Killer On Campus - The Bow Hunter

Summary

Cold Case Files: "Killer On Campus – The Bow Hunter"

Date: January 20, 2026
Host: Paula Barros
Podcast: Cold Case Files (A&E / PodcastOne)

---

Episode Overview

This episode of Cold Case Files revisits two riveting Michigan cold cases: the murder of University of Michigan law student Jane Mixer in 1969 and the unsolved slaying of bowhunter Charles Murray in 1993. Through gripping interviews and detailed forensic analysis, the episode explores how advances in DNA technology, dogged detective work, and even unexpected psychological tactics brought long-delayed justice—and left lingering questions.

---

Segment 1: The Jane Mixer Case – "Killer on Campus"

[00:58–25:42]

The Crime: 1969 Murder of Jane Mixer

• In March 1969, 23-year-old Jane Mixer was found shot and strangled atop a grave in a Michigan cemetery. She had posted on a ride board at the University of Michigan law school looking for transportation to Muskegon. Her body was discovered amidst her suitcase and belongings nearby.
• “Her garments were pulled up, exposing her genitalia… there might have been an attempt at assault or rape. We didn’t know at the time.” (Don Bennett, Crime Scene Officer, [03:02])

Initial Investigation

• A phone book found near the crime scene with “Mixer, Muskegon” scrawled was one of few clues.
• The most obvious suspect, a David Johnson (name found in Jane’s phone book and note), quickly established a solid alibi.
• Mixer was initially believed to be a victim of a local serial killer, John Norman Collins, who had murdered other coeds around Ann Arbor, but police couldn’t confirm the link.

“Although she was shot, she still had the pantyhose wrapped around her neck. ... That was what happened to the prior one.” (Ken Krause, Detective, [06:38])

Cold for Decades

• The case went cold after Collins’ arrest for a similar murder failed to yield a connection. Mixer's file gathered dust for over 30 years.

---

The DNA Breakthrough

• In 2001, Detective Eric Schroeder revisited the case and submitted preserved evidence—including Jane's pantyhose—to the state lab for DNA analysis.
• Analyst Steve Milligan found male DNA on the pantyhose and a second, separate male DNA profile in a blood stain on Jane’s hand.

“Three of the stains gave a full profile… they indicated the presence of a male donor.” (Steve Milligan, DNA Analyst, [09:54])

• Neither DNA profile matched John Norman Collins. In 2002, the profiles were entered into the national database.

The John David Rulis Mystery

• One DNA hit matched convicted murderer John David Rulis—but he had been four years old in 1969.
• Detectives, baffled, visited Rulis in prison. He recalled being kept sedated by his mother and witnessed a bloody scene in his uncle’s garage, but his uncle’s DNA did not match the crime scene profile.

“It’s obvious pretty quick that he was only four years old... Surprised would be somewhat of an understatement, I think.” (Eric Schroeder, [11:49])

• Despite efforts, police never established a connection between young Rulis and Mixer, nor could they explain how his blood was present at the scene.

The Real Killer: Gary Lighterman

• A second DNA hit matched Gary Lighterman, a nurse at a hospital near Ann Arbor in 1969.
• When confronted, Lighterman was evasive, claiming he didn’t recall Mixer and suggesting any contact would have been from casual encounters, but his DNA on multiple locations of the victim’s pantyhose was damning.

“You didn’t meet her in a bar. ... The DNA, where it’s at, how it is, directly puts you there.” (Detective Schroeder, [18:03])

---

The Trial and Lingering Doubts

• At trial, the prosecution focused on the physical evidence, while the defense hammered on the inexplicable presence of Rulis’ blood:

“Those answers are evidence, and that’s what’s so troubling about this case.” (Gary Gabry, Defense Attorney, [23:46])

• Jurors ultimately found the DNA evidence against Lighterman overwhelming despite the unresolved Rulis question.

“I’m fairly certain that we made the right decision and that Gary Lighterman was guilty of this crime.” (Steve Kestin, Juror, [25:17])

• Lighterman was sentenced to life. The Rulis DNA remains a forensic mystery.

---

Segment 2: The Bow Hunter – Charles Murray

[26:07–44:44]

The Crime: 1993 Bowhunter Killing

• Charles Murray, 33, vanished after heading to northern Michigan for bowhunting. His mother (Sandy) and half-brother (Matthew) alerted authorities after he failed to return.
• Officer Theo Helms, suspicious of Matthew’s evasiveness, discovered Murray’s body—a single bullet wound to the head.
• A sketch was produced based on a sighting by fellow hunters, but leads dried up.

The Cold Case Reopened

• Ten years later, Detective Sgt. Robert "Bronco" Lesneski dusted off the file.
• After local news coverage, Sgt. Greg Potts called in with a tip: serial killer Ronald Brown, recently paroled and accused in a nearby murder, fit the profile and timing.

“In my mind, he’s a serial killer that got out for about three months ... and, you know, committed two murders. That’s huge.” (Greg Potts, [31:52])

• Brown’s mugshot matched the original sketch almost exactly.

---

Getting a Confession: Playing "Hard to Get"

• Bronco began visiting Brown in prison to build rapport. Brown, already serving life for other murders, relished the psychological one-upmanship.
• Psychologists Dr. Wolford and Dr. Comer suggested Bronco become distant—to "play hard to get" and exploit Brown’s need for attention and control.

“You got to start playing hard to get. That's exactly it.” (Dr. Wolford, [39:40])

• After Bronco stopped all contact, Brown became desperate, writing to both Bronco and the prosecutor, ultimately demanding to confess.

The Confession

• Brown’s confession was eerily cold:

“He got shot three times about 50 yards away. Three times with a 12 gauge, double buck shells and he fell out the tree. ... I shot him for no reason.” (Ron Brown, [43:28])

• Brown pleaded guilty to manslaughter; Bronco's psychological gambit paid off.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the campus murders epidemic:
  "It just permeated everybody’s subconscious. ... It was very scary." (Maryanne George, [07:21])

• On frustrating dead ends:
  "We’ve been asked many times, do you have an established on paper link between John Rulis [and] Jane Mixer? No, absolutely not. We don't. But we do have the DNA." (Det. Schroeder, [14:19])

• Trial commentary:
  "She became more than just a terrible mugshot in an old newspaper. She became this person." (Maryanne George, [22:59])

• Juror’s perspective:
  "The DNA evidence is so compelling that it’s hard to overcome. ... I’m fairly certain that we made the right decision." (Steve Kestin, [25:17])

• On serial killer Ronald Brown:
  "He’s a scary dude and he’s a bad dude. ... He’s psychotic." (Bronco Lesneski, [35:21])

• Psychologists' insight:
  "The second most important person in his life may be you." (Psychologists on Brown’s fixation with Bronco, [39:13])

---

Timeline of Key Moments

• [01:59] – Detective Schroeder reopens Jane Mixer case
• [03:02] – Crime scene description
• [07:21] – Campus fear during serial killings
• [10:21] – Two unknown male DNA profiles emerge
• [11:32] – Blood on Jane’s hand matches John David Rulis
• [17:18] – Gary Lighterman becomes a suspect
• [19:45] – Lighterman arrested
• [22:35] – Mixer trial opens
• [25:28] – Lighterman convicted
• [28:24] – Charles Murray’s body discovered
• [31:52] – Ronald Brown emerges as lead suspect
• [35:21] – Bronco Lesneski targets Brown
• [39:40] – Psychologists suggest “hard to get” strategy
• [41:06] – Brown confesses
• [43:48] – Brown pleads guilty in Murray’s case

---

Tone and Storytelling

The episode’s tone is relentless, clinical in its examination of puzzling forensic details, yet empathetic in interviews with family and survivors. Detective stoicism, juror candor, and the haunting calm of a serial killer all permeate the narration, making for a chilling, engrossing listen:

“He was there, so I shot him.” (Ron Brown, [43:28])

---

Conclusion

This gripping episode of Cold Case Files illuminates the painstaking process—and the inevitable mysteries—of solving decades-old homicides. From the unresolved anomaly of John David Rulis’ DNA to the psychological chess match with Ron Brown, it’s a testament to the tenacity and ingenuity of cold case investigators—and a sobering reminder that some secrets, chillingly, may stay buried forever.

Transcript

[A]

You can't solve every case for your kids, but with Greenlight, they'll have the instincts and the money skills to stay out of trouble. With a Greenlight debit card and money app, parents can monitor spending and teach financial responsibility. It's an easy way to guide kids as they grow from earning allowance and tracking chores to learning how to save and even invest. Start your risk free Greenlight trial [e-mail] wondery that's greenlight.com wondery this podcast is.

[B]

Brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Fiscally responsible financial geniuses, monetary magicians. These are the things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to Progressive and save hundreds because Progressive offers discounts for paying in full, owning a home and more. Plus, you can count on their great customer service to help you when you need it. So your dollar goes a long way. Visit progressive.com to see if you could save on car insurance, Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states or situations.

[A]

This program contains subject matter that may be disturbing to some listeners. Listener discretion is advised. There are over 100,000 cold cases in America. Only 1% are ever solved. This is one of those rare stories. It's 2001 in Lansing, Michigan, and Eric Schroeder is an officer with the Michigan State Police. That summer, Eric walks into the department's evidence room and begins to look around.

[B]

I thought this would probably be a really good time to try to go through some of this evidence on these cases and submit it back to the lab and see if they could do anything further on it or any type of testing that would give us some DNA analysis results.

[A]

Of all the cold cases in this room, one is of particular interest to Schroeder. The 1969 murder of a University of Michigan student, Jane Mixer.

[B]

Because I had worked on the Mixer case when I was posted down at the state police post in Ypsilanti, that was kind of always one that was near and dear to my heart. So it was one of the first ones that I pulled out.

[A]

Detective Schroeder begins to work the case, more than 30 years cold.

[B]

Well, I was a, we call today a forensic scientist. I, I was a detective sergeant and sworn officer for the Michigan State Police.

[A]

On March 21, 1969, Don Bennett responds to a call about the body of a young woman lying on top of a grave.

[B]

When I got here that morning with the fellows from our crime scene crew, we saw that there was a heel print. And then from that heel print leading kind of into the cemetery were Some scuff marks, some drag marks, not very deep or distinct, but you could see them beyond the drag marks. There was a body lying in front of this headstone that says William Downing Sr.

[A]

The woman has been shot twice in the head.

[B]

Her face was bloody. Blood had run down the left side of her face and had dried beside the blood, dry blood on her face, it was very obvious. There was a silk stocking tied very tightly around her neck like a garrote. That had been. She'd probably been strangled with. The fact that her garments were pulled up, exposing her genitalia would tell you that maybe there might have been an attempt at assault or rape. We didn't know at the time.

[A]

Next to the body lies a suitcase and a jumble of women's clothes.

[B]

She just obviously did not just walk in here. She was carried and put in here. Then everything she had with her was obviously put beside her and then covered up and left that way.

[A]

Bennett goes with the body to the morgue. No semen or other evidence of sexual assault is found. The victim is identified as Jane Mixer, a University of Michigan law student reported missing the day before.

[B]

I had never been here to the Lock Quad, as it's called. That's like a little village right within the university.

[A]

Later that day, Detective Ken Krause arrives at Michigan Law School. A little after 1pm he discovers Jane Mixer had posted a note on a school bulletin board asking for a ride home to Muskegon, Michigan.

[B]

This is known as a ride board. And students here that are looking for a ride to a particular place in the country can come in here, and they can. They can fill out a slip and place it in the slot where they want to go to.

[A]

Jane's friends never saw the mystery man who offered her a ride. In a phone booth in the basement of the law school, however, detectives find a hint of how he might have operated.

[B]

There was a phone book found by one of the phone booths that on it had the words Mixer, Muskegon written. And we kind of think that whoever probably called or had wrote that on the book, it was some of the only evidence we had really, of maybe identifying a suspect.

[A]

The phone book is submitted for handwriting analysis. Meanwhile, Kraus searches Mixer's dorm room. On her desk, he finds a second phone book with a check mark placed next to the name David Johnson.

[B]

The reason that I would say she was calling David Johnson was to get her ride to Muskegon. The connection was the note on the ride board and respond by him to her for a ride to Muskegon detectives.

[A]

Call the David Johnson in the book, the university of Michigan student says he never offered Jane Mixer a ride and has a good alibi. He was performing in a play on the night Mixer was murdered.

[B]

Felt that he had no involvement in her disappearance. There were many David Johnsons in any about any David Johnson within probably Michigan was contacted and checked for whatever all.

[A]

The David Johnson's in the local phone book are cross checked against registered owners of.22 caliber guns. None are good suspects. Police begin to suspect David Johnson might have been an alias and that Mixer's murder might be the work of a serial killer.

[B]

This is scrapbook with clippings of the various homicides that had occurred about that time.

[A]

In 1969, murder in Ann Arbor was an unfortunately common occurrence with Jane Mixer being the third young woman found dead near the university.

[B]

Although she was shot, she still had the pantyhose wrapped around her neck. So of course that that was what happened to the prior one. So of course that would sort of lead you to believe it was the same person. I think that was a feeling a lot of investigators feeling was that, you know, we can't say it's not and we can't really say that it is, but let's leave it, hang there and see what we can find out.

[A]

By midsummer, the death toll stood at seven. Crime reporter Maryanne George was a student studying on the same campus as Mixer. Like everyone else, she was terrified.

[B]

It just permeated everybody's subconscious. You know, walking at night, you'd be looking over your shoulder. I used to ride my bicycle instead of walking because I could move faster, but it was very scary.

[A]

Six months after Mixer's murder, John Norman Collins was arrested and charged in the strangulation death of Karen Sue Bineman. Though he was charged in just the one case, Collins was suspected of several more.

[B]

The fact that he was responsible or at least charged with one of them, I think everybody relaxed to a certain point so there was some relief. But you didn't quite feel like it was over because you never knew. Did they get them all?

[A]

Speculation aside, detectives on the Mixer case are never entirely convinced Collins is their killer.

[B]

But they have no other leads after Collins was arrested. Eventually you run out of information or things to track down. It never really went, I'd say, to a dead file. But it was very inactive. I guess that's what you'd call it.

[A]

Jane Mixer's murder goes cold and is packed away in the archives of the Michigan state police until 30 years later inside an evidence property room in 2002. Detective Eric Schroeder believes DNA might help him find her killer.

[B]

This envelope contains the pantyhose that were on Jane Mixer's body at the time she was found.

[A]

The victim's pantyhose are of special interest to Schroeder.

[B]

We felt quite strongly that the offender's DNA could have been embedded into the weave of that due to the fact that he had obviously had to pick her up to transport her.

[A]

Schroeder packs up the pantyhose along with several other items and sends them to the state crime lab in Lansing.

[B]

There were a number of items that were submitted by Detective Schroeder in this case.

[A]

Steve Milligan is a DNA analyst with the Michigan State Police. He begins by taking a blue light to the Mixer evidence.

[B]

We'll use this light source in order to scan the item of evidence and see if anything stands out against the background. There were four areas on the nylon pantyhose from Gene Mixer. Visibly, you could see that there was a stain present in the mesh of the nylon.

[A]

Milligan believes the stains to be sweat or mucus, most likely sloughed off the killer's hands as he carried Mixer's body. Milligan isolates the stains and extracts human DNA.

[B]

Three of the stains gave a full profile. They were the same profile, same, so they had the same types. They indicated the presence of a male donor.

[A]

Milligan then turns to a second piece of evidence. A spot of blood found on Jane Mixer's hand. Detectives assume the blood belonged to the victim. DNA testing, however, yields an unexpected result. A second male profile.

[B]

There was no information other than we had two distinct profiles of two different male donors associated with the items of evidence that came from Jane Mixer.

[A]

Milligan compares both profiles to DNA taken from John Norman Collins, a man serving a life sentence for killing a Michigan student in 1969.

[B]

People all over the state had been told John Norman Collins was responsible for this homicide. One of the first things is, let's compare it to John Norman Collins and see if it matches. They compared his DNA and it was not a match. You know, that basically left us with if he didn't do it, then who did?

[A]

In November of 2002, the two profiles are loaded into the national DNA database and run against millions of violent offenders. A year later, one of them hits.

[B]

I got a 911 page from the lab, so I called down to the lab to find out what was going on.

[A]

The blood found on Jane mixer's hand in 1969 has been matched to John David Rulis. A man serving time for murdering his own mother.

[B]

We thought, well, this is outstanding. We've got someone who's in prison for a violent crime. So, you know, we got all excited about that for about 20 seconds.

[A]

The excitement fades when Schroeder learns that John David Rulis was born in 1964.

[B]

It's obvious pretty quick that he was only four years old and eight months at the time Jane Mixler was murdered. Surprised would be somewhat of an understatement, I think.

[A]

Schroeder decides to visit Rulis in prison and ask him how a 4 year old's DNA winds up at the scene of a murder.

[B]

January 16, 2004. Well, we're here at the Bellamy Creek MDOC facility in Ionia inside a Michigan prison.

[A]

Detectives Schroeder and Powell sit down with John Rulis.

[B]

John, if we're here investigating a case that you're a potentially witness on, we certainly had no ideas that, you know, he's the person that, you know, kidnapped Jane Mixer, shot Jane Mixer. So we needed to talk to him as a witness. Who was he with Roulis?

[A]

Childhood memories are fuzzy. His mom was a transient and kept 4 year old John sedated with cough syrup. Rulis does, however, remember one night and a lot of blood.

[B]

My mother left me with my uncle for a period of time. Where she had gone, I don't know the incident which I'm referring to. It's a death that involves a person who I don't know the name of, don't know the gender of. At the time it occurred, I was only six years old. The one story that he told involved going out of the house during the middle of the night, walking out into the garage and seeing a vehicle in there with the motor running and the headlights on. And his uncle was talking to one of his, you know, now deceased uncles and that they were having some type of an argument. I remember my uncle had a gun. I remember Joe was out of holster. It was in his hand and there was feet and there was a lot of blood. I say a lot of blood. I mean, profusely, a lot of blood.

[A]

Rulis statement appears to implicate one of his uncles. So detectives, follow the lead.

[B]

He voluntarily gave us a DNA swab. We had that tested. He was excluded as the donor of that DNA. We spent quite a bit of time with that uncle, interviewing him and tracking things down, and there was absolutely nothing in that story that even remotely sounded true.

[A]

Rulis uncle is dismissed as a suspect, and detectives remain at a loss as to how 4 year old John Rulis blood found its way onto the hand of a murder victim.

[B]

We've been asked many times, do you have an established on paper link between John Rulis Jane Mixer? No, absolutely not. We don't. We don't have anything like that. But we do have the DNA.

[A]

The Mixer case remains a mystery until eight months later when Detective Schroeder takes a second call from the DNA lab and identifies another suspect.

[B]

I have nothing to do with this girl and her be killed and left here. I have nothing to do with that. Well, science says otherwise and that's the bottom line.

[A]

So here we are. A new year and a fresh start. I always love that clean slate feeling in January. And this year, instead of just organizing my closet again, I decided to organize my brain a little. I've been using Rosetta Stone to brush up on my Spanish and it's honestly been such a fun way to kick 2026. Whether you're planning to travel, dive into your family roots, or just want to pick up something new, learning a language feels like a resolution that actually sticks. Rosetta Stone has been the go to name in language learning for over 30 years and there's a good reason why their immersive and intuitive lessons are short and super easy to fit into my day, usually while I'm waiting for coffee to brew. And the True Accent feature gives you instant feedback so I sound like I know what I'm doing when I order food at the little Salvadorian restaurant near me. There are 25 languages to choose from. Spanish, French, German, Japanese and more. And with their lifetime membership, you get access to all of them. So you can start a language now, switch to another next year and keep going forever at no extra cost. If New Year New Language sounds like something you'd like to try, Rosetta Stone is the easiest and honestly most rewarding way to make it happen. Don't wait. Unlock your language learning potential now. Cold Case Files listeners can grab Rosetta Stone's lifetime membership for 50% off. That's unlimited access to 25 language courses for life. Visit RosettaStone.com Coldcase to get started and claim your 50% off today. Go to RosettaStone.com Coldcase and start learning today. Cold Case Files is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. You chose to hit play on this podcast today. Smart Choice Progressive loves to help people make smart choices. That's why they offer a tool called Auto Quote Explorer that allows you to compare your progressive car insurance quote with rates from other companies. So so you save time on the research and can enjoy savings when you choose the best rate for you, give it a try. After this [e-mail], progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates not available in all states or situations. Prices vary based on how you buy.

[B]

I don't know that we ever actually sat down and said, this is the guy and this is the day. This was just an opportunity for us to talk. I mean, it was the logical next step. We got to talk to the person who did a deposited the DNA.

[A]

Gary Lighterman is at the center of a 35 year old cold case.

[B]

Do you have any reason why we'd be here? Do you want to talk? Not at all. I. I have. I. I thought maybe when I first saw you that there was some problem with somebody in the neighborhood or something.

[A]

Cold case detectives don't want to talk about Lighterman's neighbors. They want to know how his DNA wound up on the pantyhose of, of a murdered college student named Jane Mixer.

[B]

I mean, help me here, Help me here. I mean, I'm totally reaching out to you here. I mean, give me something I can work with. Like I said, I'm willing to work with you on this. I am. I just need some options.

[A]

If there's an innocent explanation, detectives want to hear it.

[B]

I can't give you any answers. I may have met this person in a chance encounter, but I don't remember her specifically. I don't remember the face. I can remember having on one or two occasions a sexual encounter with women that I met at bars. You know, my biggest thought at that point is Jane Mixer wasn't at a bar. She wasn't out for the night bar hopping. I mean, she had a suitcase full of clothes. She had clothes on a hangar. She had her. She was going home to tell her family about her engagement to her fiance. The DNA, where it's at, how it is, directly puts you there. You didn't meet her in a bar. I have nothing to do with this girl and her being killed and left here. I have nothing to do with that. Well, science says otherwise, and that's the bottom line. We're basically accusing this man of murdering a 23 year old girl. We didn't get any type of the normal response that you would expect to see from someone who's being accused of a crime of that nature. And never at any time did he jump up and get angry. I told you all I know. I know you're wanting to hear something different. I can't tell you anything different. I've told you all I know. Well, you haven't told us how your DNA got there. For some reason, you don't want to talk to about what occurred. What this interview did for us was tell us that there is no innocent explanation for his DNA to be on her. And I feel like we covered every base we could in this interview. Do what you have to do. I can't admit to something.

[A]

Gary Liderman is arrested and charged with first degree murder. As the state prepares for trial, however, problems arise.

[B]

It was certainly frustrating. I mean, we would have liked to have been able to present evidence to the jury to say, you know, here's why John Rulis blood was on Jane Mixer.

[A]

A convicted killer named John David Rulis is a mystery to prosecutor Steve Hiller. Although Rulis was 4 years old at the time Jane Mixer was murdered, DNA testing shows a drop of his blood was found on the victim's hand.

[B]

Well, it was something that needed to be explained. It was something that needed to be investigated to find out if there was a problem. That was the responsible thing to do.

[A]

The first possibility is lab contamination. Hiller speaks with his forensics team.

[B]

We were pretty defensive, I would say. We are so cautious on how we process everything in the laboratory.

[A]

Jeff Nye learns that evidence from Rulis own murder case was in the crime lab during the same month that Mixer's evidence was processed. On the surface, the potential for contamination seems to grow.

[B]

I was asked to investigate the two cases together to determine if there was any crossing of paths between the two cases in the laboratory. So basically what I would do is come to the file room and grab all the files associated with each other. Each case.

[A]

The two cases were processed by different analysts at different workstations nearly a month apart, making cross contamination, in the state's opinion, highly unlikely.

[B]

They're stored on opposite sides of the property room, and all the evidence that comes in the laboratory are sealed. So there's no issue there on the fact that they came unsealed and DNA just magically crossed from one side of the room to the other. I have never seen a case that has so much reasonable doubt.

[A]

Gary Gabry does not share the state's confidence in their lab work. Gabry argues either the DNA lab contaminated the evidence or it didn't, in which case the state cannot explain an important facet of its crime scene.

[B]

From my perspective, the defense was sitting in a good position with either argument that you can't rely on the lab if there's contamination and they can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt given the evidence that they have left, that My client was guilty.

[A]

Gabry believes John Rulis blood provides enough reasonable doubt to gain an acquittal for Gary Lighterman. A Michigan jury will settle the matter in July 2005. Mary Ann George covers the Jane Mixer murder trial for the Detroit Free Press.

[B]

I mean, that kind of detail, it just broke my heart because here was this beautiful girl who just got robbed in a most violent way. I mean, it's still, you know, I might have known her on campus.

[A]

In 1969, George was a student at the University of Michigan. In a packed courtroom, she watches as the trial unfolds and the memories return.

[B]

When all this stuff started spill out, she became more than just a terrible mugshot in an old newspaper. She became this person.

[A]

The state keeps its attention focused on the defendant's DNA found on four different locations on the victim's pantyhose.

[B]

They were consistent with him having lifted her out of the vehicle, putting his hand underneath her legs, dropping saliva or sweat or perhaps even tears. Tears onto the top of her thigh as he's doing that. In that moment. You got a picture? Oh, yeah. That's pretty plausible. It put an image in your head that made sense.

[A]

The defense counters with questions the state cannot answer, chief among them, the origin of the blood stain linked to John Rulis.

[B]

Where did that come from? How did that get there? How does that connect to Gary Lighterman? How does Gary Letterman connect to Jane Mixer? How does the origin of the blood, a person by the name of John Rulas, connect to Jane Mixer or Gary Lighterman? They could answer none of those questions. That's something that's been lost to history. But it doesn't change the fact that Gary Lighterman's DNA was on Jane Mixer's pantyhose. Now he just wants to brush this off, saying those in answers are lost in history. Well, those answers are evidence, and that's what's so troubling about this case.

[A]

After two weeks of testimony, the case goes to the jury, which deliberates for five hours. They find Lighterman guilty of murder in the first degree. Steve Kestin served on the jury.

[B]

The main point of disagreement was how to handle the John Roelos blood drop if it was his.

[A]

Despite the DNA report, Kestin never believed the stain belonged to Rulis.

[B]

I personally don't think so. I think that that was Jane Mixer's blood. My personal opinion is that there may have been a mix up in the lab, and that's how that drop of blood was associated with John Herlos.

[A]

The possibility of a forensic mix up, however, did not deter Kestin, who focused on the evidence. Gary Lighterman could not explain his DNA on the victim's pantyhose.

[B]

The DNA evidence is so compelling that it's hard to overcome. I'm fairly certain that we made the right decision and that Gary Liderman was guilty of this crime.

[A]

Gary Liderman is sentenced to a term of life without parole. No explanation, however, has ever surfaced as to how or why John Rulis blood made its way into the Mixer crime scene.

[B]

Unanswered questions are always tough. But again, it doesn't change the fundamental nature of the evidence against Gary Lighterman and it doesn't change my firm belief that he killed Jane Mixer and he was rightfully convicted.

[A]

It's October 11, 1993 in Pontiac, Michigan, and Sandy Murray is worried about her son, 33 year old Charles.

[B]

He loved to go deer hunting rifle season, and he'd never ventured into bow hunting until that year. That had been his first time.

[A]

It has been more than a week since Charles Murray had traveled to northern Michigan for the first day of bow hunting season On a weekend I know.

[B]

Can go by, but a whole week and then him not showing up at work, and that wasn't like him. And I thought, well, something's wrong.

[A]

That evening, Sandy Murray contacts authorities. Then she gets into her car and heads north.

[B]

A bird hit my window. You know, it's this old superstition and I thought that's a bad sign. And I thought, no, no, don't let it happen. But I knew it did. I knew something was afoul. I overheard some radio traffic that the state police had on the air. Something about they were with the family and the mother and the brother. And I heard something about a missing hunter.

[A]

Department of Natural resources officer Theo Helms responds to the radio call. He meets Sandy and Matthew Murray, Charles Murray's half brother.

[B]

I found out that the brother had actually been into this hunting area with him. And in talking to him, I said, well, if you went with me in my car, could you find that area where he normally punts? And he said, yeah, I think so.

[A]

Helms and Matthew drive around for a while before Matthew finally settles on an area he, he says, looks familiar.

[B]

This area is northeast of the intersection of Bissonnet Road and M65. I guess the address here would probably be Glenny or Hale maybe. It was odd to me that he couldn't direct me right to the spot. I had the distinct feeling that he was. He wanted me to find his brother, but he was being evasive enough to make me Think. Well, he doesn't really want me to know that he knows where exactly it is.

[A]

Following a trail 600ft into the woods, Helms stumbles upon a corpse. It is the body of Charles Murray.

[B]

He had a perfectly round hole in his forehead, and there's only one way a hole could get there. It looked like a bullet hole.

[A]

Helms walks through the woods back to where the dead man's brother, man Matthew waits.

[B]

He didn't even ask me if he was dead or not. He just went down to one knee like this, and he said. He just shook his head and he said, don't let mom and dad see him. So he didn't even question me. Is he all right? Is he okay? So it was a strange behavior.

[A]

Helm's suspicions are relayed to the Michigan State Police, who take a hard look at Matthew Murray. Matthew, however, has a solid alibi, passes a polygraph, and is cleared as a suspect. Meanwhile, detectives canvass the area and happen upon a hunter named Daniel Fair.

[B]

My father and I were hunting on opening morning, and shortly, as the morning progressed, I heard three loud gunshots. It didn't happen very far away. I knew it would startle the game and the honey wouldn't be any good that morning. So we started to pack up and leave.

[A]

As father and son drive down the road, they are approached by someone who looks out of place in the woods. They slowed down to get a better look.

[B]

Well, he was large. He had a leather sleeveless vest on at the time, real bushy hair. He kind of hawked down and kind of gazed into the window of the car, like, looking at me like this, trying to spook us or scare us. And it worked. I was intimidated at the time, and he just looked out of place. That's not what you find on opening day of bow season. That's just not the type of character of a person that would be out.

[A]

There in the woods the following day. Fair hears about the bow hunter shot in the head and calls police.

[B]

This is a sketch of the man that I saw opening day bow season in Oscoda, standing on the side of Bisnette Road.

[A]

The sketch is distributed among law enforcement, but fails to generate a suspect. In time, the image fades, and the case of the bowhunter goes cold.

[B]

I love the woods. I'm in the woods a lot. I love to hike. I hike all over, but I'm not a hunter.

[A]

Ten years later, Detective Sergeant Robert Bronco Lesneski works for the Michigan State Police.

[B]

I have nothing against hunters, but I'm not a hunter.

[A]

While he may not be a hunter in the traditional sense. Branco knows how to stalk a criminal. Ten years after Charles Murray was shot and killed, Bronco picks up the old file and begins to work.

[B]

I was confused, convinced that there was somebody out there that knew something, you know, someone somewhere knew something. So I use the media a lot, and I thought, what better way than to call up the TV stations and the bigger newspapers and say, hey, I need your help.

[A]

Greg Potts is a sergeant in nearby Bay County. When he sees news reports on the bowhunter and calls in, I felt that.

[B]

A guy by the name of Ronald Brown had been the person that had murdered his bowhunter up there.

[A]

In 1993, Potts helped tie Brown, a convicted killer recently out on parole, to a murder in a neighboring county. That murder took place on the same day Charles Murray's body was found.

[B]

In my mind, he's a serial killer that got out for about three months or two months, whatever he was out for, and, you know, committed two murders. And so that's what kind of sparked a chain of events for that investigation. That's huge. That's monumental. I mean, it's like, this has got to be my guy.

[A]

Bronco's first step is to compare Ron Brown's mugshot to a sketch of the murder suspect created in 1993.

[B]

When I saw that, I'm like, oh, my goodness. I couldn't believe it. Just couldn't believe it. And then I took it one step further and I took a. I got on the Michigan Department of Corrections website and got a better picture of Mr. Brown, and it's just amazing.

[A]

Branko believes Brown is the killer. To get Brown talking, however, Bronco must go one step beyond the normal call of duty.

[B]

The advice, metaphorically speaking, you know, look at it as a love relationship, and you start playing hard to get.

[A]

This episode is sponsored by BetterHelp. It's easy to get swept up in the new year, new you thing that comes around every year. I love the opportunity to start fresh in lots of areas of my life. But in other areas, I don't necessarily need a new me. I just want a lighter me, someone who's carrying a little less self doubt and pressure. Lately, I've been working on letting go of perfectionism, that feeling that everything has to be just right before I can relax. Therapy has really helped me see where that comes from and how to move past it. That's what I love about BetterHelp. Their therapists are fully licensed in the US and follow a strict code of conduct. So you're in good hands and they do the heavy lifting when it comes to matching you with the right therapist. Just answer a short questionnaire and their System uses over 12 years of experience to find the best fit. If it's not quite right, switching is super easy. With over 30,000 therapists and more than 5 million people served globally, BetterHelp has the experience to help. Plus an average 4.9 out of 5 rating from live sessions based on over 1.7 million client reviews. If you're ready to feel a little less burdened this year, therapy through BetterHelp is a great place to start. BetterHelp makes it easy to get matched online with a qualified therapist. Sign up and get 10% off at betterhelp.com coldcase that's better H-E-L-P.com cold case homes.com knows that when it comes to home shopping, it's never just about the house or condo. It's it's about the home. And what makes a home is more than just the house or property. It's the location and neighborhood. If you have kids, it's also schools, nearby parks and transportation options. That's why homes.com goes above and beyond to bring home shoppers the in depth information they need to find the right home. And when I say in depth, I'm talking deep. Each listing features comprehensive information about the neighborhood, complete with a video guide. They also have details about local schools with test scores, state rankings and student to teacher ratio. They even have an agent directory with the sales history of each agent. So when it comes to finding a home, not just a house, this is everything you need to know, all in one place. Homes.com, we've done your homework.

[B]

From a perpetrator's perspective, it's probably a target rich area.

[A]

Detective Robert Bronco Lesneski is a hunter of sorts. Bronco's latest target, a twice convicted killer named Ron Brown.

[B]

He's a bad dude. He's a scary dude and he's a bad dude. He's psychotic. He's the kind of guy that you certainly would not want to cross paths with anywhere.

[A]

Bronco believes Brown killed 33 year old Charles Murray in the Michigan woods 10 years earlier.

[B]

So I'm putting together this circumstantial case and I'm, you know, I'm, I'm cooking it, you know, I got it going.

[A]

Bronco knows he needs more.

[B]

What it would need to put the case over the top would clearly be a confession. Ideally, I think most old cases, that's.

[A]

What it Takes Ron Brown is serving a life sentence at the Freeland Correctional Facility, where Bronco meets him.

[B]

We'd start off that he'd be really contentious, almost like he'd want to fight. He'd just, you know, just despised me. And then as time progressed, you know, he would accept me, and we'd start talking, and by the time I left, we were shaking hands. I'm breaking the ice with this guy a little bit. I know I'm making some headway with him.

[A]

Branko has taken the first critical step, establishing a rapport with the suspect. The next step is to let the convicted murderer talk about how he kills.

[B]

He'd make statements like, well, shotguns are my weapon of choice. You can easily make a kill from a long distance off and quote, I generally just leave the body there anyway, unquote. So, I mean, he's giving me all this information that is consistent with what happened to this bowhunter.

[A]

Brown is giving up a lot of information, none of which gets Detective Bronco Lesneski any closer to a confession.

[B]

Keep in mind, I'm looking at a guy that's been twice convicted of murder who's doing natural life in the prison. What incentive is there for him to confess to me?

[A]

Branko is going to need some help and turns to a couple of experts in human psychology.

[B]

Branko, I think, was looking for insight as to what kind of made this individual tick.

[A]

Doctors Robert Wolford and Michael Comer are psychologists for the Michigan State Police and represent a last best hope for Bronco.

[B]

I felt like I was kind of stymied in the investigation. Without a doubt. I felt that the focus was at that point with Ron Brown, and I was looking for some kind of a way that I could maneuver myself a little bit closer to him to get him to talk to me.

[A]

The doctors begin by reviewing Brown's criminal history, his conversations with Branko, and conversations with his own family.

[B]

Dr. Wolford, I think you said, you know, get me some intelligence information on this guy. And what I ended up doing was, unbeknownst to him, I was copying phone conversations between he and his family from his prison cell. I love you. I love you, too. And I'm sorry to put everything on you, but where else can you go right in analyzing those tapes and just basically listening to those tapes, what came through very strongly was that need for Mr. Brown to make sure that family members and I suspect even other individuals thought that he was a very important person. I needed someone I could talk to outside. But don't lose faith in me. I got One, Maria. I got one.

[A]

According to the doctors mother, Brown wasn't the only one making her son feel important. So was Bronco.

[B]

He was really feeling superior to Branko because Branko would come to visit him. He would tease Branco with part of the story, but not give Branko enough to get a conviction or a confession. And so Mr. Brown could walk away saying, I'm beating the cop.

[A]

Control is something Ron Brown craves, and the convicted killer doesn't have many people on such a short list.

[B]

I can remember you guys saying, hey, listen, Bronco, the most important person in his life is his mother. And I remember sitting in this room when you said, and the second most important person in his life may be you. And I mean, I was completely taken back by him. It just didn't seem right to me at the time. You were giving him lots and lots of attention, which he craved, but he didn't have to give anything up to get that attention.

[A]

To turn this around and put Bronco back in control, the doctor suggested using the psychology of courting.

[B]

I think the phrase Bob used was, you need to play hard to get. Exactly. Yeah. You got to start playing hard to get. That's exactly it.

[A]

The psychologists tell Branko to stop the visits to Brown, stop the phone calls, stop the correspondence and wait.

[B]

We've used as kind of metaphorically is he establishes an extremely close, almost like a love type relationship. That's how important he was to this individual. And then he just disappears out of the picture. He's gone. It's like somebody being involved with a partner for a year or so, building a relationship, and then all of a sudden they don't call him anymore.

[A]

The doctors believe Ron Brown might actually offer up a confession to Charles Murray's murder, all in the hopes of winning Bronco back.

[B]

And I can remember sitting in this room when we're talking about it, and they're actually. My colleagues are laughing at me, you know, like, well, that's crazy, you know, but that's what I did. He's sending me letters and he's telling the inspector that he wants to talk to me.

[A]

On June 1, Branko cuts off all communication with Brown. The convict takes it hard.

[B]

I will talk to you. Without a lawyer. I have nothing to hide. I waive all my rights. I mean, it was really hard to be disciplined and not go down there and talk to him.

[A]

Bronco resists the urge, and a month later, his patience pays off.

[B]

Ron Brown sends a letter to the prosecutor that says, this damn detective won't come and talk to me, get an attorney down here. I want to confess. When the prosecutor called me at home and told me that, I'm like, oh, my gosh, I just can't believe this is a room that I utilized for the interview of ron Brown.

[A]

On July 20, 2004, Bronco prepares to break the silence and talk with Ron Brown.

[B]

I sat Ron Brown's chair right here in this exact location, and I had his head against the back of the control center. I wanted him focused on me the whole time. So putting his head at the back of the control center, he's not watching people. He's not seeing any movement, nothing at all. It's just he and I in this great big room. And what I did is I took my chair and I put it right close to his so our knees were almost touching just like this. And when they brought him in the room, if you could see the fire in his eyes. He's got some deep set eyes anyway, and just they're eyes of anger. And he's coming in, and he's walking, and his arms are tight, and he's pulling up. He's got a belly band attached to the irons on his hands, and he's pulling up on it so hard that I can. And it's cutting the circulation off in his arms. I mean, he is so mad that I can just see it.

[A]

Brown is chained, cuffed, and Bronco hopes ready to talk.

[B]

So I'm thinking if it's gonna happen, it's gonna happen right here and now. It's either gonna happen or our relationship's gonna be severed, and I could potentially lose any relationship that I ever had with him for later down. Down the road in the future. So for me, it was like. It's like do or die. I don't know what set him off, and I really don't know what it was, but he screamed at me. You want it? You want it? Get your tape recorder out. Well, now my heart is beating so hard that I'm thinking my pen's gonna pop out of my chest and hit me in the eye. I mean, I was. It was just. I was really nervous. You know what this is about, correct? Yes. This is about a bowl hunter that was shot out of a tree line. Yeah. You're telling me that you want to confess to that? Yep. He was ready, Without a doubt. He was just so matter of fact. I mean, he had a story to tell, and I wasn't in charge. He was in charge. That's what he wanted me to know. How did you do that Ron, he got shot three times about 50 yards away. Three times with a 12 gauge, double buck shells and he fell out the tree. What were you doing up in that area in the first place? Just driving around someone's shoes. Why'd you shoot him? For no reason. Just shot him. You shot him for no reason? I said he was there, so I shot him. That's scary. He is a scary man.

[A]

Ron Brown pleads guilty to manslaughter and gets 20 to 30 years for the murder of Charles Murray. For Bronco, the case has earned him quite the reputation.

[B]

I look back at it now and I take some heat for it and you know, big bad Bronco and the love relationship with inmate Brown.

[A]

But to Bronco, it's just another role he needs to play to get the job done.

[B]

I mean, police officers wear the hat of a social worker. They wear the hat of a clergy person. They wear the hat of a peacekeeper, they wear the hat of a policeman. You know, and if I got to wear the hat of some estranged person from a relationship that was started out of prison because of a homicide, then you bet your bottom dollar I'm gonna do it.

[A]

Pluto TV has thousands of free movies and TV shows.

[B]

This is the mindset.

[A]

Free.

[B]

This is the mantra.

[A]

This is the time to find out. With movies like Joe dirt, pixels and 51st date.

[B]

This is awesome.

[A]

And TV shows like Survivor, SpongeBob SquarePants, the fairly odd Parents and Ghosts. Pluto TV is always free. Huzzah. Pluto TV stream now pay Never.

[B]

You're welcome.

[A]

A master murderer, Israel Keys lives between two worlds.

[B]

There's the person that everybody knows and loves, and then there's the guy who spends every waking hour planning on how he's going to kill someone.

[A]

On Mind of a Monster, the Cross Country Killer, we find out how this deadly predator went unnoticed for so long.

[B]

I've had some confessions in my history, but nothing to that detail. I'll give it glow by glow if you want.

[A]

Listen to Mind of a Monster, the Cross Country Killer. Wherever you get your podcasts.