when she was going, who was she with, almost like he was her father.

From Hae's Diary:

The second thing is the possessiveness. Independence (indiscernible). I'm a very independent person. I rarely rely on my parents. Although I love him, it's not like I need him. I know I'll be just fine without him, and I need some time for myself and (indiscernible) other than him. How dare he get mad at me for planning to hang with Aisha?

Serial leaves out "possessiveness" when covering this. Koenig writes it off by saying Hae then says "he brought carrot cake!" In every instance where she could have told Hae's story a little better she deflects any possible suggestion that he was a controlling, possessive kid who could not handle his girlfriend dumping him for an older man.

Serial also leaves out that Hae once hid from Adnan and had a teacher lie for her when he showed up looking for her. She was due to work with the teacher but opted out, trying to avoid Adnan. The teacher, by the way, is never mentioned on Serial at all, nor is any of her testimony.

Even with all of that deflection, though, Serial cannot exonerate Adnan Syed. Everything they checked checks out. They flail around at the end with Nisha call, finding some tiny print that YES, maybe it could be a butt dial for over two minutes. That is just one improbability. To find Syed not guilty you have to accept the least probable situation all the way down the line. No one has yet calculated the percentages on that but I'm guessing they would be up there with getting struck by lightning.

As a fan of Serial I am so amazed and appreciative that Sarah Koenig kicked ass as she did. As a mother, a woman and a feminist I'm heartbroken that they could leave out something so important as Adnan's behavior leading up to the murder. While it started out telling Adnan Syed's story it never adequately told Hae Min Lee's. They tried but never got there. They owed it to Lee's family to bring up the issue of domestic violent homicide - to even use those two words together on the podcast. They never did.

These are important words to "leave in" considering the prosecution thought of this as a "domestic violence case" but how many listeners of Serial got that? How many reporters writing their update stories the case even bother including that? Adnan is treated as the victim again and again.

Because public opinion is shaped by the media, and the media wants this to be a wrongful conviction case, this story will keep rolling along until the public gets what it wants. Adnan Syed's verdict will be overturned, he'll go free. Sarah Koenig and Serial will take partial credit. Rabia Chaudry and her Undisclosed podcast will take the rest of it. Fan letters will pour in from all over the world. Syed will be on every network news programs - morning, noon and night. This is the direction the story wants to go in.

It doesn't want to go in the direction of the even bigger tragedy. Probably the most thorough read on this has been covered by only one person, as far as I can tell, and that is Ann Brocklehurst who wrote "Serial podcast rehabilitated a schoolgirl's murderer, so where's the feminist outrage?" Read it.

Where is the feminist outrage? Completely missing in action.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why is Nobody Talking About What Serial Left Out?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sarah Koenig today updated fans of the wildly popular, game-changing podcast series Serial with an update on the new shows, yet another award they won and the recent news about the case against Adnan Syed. Syed was the subject of the podcast and is c

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Things To Know About The Mysterious Staircase Death of Kathleen Peterson

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2003, Michael Peterson went to jail for life without the possibility of parole for the murder of his wife, Kathleen - but that was just the beginning of the story.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Who killed Kathleen Peterson? As documented by the true-crime series The Staircase - a 13-part investigation that follows the murder trial of her husband, Michael Peterson - neither the prosecution nor the defense told a story that seemed to make perfect sense. Durham County district attorney James Hardin Jr. contended that Michael had beaten Kathleen to death with a fireplace tool known as a blow poke, but defense experts claimed the blood-spatter patterns didn't match that scenario, and the supposed murder weapon was eventually found and essentially ruled out. Meanwhile, Peterson and his attorney posited that Kathleen simply had a terrible fall down the stairs, but that didn't sound right either: The lacerations on her head seemed too severe and the amount of blood just too great.

But a third theory, which sounds ridiculous at first, might actually make more sense than either of those presented at trial: Did an owl attack ultimately led to Kathleen Peterson's death? "An owl did it!" reads like breathless straw-grasping from a defense team with nothing left to lose, but that wasn't the case - the defense never once brought it up in court. The "owl theory," as it's known to those following the case, originated with a lawyer named Larry Pollard, who happened to be the Petersons' next-door neighbor. And he didn't come up with it until the months-long trial was nearly over.

Here's the short version of the owl theory: Kathleen was heading back into the Petersons' house when an owl silently swooped down and struck her head, digging its talons deep into her scalp. She moved inside to escape the bird, leaving a bit of blood outside. She had been drinking, and there were muscle relaxers and anti-anxiety medication in her system. Woozy and scared, she headed upstairs, presumably to tend to her wounds, and slipped, fell backward, blacked out, and bled to death. Some time later, Michael Peterson, who had been out of earshot outside, came inside and discovered the grisly scene.

The most compelling evidence in favor of the owl theory? Microscopic owl feathers were found along with some of her own hair in Kathleen Peterson's hand - "hair that was pulled out from the root of her head," Pollard told a Durham TV station. He theorizes that Peterson had yanked at her own hair to try and dislodge the owl. Second, the wounds themselves looked like they were made by claws, in a trident pattern of roughly equal depth. (Pollard contacted experts that agreed.) Also, owl attacks of this nature are not uncommon: When NBC's Dateline covered the Peterson case, they found a local man whose attack by an owl was caught on surveillance cameras. He likened it to being hit with a baseball bat, and he bled so much that he thought he'd lost an eye.

The best evidence against the owl theory, of course, is that it sounds crazy. As Michael Peterson's brother Bill told Dateline, "The cops were making a big joke out of it. They put a picture of the owl in their most-wanted list." When Pollard approached the district attorney, he dismissed the idea out of hand. He also tried approaching Peterson's defense attorney David Rudolf, but by that time it was too late.

"The first time it ever crossed my consciousness was a day or two before I was getting ready to give my closing argument," Rudolf told Vulture. "Even if I was willing to come in after six months of saying it was a fall and say, 'Sorry folks, it wasn't a fall, it was an owl that first caused these wounds,' I couldn't do that because in the closing argument, you're limited to evidence that's been presented at trial."

Even though the owl theory never got its day in court, Rudolf says it has "real credibility." "The feather that was in her hand, I just didn't focus on that. I figured it was from a down comforter. I take full responsibility for not having thought of that," he said. "I give Larry Pollard credit for coming up with it. I wish he had realized it six months earlier."

Since the trial, the theory has dominated much of the coverage of the case, especially on the internet. (One of the most comprehensive articles about the owl theory was published by Audubon, the long-running nature magazine.) However, newer developments rendered the owl theory moot from a legal standpoint. In 2011, Peterson was granted the right to a new trial after a key prosecution witness was found to have perjured himself in this and many other cases. Six years later, rather than go to court again, Michael Peterson agreed to an Alford plea, in which a defendant pleads guilty but admits no wrongdoing. Having already served eight years in prison, he was officially a free man, one who didn't need any evidence of an owl to exonerate him. Still, the theory is afforded barely a passing mention in The Staircase, an otherwise exhaustive profile of the case. Why?

"The purpose of the film was to follow the legal process," Staircase director Jean-Xavier de Lestrade told Vulture. "If there would have been another trial, I'm sure that the owl theory would have been examined inside the courtroom, and then it would have been in the film." But de Lestrade doesn't discount it: "The first time I heard about the owl theory, I really laughed. But when I started looking at it and I met with Larry Pollard ... It might be the more plausible explanation. How can you explain all the cuts and lacerations and the absence of fractures? When you start thinking about the owl theory, and the kind of injuries she had, you start thinking maybe there is something there."

The Staircase Director on the Peterson Case and the Owl Theory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Real Killer in The Staircase Might Be ... an Owl?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Netflix's docuseries The Staircase is a thorough investigation of the Michael Peterson murder trial, but it leaves out the infamous "owl theory." Did a bird actually kill Kathleen Peterson?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The gripping HBO Max true crime series The Staircase follows the 2001 death of Kathleen Peterson. Her husband, novelist Michael Peterson, became the center of the investigation and was eventually convicted of Kathleen's murder in 2003. After being released from prison in 2011, he's now fighting to clear his name.

But if you've binge-watched the Netflix documentary The Staircase, then you know that it isn't so simple. The doc that the HBO Max show is based (and builds upon) is filled with dark twists and turns, plus the confusing ins and outs of Michael's trial.

Michael's children also play a large role. The Peterson family has been outspoken about their father's trial-and there's a lot to learn about each of them.

Ready for the full breakdown? Here's everything you need to know about each member of the Peterson family, including who plays them in the HBO Max series:

Michael and Kathleen Peterson

Michael Peterson is an author and a military veteran who served in the Vietnam War. He met his first wife, Patricia Sue, in West Germany, according to The two got married in 1968 and eventually had two sons, Todd and Clayton.

During their marriage, Michael and Patricia became close friends with their neighbors at the time, George and Elizabeth Ratliff. When the Ratliffs both died in the 1980s, Michael adopted their daughters, Margaret and Martha, per . Soon after that, Michael and Patricia split up.

Michael then married Kathleen Peterson in 1997. She was an executive at Nortel Networks, a telecommunications company, reported. Kathleen had one daughter named Caitlin from her first marriage to physicist Fred Atwater, per A few years later, in 2001, she was found dead at the bottom of a staircase in her Durham, North Carolina home.

In the series, Michael is played by Colin Firth, while Kathleen is played by Toni Collette.

Patricia Peterson

Patricia, Michael's first wife, lived with Michael for several years in Germany, The News & Observer reported. The two both worked for the Department of Defense-Patricia taught elementary school children there for over three decades.

The pair never got back together after their divorce, but Patricia maintained Michael's innocence in both the deaths of Elizabeth Ratliff and Kathleen Peterson up until her own death in 2021, per the Charlotte Observer (more on that in a sec).

Patricia doesn't appear in the HBO Max series.

Clayton Peterson

Clayton is the oldest of Michael and Patricia's children. Clayton and his brother Todd grew up with Patricia after their parents divorced, according to Newsweek. As teenagers, they reunited with Michael in Durham, North Carolina.

When Clayton was 19 years old, he was arrested and charged for planting a homemade pipe bomb in a Duke University office, where he was attending college at the time, per The News & Observer. (The bomb never went off.)

Investigators later found six additional bombs in the Peterson's family home. After he was convicted of possessing a destructive device in 1994, Clayton served four years in a federal penitentiary, the reported.

During Michael Peterson's trial, Clayton maintained his father's innocence. Today, he lives in Maryland with his wife and children, according to The News & Observer.

In The Staircase, Clayton is played by Dane DeHaan from The Amazing Spider-Man 2.

Todd Peterson

Todd is Michael and Patricia's younger son. He was the first person to see Michael after Kathleen died, and he also supported his father during the trial.

Author Diane Fanning writes in her book Written in Blood that Todd supposedly told police officers he thought Kathleen's death was alcohol-related, per . In 2018, Michael's lawyer revealed that Todd now lives in Tennessee, The News & Observer reported.

Todd is played by Midnight Sun actor Patrick Schwarzenegger.

Margaret and Martha Ratliff

Michael and Patricia adopted Margaret and her sister Martha after their parents, George and Elizabeth Ratliff, passed away.

When authorities found Elizabeth dead at the bottom of a staircase in Germany, autopsy results revealed that her cause of death was an intracerebral hemorrhage, per Newsweek. The Petersons had dinner with Elizabeth, Margaret, and Martha the night she died, and Michael was the last person to see her alive. Elizabeth's body was exhumed during Michael's trial, only adding to the layers of evidence that were presented in court.

Like Clayton and Todd, both Margaret and Martha maintained Michael's innocence. Since the trial, Margaret has moved to California, while Martha now lives in Colorado, per Newsweek.

In the HBO Max series, Margaret is played by Sophie Turner and Martha is played by Odessa Young.

Caitlin Atwater

Caitlin Atwater is the daughter of Kathleen Peterson and her first husband, Fred Atwater. When Michael was arrested, Caitlin spoke out in support of her stepfather: "My mother and Mike had an absolutely loving relationship and there is no way that either of them would ever wish any sort of harm on the other one," she said, according to Newsweek.

But as The Staircase shows, Caitlin began to grow suspicious of Michael during the trial, eventually becoming a key witness for the prosecution. In 2008, Caitlin filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Michael, which the two later settled for $25 million, Newsweek reported.

Today, Caitlin goes by her married name, Caitlin Clark. Since the trial, she's had twins and moved to Virginia, per The News & Observer.

In The Staircase, Caitlin is played by Olivia DeJonge from The Society.
You Might Also Like

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kathleen Peterson's Daughter Sued For Millions After Her Mother's Death In 'The Staircase'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
HBO Max's 'The Staircase' follows the 2001 death of Kathleen Peterson and her husband Michael Peterson's trial. Here's a full breakdown of the Peterson family:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Sinister Letters That Terrorized A Small Town • Mystery Files