Cold Podcast: Susan Powell Case Files

Episode: Beaches & Airplanes (Bonus Episode 11)

Host: Dave Cawley
Original Release Date: December 6, 2024

Episode Overview

This bonus episode of Cold revisits the Susan Powell investigation, focusing on the persistent intrigue around clues offered by Susan’s young son, Charlie, during early police interviews after Susan disappeared in 2009. Host Dave Cawley explores how children’s memories, language, and trauma intersect with criminal investigations, examining both the literal and symbolic meaning of Charlie’s references to “crystals,” “beaches,” and “airplanes.” Through archival audio, police interviews, Powell family home videos, and an in-depth conversation with children’s forensic interviewer Brianna Martinez, the episode critically analyzes how investigators interpret and act on children’s statements in high-profile cases of domestic abuse and disappearance.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Lasting Mystery of Susan Powell’s Disappearance

• Public Attention Shift: Fifteen years after Susan vanished, online interest and amateur theories have faded, but questions still arise, often focusing on unsearched locations with names like “Crystal.”

  • [00:00] Dave Cawley: “The Facebook groups that once buzzed with tens of thousands of members... are pretty quiet these days. Every once in a while, someone new joins and posts a question asking if this or that place has ever been searched.”

• Origin of the “Crystals” Clue:

  • The persistent focus on “crystals” comes from Charlie Powell’s 2009 police interview. At four years old, he repeatedly referenced crystals as the place where Susan was left behind during a family camping trip orchestrated by his father.
  • [01:18] Charlie (audio clip): “My mom stick. Where a crystal are... Where our crystals are.”

2. Dissecting Charlie Powell’s Testimonies

• Camping Story & Contradictions: Dave revisits the timeline: Josh Powell took the kids camping overnight in a snowstorm—the same night Susan disappeared. While Josh told police Susan stayed home, Charlie repeatedly said she went camping and did not return with them.

  • [02:54] Detective: “Well, what did you do last night?”
  • [02:57] Charlie: “Go camping.”
  • [03:14] Detective: “Who were you camping with?”
  • [03:16] Charlie: “My dad and my mom and my... My little brother.”

• Fantasy and Fact: Charlie claimed to have gone on an airplane and to a beach, both geographically implausible in relation to the events. Dave underscores the risks of taking preschooler statements too literally, noting such stories often mix real experiences and imagination.

  • [04:31] Charlie: “You went to an airplane yesterday? Yeah. And our airplane brings us to Dinosaur National Park.”

3. How Children Remember and Disclose Traumatic Events

• Complexity of Child Testimony:

  • Interview with Brianna Martinez, a forensic interviewer at the Weber Morgan Children's Justice Center, provides insight into children’s developmental limitations, trauma responses, and the importance of open-ended questions.
  • [07:04] Brianna Martinez: “It’s intimidating, first off. And a lot of kids have trauma... that can bring up some previous trauma... This is just like a neutral place for them to come where they know they're not in any trouble.”

• Building Rapport & Eliciting Memories:

  • Forensic interviews prioritize building trust, avoiding direct or leading questions, and using episodic memory exercises to encourage more accurate recall.
  • [12:41] “The research shows that you get three to five times more accurate information from a child when you're asking... open-ended questions than when you're not.”

• Understanding Developmental Gaps:

  • Young children struggle with time, sequence, and geographic specificity.
  • [09:45] “They’ll struggle with a time something happened or a specific date, but the details of the episode they can give you...”

4. Interview Contamination and Coaching

• Second Interviews & Contamination: After authorities lost Susan, Charlie was re-interviewed months later, but gave less detail and seemed evasive, likely due to coaching by Josh Powell.

  • [18:23] Detective: “Did somebody tell you to keep a secret?”
  • [18:26] Charlie: “No. Only my brain did.”

• Forensic Challenges:

  • Brianna Martinez explains why repeated interviews can lead to inconsistent statements, particularly if the child's environment becomes a risk for coaching or suppression.
  • [22:38] Brianna: “Especially if their disclosure from their first interview to the second interview is completely different... you really have to kind of dive into it and ask those follow up questions.”

• Best Practice Evolution:

  • The science in this field has drastically improved in 15 years, prioritizing open-ended, non-leading techniques to avoid false or contaminated disclosures.
  • [24:03] Brianna: “There’s research going on all the time... There was a lot more of those direct questions or leading questions back then because they didn’t know what they didn’t know. And now we know that those open-ended questions are going to get you more accurate information.”

5. Symbolism of “Beaches” and “Airplanes” in Charlie’s Memory

• Reconstructing Meaning:

  • Dave suggests “beach” refers to the pond outside Susan’s workplace, the only real “beach” Charlie likely knew, and “airplanes” to watching flights at the nearby airport—both familiar components from family outings captured on video.
  • [28:13] Josh (video): “Tell me what you think of that airplane. Come here. Look at me and tell me what you think of it.”

• Theory on the Crime Scene:

  • Dave revisits his theory: Josh possibly left Susan’s body near her workplace before the camping alibi. The “beach” and “crystals” were really the pond and decorative rocks near her office, not literal geographic clues.
  • [31:31] Charlie: “And at night, my mom said, sleep where of flowers and a crystal glow.”
  • [31:45] Dave Cawley: “Whatever Charlie might have known about Susan’s death, he never developed the ability or opportunity to share it better than this.”

6. The Heartbreak of Lost Potential

• Reflections on the Powell Children:
  • The episode closes with Dave reflecting on the tragedy of the two sons’ murder at the hands of Josh Powell, and the haunting possibility Charlie might have revealed the truth had he lived.
  • [31:45] Dave: “Charlie would be 19 going on 20 if he were alive today. I sometimes wonder what kind of young man he would have become, whether he would have escaped his father’s poisonous influence and found the words to truly tell us where the flowers and the crystals grow.”

Memorable Quotes & Key Timestamps

Crystals as Clue

• [01:18] Charlie: “My mom stick. Where a crystal are. Where what are you. Where our crystals are.”

Factual vs. Fantasy Statements

• [04:31] Charlie: “You went to an airplane yesterday? Yeah. And our airplane brings us to Dinosaur National Park.”

Interviewing Child Witnesses

• [12:41] Brianna Martinez: “You get three to five times more accurate information from a child when you’re asking those open-ended questions than when you’re not.”

Disclosure & Coaching

• [18:23] Detective: “Did somebody tell you to keep a secret?”
• [18:26] Charlie: “No. Only my brain did.”

Children’s Changing Statements

• [22:45] Brianna: “You can tell that something has... Especially if their disclosure from their first interview to the second interview is completely different...”

On Missed Potential

• [31:45] Dave: “I sometimes wonder what kind of young man he would have become… whether he would have... found the words to truly tell us where the flowers and the crystals grow.”

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Timestamp | Segment Summary | |------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 00:00 | Context on Susan Powell’s case, public interest, and origin of the “crystals” clue | | 02:54 | Contradictory accounts by Josh and Charlie about camping with Susan | | 05:53 | Interview with Brianna Martinez begins - forensic child interviewing explained | | 12:41 | Importance of open-ended questions and their impact on accuracy in child interviews | | 17:32 | Second interview with Charlie - less detail, signs of coaching, reluctance to answer | | 18:58 | Handling reluctance and second interviews (Brianna), nuances of disclosure in children | | 24:38 | Home video evidence: family at pond, airport visit, and analysis of “beach” & “airplane” | | 31:31 | Reflection: “flowers and crystals” in Charlie’s memory, episode closes on lost potential |

Tone and Style

The episode maintains a measured, investigative tone, combining compassion for the victims and rigor in analyzing evidence and psychological concepts. Dave Cawley’s narration is calm, methodical, and deeply empathetic, especially when discussing the complexities of childhood trauma and memory. The conversation with Brianna Martinez offers a professional, educational perspective, demystifying the challenges investigators face when relying on statements from very young witnesses.

Conclusion

“Beaches & Airplanes” serves as both a critical reflection on the Susan Powell investigation and a primer on interviewing children in traumatic situations. By blending true crime inquiry with forensic psychology, Dave Cawley demonstrates why some clues—especially those voiced by traumatized children—are far more complicated, subjective, and heartbreaking than they first appear. The episode leaves listeners with a profound sense of both the limitations and possibilities inherent in seeking truth after senseless tragedy.