← CounterClock
CounterClock
BONUS: Season 7 Q&A
00:42:01
Join Delia and special guest Amanda Knox as they discuss YOUR lingering questions about Season 7!
Loading summary
Transcript93 lines
- [00:03]
Sarah Koenig
Hey, Counterclock listeners, welcome to the bonus Q and A episode for season seven. I have a very special guest with me today to unpack all of your questions and go over some of the most critical parts of this season seven investigation. I followed her story for years. Please welcome Amanda Knox.
- [00:19]
Amanda Knox
Hello. It's so great to be here.
- [00:21]
Sarah Koenig
I know. We're so glad to have you. But before we kick things off, I think it's really good to do this. For listeners of Counterclock who maybe don't know about you and your story, can you give us just a little bit of a summary?
- [00:31]
Amanda Knox
Yeah. I was studying abroad in 2007 at 20 years old, and out of the blue, one of my roommates was raped and murdered in her own bedroom. And despite having nothing to do with this crime, not knowing anything about this crime, I was accused and implicated and imprisoned and convicted and sentenced to 26 years in prison. And eventually, over the course of many years, I was able to prove my innocence, but it took a long time, and in the meantime, I became the center of this true crime scandal, and that sort of informed the work that I do today. I do a lot of journalism and writing around criminal justice related issues, but also around, like, survival and resilience. And just how do you get through an experience that is so overwhelming, that takes over your life and defines who you are in a big way? So, yeah.
- [01:21]
Sarah Koenig
And so I think it's an amazing story, and that's why I'm so glad when we, like, were able to kind of, like, merge our worlds here and, like, have you on for this episode, because I do feel like, in a lot of ways, like, you and I were destined to, like, have this conversation specifically about season seven, because it has a lot of elements that I think are really reflected in your story. But also, you know, it deals with, you know, things that happen in other wrongful conviction cases where you have young people who were thrust into a law enforcement interrogation and eventually, like, a criminal justice system that they were, you know, totally unprepared to face. And really is a system, particularly here in America, that is designed to be adversarial.
- [02:00]
Amanda Knox
Absolutely.
- [02:01]
Sarah Koenig
And so, you know, you know, from listening to season seven, that this case involved five adolescent defendants and a teenage girl who were all quickly identified and questioned by law enforcement in the town of Winston Salem, North Carolina, which is my home state. And for those of you that don't know, North Carolina is in the American south, so a lot of dynamics going on there. But the murder they were suspected of being involved in was of an older black man in the city who held a pretty prominent role in that community. Nathaniel Jones was a business owner. He was a deacon in his church. He was a figure of success to a lot of black residents in that area. And he also was the grandfather of an up and coming high school basketball star named Chris Paul, whose eventual celebrity and notoriety in the NBA came to be very much an anchor point. And I think why this case received so much attention back when the crime happened in 2002, as well as throughout the years, instead of some of maybe the more nuanced details about the crime itself and the claims of innocence that the five young men who'd been convicted like, were actually making, like that kind of overshadowed some things over time.
- [03:08]
Amanda Knox
Yeah, totally. It was definitely really interesting to hear throughout the podcast all of the voices of so many people who historically have not had the opportunity to share their story or their perspective on things. And I think the media definitely played a role in the defendant's portrayal in the community. And there were clearly a lot of problems in the law enforcement's investigation back in the day. So I found it really encouraging to hear that North Carolina has that Innocence Inquiry Commission process, which really seemed to turn everything in this case upside down once they got involved for sure.
- [03:42]
Sarah Koenig
And I mean that process, right? Like their 5 year investigation was without a doubt the tipping point. And I think in these defendants post conviction fight, like, hands down, I don't think anybody has like questioned or disputed that. But I was actually just talking about this with one of the defense attorneys the other day, and I actually don't think that any of these defendants petitions for relief would be where they are today, like in the hands of a new judge after having gone through an evidentiary hearing if that whole IIC process, like, hadn't taken place. And it's interesting because listeners who wrote in for the Q and A, like, they really keyed in on this and this entity's work, specifically with regards to DNA testing and some of the physical evidence, which is obviously a great thing in this case, because we aren't talking about a case that's like, you know, the 50s, 60s, 70s, like we're, we're staying, you know, in the early 2000s. So we got several questions about the DNA, which as you know, is really focused around the tape used to bind Mr. Jones's hands and a piece of black string that was intertwined with that tape when that evidence was tested for the first time in 2019 and in 2020.
- [04:53]
Amanda Knox
So can we just. Can I interrupt you for A second, because I just wanted to pause on that for a moment and, like, emphasize we're talking about 20 years after the crime happened.
- [05:02]
Sarah Koenig
Yes. And it's funny because I was just like, oh, no, this isn't like, that old. But no. So, yes, I'm very deep in this case, so I forget. It's easy to glaze over that fact. But, yeah, I think it's important to remind folks that none of the physical evidence in this case was tested for DNA in 2002, like, prior to the trials, in 2004 or 2005 or during the appeals, which is kind of an interesting thing to me. It was only because the Innocence Inquiry Commission got involved and re examined the physical evidence and sent it off to Bode technology that DNA testing was conducted for the first time. And, like, the results were actually captured.
- [05:39]
Amanda Knox
You know, it looks like a few questions that listeners submitted asked things like, can the strong female DNA profile from the tape undergo genetic genealogy testing, or has it been submitted into codis? And then another person asked, was it compared to either of Mr. Jones's cleaning ladies? Do you know the answer to any of those questions?
- [05:58]
Sarah Koenig
So I do. Like, this is what's so great about, like, where we are now. So as far as it having been entered into codis, it has, but to date, no matches have come back for it. So I'm told, like, it's being continually resubmitted with the hopes of maybe getting a match. So TBD on that. That's kind of just how CODIS works. You have to keep going back sort of thing. But as far as that question about the cleaning ladies, I was actually able to interview both of them, and to my knowledge, their DNA has not been compared against any of the case evidence. But honestly, I think this kind of goes back to this whole thing of investigators and attorneys over the years. Like, they just never have considered those women as important, which why? Like, how they came to that conclusion because they are in the original police case file. Like, they were interviewed, or at least they were claimed to have been interviewed. I have no idea, like, the rationale behind all that or why they don't think they're important, but did you listen to the evidentiary hearing bonus episode?
- [06:55]
Amanda Knox
Yeah. Yeah. And you found both of them, right?
- [06:57]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. So, like, I was able to go to their houses, interview them, and they were both great interviews. I mean, like, how nobody thought to follow up with them until now, like, 2025 is so strange to me, but the listener who wrote with that question about their DNA, they make a good point, Because I think what the question really is is, is could the dominant female DNA profile from the tape in Blackstring, could that belong to one of the cleaning ladies? But the answer is, like, I don't know. And I guess if it was, like, hypothetically, if it was, that would be an entirely new avenue of investigation to follow. But I don't think, like, prosecutors or Winston Salem Police Department have any reason or obligation to follow up on that, because in their minds, the case is solved. Right. Like, it would have to be an effort, I think, by the defense team to really look at something like that. And it's, you know, this. It's not like defense attorneys can just go into agencies and, like, demand to handle the physical evidence themselves and, like, have it tested. There's all these sort of chain of custody things and procedural things.
- [08:03]
Amanda Knox
Oh, my God.
- [08:05]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. A lot of red tape. Yeah, it's. It's just like a huge mess that they'd have to go through. But, you know, I think the other important thing to know about this DNA from the tape is that it's a mixture of three profiles. That was information that came out, you know, definitively in the evidentiary hearing just this last January. And the majority of the mixture is that dominant female profile, which is not Jessica Black's, by the way. So it's good to clarify that for folks. And the other two profiles in the mix are both male and considered minor contributors. Of those two minor profiles, one is believed to belong to Mr. Jones himself. You know, that's what all the scientific experts so far have said. They've evaluated it and determined, like, you know, the markers on it, things like that are his. And the other minor male profile is unknown, but it is not any of the defendants, nor is it anyone that's been associated with the case so far. The tricky thing, though, that comes with this IGG sequencing question is to figure out, you know, like, the family tree for that unknown profile for the, you know, unknown male, minor contributor profile. And the dominant female is that according to BODE technology and other accredited forensics labs, mixtures of three or more DNA profiles are super hard to get usable SNP or SNP results from and do genetic genealogy. I talk about this a little bit in the show, but the labs right now say that, like, they have the best SNP results when they're dealing with a sample that has mixtures of two or less DNA profiles. So it's like, we're just so close.
- [09:39]
Amanda Knox
It's a waiting game. The technology has to get there.
- [09:42]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. And that Is like, it's hard as an investigative journalist, like, for me to accept that, because you really just want to see everything out to its final conclusion. But, yeah, you're right. It's just a matter of time until the science catches up. But you know something, and this is what I really wanted to talk with you about is, I think, something else that, you know, the DNA results in this case reveal is the fact that as sensitive as the testing methods are today, none of the testing has revealed the defendant's DNA or Jessica Black's DNA.
- [10:15]
Amanda Knox
Right.
- [10:15]
Sarah Koenig
On anything. Like, nothing. So, which I think it goes to show you that their claims of not being there at the crime scene when the murder occurred, like, there's some credibility to that.
- [10:28]
Amanda Knox
Absolutely. Because it's not just about what was there, it's about what wasn't that's equally important. And this is a huge point in my case, because I was acquitted when the supposed DNA that linked me to the murder of my roommate was debunked by independent DNA experts. And what few people ever learned is that even that, like, bogus DNA trace was supposedly found on a knife that was taken at random from the kitchen drawer in my boyfriend's house, like, on the other side of town. So there never was any DNA trace of me, bogus or not, and ever found in the room where Meredith was raped and murdered. So, again, it is important to note that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but it's equally important to recognize that it's incredibly easy to leave DNA traces, and it's almost impossible to carry out a rape and a murder without leaving traces. So. And in fact, you know, the actual killer, Rudy Gaday, left copious traces of himself there. So all of this to say that it is certainly meaningful not to find someone's DNA when you would expect to. And also that lack of evidence isn't conclusive proof of innocence. And when you have a false confession involved, it becomes really, really tricky to prove innocence.
- [11:47]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. And I think that's what kind of brings me to the, like, what is the whole crux of this case, which is the false confessions? You know, like, what did they say that doesn't align with reality? Why did they say what they said to police and, like, what was really going on in their interrogation rooms?
- [12:05]
Amanda Knox
Right, Absolutely.
- [12:06]
Sarah Koenig
And I tried to emphasize this a lot in this show. It's not just the boys who claim they were coerced into making a false confession. It's Jessyca, too. Right. The witness. And there are numerous instances in her interrogation when she's 16 years old. And during her testimony at the two trials where she changes her story and gets critical crime scene details wrong, one listener who submitted a question even pointed out that in Jessica's initial confession, where she claimed she'd overheard Mr. Jones's murder taking place, they couldn't understand why no neighbors who all said they were within earshot of the house, like, around that same time, like, they didn't also hear what she said she heard. Like, it's right. You have one ear witness and none others, but we know there were others there.
- [12:51]
Amanda Knox
So another instance of incongruent facts.
- [12:54]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. And I think from listening to, you know, Jessica's recantations since 2019, which she's recanted, you know, several times, all very consistent, it's clear that all six of the teens were under duress in their interrogation rooms. And because of that, their confessions conflict with one another. They conflict with eyewitness statements, and they conflict with the physical evidence at the crime scene. It's pretty clear that, you know, maximization techniques were used. You know, yelling, screaming, intimidation tactics, you know, all around threats of the death penalty, isolation, really common things that we see in false confession claims. And I mean, like, even the police officers who were involved in these interrogations, like, they have admitted in depositions and they have admitted on, you know, under oath that these things, you know, actually happened. So I think it's important at this point it's worth, like, I think us parking here for just a little bit, because I know a big part of your story involves being interrogated, as you said, as a young person, and having to deal with the dynamics of, you know, law enforcement accusing you of murder and conspiracy. And, you know, I think it's good for people that are listening to know, like, now that you're on the other side of that, I know it's something you've spoken about in other spaces, and I really just want to kind of get your thoughts, you know, after you've listened to season seven and you kind of hear these specific defendants. But before we do that, let's take a quick break.
- [14:27]
Amanda Knox
So the issue of false confessions is really close to my heart. The course of police interrogation I was put through remains one of the most terrifying experience, maybe the most terrifying experience of my life. And the false admission I was pressured into signing led to everything going awry in the entire investigation. And I'll be honest, like, I blamed myself for a long time for the outcome of that interrogation. I thought it was because my Italian was so bad or that I couldn't communicate well enough. But eventually I learned through the help of false confessions experts like Dr. Saul Kassen, that what the police had done to me was actually a method which is quite similar to the Reid technique here in the US that was designed to relentlessly pressure me to confess and really, like, I never stood a chance. Like, this technique is effective at getting people to confess whether they are guilty or not. And it does so not just through the maximizing language that we talked about earlier, which ultimately comes down to various forms of bullying, but importantly also through minimization as well. So when police positioned me as a witness and not a suspect, which is the same thing that the NYPD did to the Central Park Five, like, they pressured me to implicate someone else, but in so doing, they placed me at the crime scene and made me culpable as well. And they did that by telling me that my memories were wrong. Like, they incessantly nitpicked my memories until I lost faith in them and then introduced this new idea that I had trauma induced amnesia from having witnessed something so horrific that my brain blacked it out. And I know it's hard for people to imagine how you could be convinced of something that sounds so ludicrous, but consider all the factors that made me vulnerable to this. Police coercion. I was in a foreign country where I was not fluent in the language. I was in shock at the fact that my roommate had just been murdered, and now my house was a crime scene and there was a killer on the loose, which was super scary. I had no idea that if. If he was targeting the people who lived in the house. So I was really depending on the police for help, for emotional stability, for everything. They turned my boyfriend of a week against me through his own course of interrogation, and then turned themselves into my only support system. And given the fact that I had already been questioned for over 50 hours over the previous days, I was just exhausted physically and emotionally. And in that final interrogation, when I was deprived of sleep and questioned into the early hours of the morning and I didn't have bathroom breaks and food, and I had my period, and I, like, they refused me a lawyer. You know, they wouldn't even let me answer the phone when my mom called. All of this made me extremely fragile. And then they did the most damaging but sadly common thing that they do in police interrogations, which is they lied to me about the evidence. They told me that they had hard evidence proving I was at my house the night of the murder and not at my boyfriend's. Apartment, which is what I remembered. And so because I couldn't imagine what the evidence could be, and because I couldn't imagine that they would lie to me, I assumed, you know, wrongly, that they were bound by some ethical code not to lie. It broke my grip on reality and it made me think, you know, it made me believe, really. And in fact, just long enough for me to sign those statements that I had this trauma induced amnesia, that I couldn't trust my actual memories, you know, that and all the screaming and slapping from the police that we've talked about. So, like, I actually did a big, deep dive into all these issues recently in this miniseries on my own podcast, Labyrinths, called False Confessions that I put out. I talk to people who are put through interrogations and experts like Saul Kasson who have done all this critical research into the psychology behind it. And so coming to understand these issues has led me to advocate for banning police deception during interrogations because it's a leading cause of false confessions. And youths, like the defendants in season seven of Counterclock, are particularly vulnerable to this form of gaslighting. And some states have had luck passing bills to ban police deception when minors are being interrogated. But that's just a first step. And also that's just some states, most of them still don't have laws to protect youths. And, you know, I was 20, and so even those laws wouldn't have protected me.
- [19:01]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. And I think, you know, it's also important to bring up, I think while we're talking about this, that it's very hard for the general public to reconcile with someone confessing to a crime, even if coerced, and then retracting that confession. It's almost like people feel the need for that person to prove they're innocent. Right. Oh, yeah. So I think a perfect example, we had a few listeners who submitted questions asking what every defendant in this case was doing at the time of the crime. You know, like, what were their alibis? Is really the question, do they have witnesses who can corroborate their whereabouts? Which the answer is yes. You know, their alibis are one another. And Jessica, who says most of them were with her except for Rashawn, who was home asleep. But it's as if people need to know where the accused were. Right. Like, they need X, Y and Z in order to feel okay about believing them.
- [19:55]
Amanda Knox
Right. They've passed the point of no return.
- [19:58]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah, yeah. And it's so. It is so obvious. And I think that the questions that came in, like, I don't fault These listeners, I'm just saying it's, you know, that's an example of that. But the problem with that kind of thinking and the boy's lawyer, even they mentioned this over and over in their interviews, is that even when the public is given overwhelming information that indicates these defendants weren't there, people still feel like they need to know every little thing about their whereabouts that day. When in reality, like all of those things should matter. When we're dealing with a situation where law enforcement is alleged to have coerced confessions out of these guys, like they're. The things are separate. It's just such a weird.
- [20:39]
Amanda Knox
Yeah, that burden of proof shifts, right? This is a thing that's so troubling about false confessions because once police coerce someone into a confession, you're right, the burden of proof in the minds of pretty much everyone, the police, the jury, the public, it shifts because we all have trouble understanding how someone could confess to a crime they didn't commit. And so the innocent person is put into this near impossible position of not just having to prove that they aren't guilty, but to prove that they are in fact innocent and to prove that their confession was the result of coercion, which is often difficult, if not impossible to do because police often don't record their interrogations and as they conveniently didn't do for me. And so if the only evidence against you is a confession, it doesn't help to point out that your DNA isn't there. So often, even when DNA identifies who actually committed the crime, like the DNA that is there, law enforcement and the public will double down, insisting that the confession must be true, however much they have to contort their theory to make the evidence fit. And my own case is a really good example of these prosecutorial mental gymnastics, and it's sadly common. You know, the Central Park Five case I mentioned before is another good example of this, because the DNA eventually identified a man named Matias Reyes as the rapist. And none of the Central Park Five's DNA was ever found on the victim or even in the vicinity of the victim. But still many people persist in believing that they all did the crime together and that Matias Reyes, who was a serial rapist who'd raped other women by himself for some reason, teamed up with five boys he'd never met to rape someone and then conveniently only left his DNA traces. It's ludicrous, but people put it forward because that's how powerful confession evidence is.
- [22:31]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah, for sure. The next couple of listeners questions, I think you Know, kind of moving from that. Cause there is a lot to cover with this is I think we can tackle. And they all revolve around the cab company calls. In fact, it looks like the majority of the questions that were submitted for this episode were nearly all about Willard Cab Company. Which just goes to show you that like that's another powerful piece in this, I would not say equally as powerful as the false confession.
- [22:56]
Amanda Knox
Yeah, yeah. Most asked question was it was mentioned that there were two cab companies in Winston Salem. Was the second cab company ever looked into. And did anyone ever check to see if they might have picked up a fare at Mr. Jones's house?
- [23:11]
Sarah Koenig
Right. So yes, there were two well known taxi companies that serviced Winston Salem in 2002. I don't know if there were more than that. I'm sure there were. Like we're talking about a pretty decently sized city. But I know at least that there were two major ones that everyone used. And one was Willard Cab Company, which I dive into pretty extensively in the show. I had many, many late days in public libraries, you know, with phone books and whatnot. But the other one is Bluebird Taxi Company. According to Miranda Ramirez, who was one of Willard Cab Company's call operators at the time, both Bluebird and Willard were owned by the same family. And I think she actually said it was two brothers that owned those two companies. But as far as whether Bluebird may have received similar calls that night or also sent a cab to Mr. Jones's house, I don't know the answer to that question. That business's records were never obtained or archived by the police. And no one that I know of from Bluebird ever testified at the trials or anything like that. So I think Willard Cab Company is really the company that everyone is focused on and for good reason. Right. I mean, those flurry of calls that came in from a person asking for a cab to be sent to Mr. Jones's home after he was killed, but before anyone knew that he was dead? They seem extremely significant.
- [24:29]
Amanda Knox
Yeah. You know, I saw another question that came in that asked if maybe the calls could just be a red herring or like a neighbor who just didn't want to get involved. But that doesn't feel like that would be the case.
- [24:42]
Sarah Koenig
No, not in my opinion. I mean, if the calls had occurred any other time that day. Right. Like I would be more inclined to write them off as a red herring. But the fact that they happened back to back in the exact window of time that we know Mr. Jones was attacked and no one had found him yet. I think it's just obvious that they're connected to the crime in some way or the Greater Moravia street situation that day. And I do think that they have a high potential of being connected directly to the perpetrator or perpetrators of this crime.
- [25:17]
Amanda Knox
Yeah. Another question about a possible red herring. Was, is it possible the shoe print and light bulb lead is a red herring? Maybe the print was already on the hood.
- [25:28]
Sarah Koenig
Amanda, when I tell you that I have literally spiraled on this for days, I'm not kidding. So it's a very good argument that the shoe impressions on the hood of Mr. Jones's car got there after he pulled the vehicle into the carport. Right. And, like, he's getting the mail and that the shoe prints were deposited by the. The killer or killers.
- [25:51]
Amanda Knox
Right.
- [25:51]
Sarah Koenig
You know, by someone, you know, jumping on the hood and walking across. But I had to ask the question, like, why would someone jump on the hood? And, like, how did they have time to do that? Like, I know crimes can happen very quickly, but that is what I can't wrap my mind around is, like, the why, if they tampered with the light, why did they do that?
- [26:11]
Amanda Knox
Right.
- [26:12]
Sarah Koenig
And then that leads to the question of, are the impressions even connected to the carport lights being being partially unscrewed? Maybe. Probably. Like, it is just one of those things that I can just dwell on forever. But there's also this other interesting detail, which is the fact that Mr. Jones owned an auto service station. Right. And a very busy auto service station at that. So I think that there's always this theory that that shoe print got on his car well before his murder, perhaps even that day at his store, and that the impressions have nothing to do with the crime. I mean, it's just an interesting sort of comparative environment when you're looking at that evidence to see, well, actually, that. That could have happened there.
- [26:56]
Amanda Knox
Right.
- [26:56]
Sarah Koenig
So do I think the shoe impressions are a red herring to this listener who asked this question? No. Maybe. I don't know. It's an unanswerable. What I can say confidently, though, is that, you know, whatever relationship that they have to the crime scene in crime, the one thing that we'll never know with any certainty is whose foot was in the shoe that left them. And, you know, we've been through the Innocence Inquiry Commission, we've been through the three judge panel, we've been through the evidential hearing, and, like, that's just not a question we can ever know. So I think that's kind of where I have to Leave that.
- [27:34]
Amanda Knox
Yeah, yeah. Maybe it's just the best way to.
- [27:37]
Sarah Koenig
Leave that one is like, I know and it doesn't. And the thing that's important to me, right. Is it that is good and bad for particularly Sean Banner. Right. Who's like this Prince, always been tied to in a way. So good and bad, but kind of just a neutral thing at this point.
- [27:55]
Amanda Knox
Right.
- [27:57]
Sarah Koenig
The last couple of questions, they seem to have been pretty tailored in theme, I'd say, which is other possible suspects, which is, you know.
- [28:06]
Amanda Knox
Yeah, it's interesting there were a handful of questions about this topic from listeners and it kind of goes back to what we were discussing earlier, which is people have a very hard time not knowing who committed a crime.
- [28:20]
Sarah Koenig
Right.
- [28:20]
Amanda Knox
You know, like we, we need a suspect, a face and a name. Some kind of resolution, some kind of answer. And this impulse leads to a lot of wrongful convictions.
- [28:31]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. And I think, you know, when you boil it all down, like open ended mysteries are never popular, but that's life, right? Like, not. This is, this is reality of the world that we live in. Which is why I want to tread lightly here because I know that, you know, neither of us is in the business of pointing fingers at folks. So I'm going to keep my responses very respectful of people. So with that approach, it looks like someone asked, what about Mr. Jones employees? Did anyone question any of them? What I'll say in response to that is based off what I know from having read the police case files. Just a handful of folks who hung out or did work for Mr. Jones were actually questioned. In the podcast, I mentioned that his brother Reginald, who had a prior criminal record, was not one of those people, which was interesting. But Terrence Jones, Mr. Jones's nephew, who he took home after work on the evening of the crime, was interviewed. But other than that, like, I didn't see any mechanics or clerks or whoever were ever interviewed.
- [29:35]
Amanda Knox
Was it believed that this crime was connected to Mr. Jones's business that, you know of?
- [29:39]
Sarah Koenig
Not that I could find. I think the extent that law enforcement and prior defense attorneys considered that important was mostly with respect to the why for this crime. You know, with the meaning the motive being, you know, robbery, that kind of thing. It's always been assumed that whoever did this, they knew Mr. Jones personally or at least knew his normal habits. So they had some understanding that he was a guy who would frequently like, kept large sums of cash on him and that he, like, would come home on Fridays with the profits from his business for the week. Week. So it would make sense that the killer or killers had some idea of, like, how successful and well known his shop was. But whether the killer or killers were, like, disgruntled ex employees or, like a customer or something like that, I think that would really just be speculation, and even speculation that I'm not even sure how much the police back in 2002 considered, because nothing was ever developed to determine that one way or the other. And that's mostly due to the fact that the police didn't really look in that direction. I mean, they got all of the defendants so quickly in this case and narrowed in on them, like, within days that any other lead, like whether this could be related to his business that was not followed up on or dug into.
- [30:53]
Amanda Knox
That's classic tunnel vision. And it happened in my case and in so many wrongful convictions cases, especially because of that false confession. Right. It's really just a particular form of confirmation bias, because once police have their theory, they seek out information to confirm it, and they ignore information that disconfirms it. And so because. Because confessions are usually sufficient to convince a jury and get a guilty verdict, they are just not motivated to keep looking at the evidence or looking at alternative theories.
- [31:23]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah, and I think, you know, tunnel vision, that's a term that has been used often in this case, you know, by the defense. And because I think that a lot of other, you know, quote unquote possible suspects were not even on law enforcement's radar. Like, it just gets excluded from that tunnel. And in my investigation, I think I uncovered a few folks that are worth taking a closer second look at. I wouldn't go as far as saying that they are, you know, this label alternate suspect, because I do think that comes with quite a bit of weight.
- [31:53]
Amanda Knox
Oh, yeah.
- [31:54]
Sarah Koenig
They're just folks who I know police overlooked but maybe shouldn't have.
- [31:59]
Amanda Knox
So is Marcus one of those people?
- [32:01]
Sarah Koenig
He is, but only for the reasons that I like State in the podcast, which are, you know, his different stories, mostly about where he was on the night of the crime and who he was with. Jed is also another person I believe needs to be interviewed again. Then there's also, like, you know, several folks that police had been looking into for, like, string. Like a string of robberies that had been going on in that neighborhood in the south side of Winston Salem. Like, this is right before Mr. Jones was killed. Christine Muma Rayshanna, Nathaniel's lawyer, has questions about a guy named Brian Lindsay, who I talk a little bit about. And in the season, so, you know, there's a number of folks that I think were not scrutinized enough. And the fact is, is that all of these people just completely fell off of police's radar, like we just said, because they became so narrowly focused on Nathaniel Rayshawn, Darrell, Jermal and Christopher. And then, you know, maybe even Jessica to an extent.
- [32:55]
Amanda Knox
Right.
- [32:55]
Sarah Koenig
Like early on, suspect, witness. What is she gonna be?
- [32:58]
Amanda Knox
Right. Well, what about the painter, Claude Walker, and his fiance Gloria? A few listeners asked if they were ever ruled out with DNA.
- [33:06]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. So I think it's a good question. I personally don't think that either of them were involved or touched the tape used to bind Mr. Jones. As far as their DNA being ruled in or out, I wanna say no, just based on what I've seen from the case record. And I think, you know, Gloria's particularly of interest to people. Right. Cause she's. She's a woman, and we know we have that dominant female profile. I don't think it would hurt at this point to try and rule either of them in or out.
- [33:30]
Amanda Knox
Right.
- [33:31]
Sarah Koenig
I mean, in my mind, I kind of see it as one of those, like, let's eliminate as many people as possible to really get to the truth. And I think the pursuit of the truth is really what everyone should be after at this point. I don't think that either of them are still living. But, you know, there's ways to make DNA sample collection happen, right? So that's not something that science has to catch up with. Like, that's just a matter of going out and wanting to do it. How useful it would be in getting their DNA. Probably not much, like I said, for the. For the reasons I just said. But I know that their whereabouts in their story are verified by other things that kind of make it impossible for them to have been involved. Just knowing what is accounted for their movements and where they went and phone calls they made and things like that. But I do, like, where the listener who asked that question's like, head is at. Like, they're. They're like a mini me, and I'm kind of loving it. I wish, you know, law enforcement had been thinking the same way in 2002, but, you know, it just didn't happen. Something else I want to mention, though, before we go, and I think this just really speaks to the power of what we're doing and the impact that shows like this have on listeners. So in the evidentiary hearing episode that just came out recently, Jessica Black, she read for me, like, a message that she had received, a DM that she had received from a listener of the podcast after it came out, who basically told her, you know, in very harsh terms, that what she did by lying was terrible and that the community, like, hated her for what she did. Like, she gets a lot of hate on social media, media. And after Jessica, like, read that on the podcast episode, the person who wrote to her, like, that pretty terrible message actually emailed me through the show's inbox, and I kind of want to read this verbatim their response. So they said, quote, hello, my name is Nicole. I was the one who sent the message to Jessica that she read on the bonus episode of Counterclock. I was wondering if somehow you could get this apology to her. She understandably so blocked me after I sent the message that she read. And then this is this person's message to Jessica. Dear Jessica, I'd like to apologize for the message I sent you when I was so upset. I remember hearing about this case about eight years ago, and it made me so angry back then, and it still angers me. I realize I let that anger be pointed towards you. However, it really should have been with the Winston Salem police. I was triggered because I felt like you were playing a victim. But after more consideration, I realized you are also a victim. So I wanted to apologize for sending that message when I was so angry. It's clear you feel guilty, and I'm sorry for adding on to that with my words. There should be more forgiveness in this world, and I wasn't being very forgiving. I hope you, Nathaniel, Rashawn, Darrell, RIP Christopher, and Jermal are able to find peace and healing after all of this. I wish you the best.
- [36:16]
Amanda Knox
Wow.
- [36:17]
Sarah Koenig
So that's amazing, right?
- [36:19]
Amanda Knox
Amazing.
- [36:19]
Sarah Koenig
But then me being this, like, conduit, I was like, well, now I have to get this to Jessica Black, of course. So I forwarded that message to Jessica, and she actually wrote me back at, like, 2 in the morning.
- [36:31]
Amanda Knox
Wow.
- [36:31]
Sarah Koenig
And I'm gonna just read you her whole response because it's also very touching. So Jessica said, quote, thank you so much. That really made my evening. I'm so glad that your podcast truly helped someone see what really went on all those years ago and that it wasn't just some white girl playing victim. I never considered myself a victim throughout all of this. I was being told so many times that I was a victim as well. That may have got to me a tad. And I still don't see myself as one of the victims, especially considering what was taken from each of the fellas and their families or the biggest victim of all. Mr. Jones. And the fact that his killer or killers are still at large and the family has still not received the justice that they so very much deserve. But thanks again for passing the message on for Nicole. I truly needed to hear that finally someone somewhat understood.
- [37:19]
Amanda Knox
Ugh, that's so powerful and also awesome that you got to be a part of the process of having to, like, having a complete 180 about how they feel towards someone like Jessica. I think you mentioned this at the end of the evidentiary hearing episode, but what is the next step in this case? Where do things go from here?
- [37:41]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. So right now, literally, as of this recording. So let's keep it in the moment, I guess. Yeah. The defendant's motions for appropriate relief are in the hands of Forsyth County Superior Court Judge Robert Brody. And he's going to make his ruling any day, hopefully. I mean, you know, these post conviction cases, right. Like, they can go a couple weeks, months, you know, over a year before judges, you know, issue their rulings. But what's interesting to me is that he really just has to rule in favor of one of the defendant's claims. So they have multiple claims within their mars. And so if he does just one of those, a new trial could be ordered or the charges could be dropped or overturned or, like convictions overturned, which. It's really interesting that that could all be triggered. But for now we just wait, which is hard.
- [38:27]
Amanda Knox
Yeah. You know, post conviction hearings are incredibly powerful, but also a waiting game because nothing moves quickly.
- [38:34]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. And I honestly, I can't even, like, in your case too, when you're, like, dealing overseas as well. Like, that's just. I think that's interesting just to situate, like, the American justice system versus other justice systems. Like, it's all so different and the processes are just.
- [38:48]
Amanda Knox
Yes, that's what they all have in common.
- [38:51]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. Right. So based on everything, though, I observed about Judge Brody in the evidentiary hearing, like, he was paying attention.
- [38:59]
Amanda Knox
That's great.
- [39:00]
Sarah Koenig
He was taking notes. He was extremely thorough. He was, you know, questioning kind of both sides as they presented. And he's. He was very well versed in the law. And I think probably the biggest thing was he was just very curious, which in post conviction, what would normal people would consider, like, a boring hearing? Like this judge was. It was not boring for him, you know, and that curiosity, I think, is also what makes a great trier of fact in such a nuanced case. So, you know, I do think that the case is truly in the best place it can be at this point. And I'm really I'm just looking forward to, like, whatever happens next.
- [39:35]
Amanda Knox
Yeah, me too.
- [39:36]
Sarah Koenig
And I'm glad again that you were here. I wanna thank you so much for coming on this episode with me and being willing to get into the weeds a little bit.
- [39:44]
Amanda Knox
Oh, yeah.
- [39:45]
Sarah Koenig
You know, your perspective of what you have been through, what you continue to advocate for, I think is really refreshing for me. I know it's gonna be refreshing for the listeners. So tell me a little bit about what you're gonna be up to this year and, you know, where people can find you.
- [39:59]
Amanda Knox
Oh, awesome. Yeah. So I have a new book coming out at the end of March called My Search for Meaning. It's about the difficulty of rebuilding a life after a wrongful conviction and the surreal journey of traveling back to Italy face to face with my prosecutor. So that's available for pre order now. And you can also find me each week on my podcast, Labyrinths, where I tell stories of how people get lost and find their way again. I'm on Instagram @amamaknox on blueskymanandanox.com and you can find all of my work@amanda knox.com.
- [40:33]
Sarah Koenig
I love it. Thank you. Amazing. And also, I want to let listeners in on something a little special. Right. Like you're going to be actually hosting an audio channel podcast, right?
- [40:42]
Amanda Knox
Yeah.
- [40:43]
Sarah Koenig
So give us a little teaser about that because I know, like, the inside scoop, but I want everyone else to know.
- [40:48]
Amanda Knox
Yeah. So this is. This is so exciting. I'm gonna be hosting season two of three, which is about three families impacted by one of the most notorious murders in Hawaii history. The murder of Dana Ireland and the three men wrongly convicted of that murder, Ian and Sean Schweitzer and Frank Pauline Jr. It's a story that has a lot of personal resonance for me in a lot of ways, and not only because it's. It parallels a lot of things in my own case, but I was actually in Hawaii when Ian was released from prison. And so I had the honor of being the first exoneree he ever met in freedom. And so it's this twisting, maddening, emotional, gripping story. And I hope all of you come and check it out.
- [41:30]
Sarah Koenig
Yeah. And like, you just sang that, like, again, Destiny, you were destined for this.
- [41:35]
Amanda Knox
I know. I don't know. It's audio Checking Destiny.
- [41:37]
Sarah Koenig
It's just like, amazing. I will definitely be subscrib counterclock listeners. You guys do the same. Don't miss the trailer for season two of three, Murder in Vacation Land, when it drops on March 3rd. First two episodes will release the week after that on March 13th. Be sure to follow that show and this one wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks for listening.