← Crime House 24/7
Loading summary
Transcript18 lines
- [00:01]
A
Hi listeners, it's Vanessa. Before today's episode, I want to take a brief moment to tell you about a show from Crime House's sister studio Rewind that I know you'll love. It's called Government that Doesn't Suck, hosted by professors Lindsay Cormack and Greg Jackson from History that Doesn't Suck. Ever wonder how the weather forecast on your phone is so accurate? Or how your mail still gets across the country for less than a dollar? Or who actually built the highway you drove on this morning? Each episode tells the surpr of an American institution that you'll never look at the same way again. Listen to and follow Government that Doesn't Suck every other Monday on Apple Podcasts and Spotify or watch video episodes on YouTube.
- [00:55]
B
This is Crime House.
- [00:58]
A
Hi listeners. This afternoon I'm bringing you an episode of one of my other podcasts that I host with my friend and forensic psychologist Dr. Tristan Engels called Serial Killers and Murderous Minds. On the show, we go deep into the psychology of history's most chilling murderers. I have part one of this week's episode for you. Now we take a look at a killer from 1884 who started targeting black female domestic servants in Austin, Texas. The case remains unsolved to this day. To Hear Part 2 follows serial killers and Murderous Minds on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts.
- [01:39]
B
Ready to level up? Chumba Casino is your playbook to fun. It's free to play with no purchase necessary. Enjoy hundreds of online social games like blackjack, slots and solitaire anytime, anywhere with fresh releases every week. Whether you are at home or on the go. Let Chumba Casino bring the excitement to you. Plus get free daily login bonuses and a free welcome bonus. To join now for your chance to redeem some serious prizes, play Chumpa Casino today. No purchase necessary VGW Group VOIP board prohibited by law 21/TNCs apply
- [02:11]
A
In 1884, the city of Austin, Texas was booming. A new State capitol building was under construction and the University of Texas had recently opened its doors. People were moving into the city at high rates, looking for opportunity. At the same time, it had been less than 20 years since slavery was outlawed. Racism was still deeply woven into everyday life. Austin's black residents were often pushed into low paying domestic jobs, while wealthy white families held most of the city's power and influence. Not only that, but local police struggled to keep up with the city's rapid growth, which meant they weren't prepared for the horrific and sudden events of December 30th, 1884. That night, Austin was in the midst of a brutal cold snap. Snow blanketed the ground as 25 year old Molly Smith returned home from a long day. She was a cook for a wealthy family, the Halls. Molly was African American. Like many black women in Texas at the time, she worked as a domestic servant and lived in a small apartment behind her employer's family home. Molly's boyfriend, Walter Spencer, lived in the apartment with her. Molly had only been working for the hall family for about a month, so the couple had just gotten settled into their new home together. They snuggled into bed that night and the next morning when Walter woke up, their domestic bliss had been replaced with a nightmare. It was just before dawn when Walter opened his eyes. He was in immediate and intense pain. Soon he realized he was badly injured. Disoriented, Walter tried to understand what could have happened. He scanned the room and noticed blood splatter on the walls. He looked around for Molly but didn't see her anywhere. Terrified, Walter let out a blood curdling scream. Members of the hall family came running. They were shocked to see how badly beaten he was. Walter said he believed someone must have attacked in the night and that he lost consciousness. But more importantly, he had no idea where Molly was or if she was okay. The Halls rushed Walter to the hospital, then began their search for Molly. A few Hours later, around 9am, a servant at a neighboring home discovered her body in their backyard. The police were immediately called. When officers arrived, the scene was horrifying. Molly's face had been beaten so badly she was barely recognizable. Her nightgown was torn apart and she'd sustained a serious head wound. Molly's skull was nearly split down the middle, which made the police think the attacker had used an axe.
- [04:57]
C
Molly and Walter were very vulnerable here. Molly was a black woman working as a domestic servant during a period of enormous social change. Slavery may have been abolished legally, but prejudice, resentment and racial violence doesn't just disappear overnight. At the same time, that doesn't necessarily mean that this murder was racially motivated. She may have simply been perceived as an accessible and vulnerable victim. But predatory offenders in particular tend to seek opportunities where they can maintain control. And there are very few circumstances more vulnerable than being asleep in your own home. And one of the most important details here is that both victims were attacked, but Molly sustained the lethal injuries. So Walter may have been a secondary victim, not someone that the offender necessarily came there to kill. But if he was going to be able to take Molly out of her home without waking him, he needed to Ensure that walter wouldn't be able to stop him, Alert others, or identify him. So rendering him unconscious would be a way to do that. And the severe of molly's injuries May also tell us something about the offender's state of mind. Extreme violence can sometimes reflect Intense anger, Personal grievance, or just a need to completely dominate their victim.
- [06:23]
A
What do you think about the fact that molly's body was found somewhere else? It was taken from their room.
- [06:29]
C
I think that the most likely explanation Is a practical one. The offender has no way of knowing how long Walter's going to remain unconscious. And an attack with an axe Requires quite a bit of force. It's violent, it's messy, and it's noisy. And every minute that they remain inside her residence Increases the risk of being interrupted or identified. So by moving molly outside, he was likely creating more time and opportunity to carry out the attack, While reducing the risk of walter regaining consciousness or neighbors becoming aware of what was happening. And it's also nighttime, so the darkness would also provide some kind of concealment and make it easier for them to escape as someone approached. But from a behavioral standpoint, this isn't unusual. And in this particular incidence, it's not surprising he chose to do that.
- [07:18]
A
As police analyzed the scene, they pieced together a theory of what had happened the night before. First, they found signs of a violent break in at the apartment. One of the windows was shattered, and bloody handprints were smeared across the doorway. Then, since molly's body had been found outside in the snow, partially naked, Officers believed she'd been attacked inside her home. But before the assailant dragged her outside and killed her, Maybe so they could see better in the moonlight. From there, investigators couldn't help but notice Another crucial detail. The fact that walter had been injured badly enough to lose consciousness, but he survived. In their eyes, they thought this could mean walter was the attacker and had staged things to make it seem like he was a victim. Their suspicions only worsened when they questioned walter. And he couldn't give any meaningful description of the attacker. In fact, walter barely remembered any Any details from that night. To the police, his memory loss seemed a little too convenient. But there wasn't any evidence linking him to the murder. And suspicion quickly fell on another man. One of molly's former boyfriends, William brooks. William worked as a bartender At a local saloon near the hall family's home. Police wondered if he'd become jealous after molly moved on with walter, and if that jealousy had spiraled into rage. They took william into custody, and he quickly provided an alibi. He said he'd been at a bar the night of the attack. When investigators looked into William's story, it checked out, so they let him go. Given the limited forensic tools at the time, this would become an early pattern in the investigation. Police making arrests based on suspicion rather than hard evidence. All the police had to go on were witness statements, basic autopsies, and whatever physical clues they found at the scene.
- [09:09]
C
What's frustrating is that even though this was happening in the 1880s, the same underlying problem exists. Whenever investigators have limited evidence, there's always tremendous pressure to identify a suspect quickly, especially for a horrific crime like this. And that can sometimes lead investigators to focus on the person who seems most plausible rather than the person most supported by the evidence. We talked a lot about this last week in our episodes on the Mad Butcher, A depression era case, though not entirely modern day. But going back to William, he's a logical first step. We know that current and former intimate partners are statistically common suspects in violent crimes against women. So it's not unreasonable to investigate William. But there are real risks when suspicion starts to drive the investigation. Instead of evidence, for example, that can also shape the real suspect's behavior, they are likely to become more emboldened because there is little physical evidence tying them to the crime or there are no consequences. And then there are risks of suspecting the wrong person because an arrest is not evidence of guilt. Especially in an era before DNA, fingerprints, surveillance footage, or forensic testing, investigators often had to start with the basics. Who had motive, opportunity, or a connection to the victim. And sometimes that points them in the right direction, but sometimes it doesn't. And that's why corroboration is so important. And in this case, they arrested William first. They got his alibi, which they then independently verified, and then they let him go, which is how it should be done. Only police can arrest on probable cause first, which doesn't stop the potential damage to a person's reputation when it turns out that that person is actually innocent.
- [10:58]
A
Well, with practically zero evidence to go off of, police hoped Molly's murder had been an isolated tragedy. But in a fast growing city like Austin, there were plenty of dark corners, a killer to disappear into, and plenty of opportunities to strike again. On May 6, 1885, Eliza Shelley spent the day working as a cook and domestic servant for a wealthy family known as the Johnsons. Eliza was in her early 30s and lived with her three young children in what was known as a freedman's settlement, a neighborhood largely made up of formerly enslaved people. And their families. After the Civil War, these communities were often overcrowded, poorly lit and severely under resourced, making it easy for someone with evil intentions to move through unnoticed. And that evening, as Eliza put her children to bed, she had no idea that danger was lurking. Once her kids were tucked in, Eliza fell asleep in her bed. The next morning, her children awoke to find her gone. They immediately went outside to look for her and. And that's when they spotted a blood soaked bed cover on the ground. When they pulled back the COVID the children found their mother's deceased body.
- [12:17]
D
We all belong outside. We're drawn to nature. It calls to us. Whether it's the recorded sounds of the ocean we doze off to or the succulents that adorn our homes, Nature makes all of our lives richer, calmer, and frankly, better. Despite all this, we often go about our busy lives removed from it. But the outdoors is closer than we realize. With alltrails, you can discover trails nearby or trails worth traveling to and explore confidently with offline maps and on trail navigation. Whether you're looking for a laid back walk with family or something more adventurous to get your heart pumping, Alltrails gives you the tools you need to get out there and find your outside. Download the free app today and make the most of your summer with alltrails.
- [13:17]
A
Their screams brought neighbors running, and before long, police had another disturbing crime on their hands. Like Molly Smith, Eliza's head had been nearly split open, an injury that appeared consistent with an ax. Police also noticed stab wounds above her ear and near her eyes. They could hardly believe that they were dealing with yet another brutal murder, and they feared that, just like before, they'd have no leads. However, officers soon uncovered some crucial information. First, they noticed a trail of bare footprints leading away from the body, which they believed likely belonged to Eliza's killer. Not only that, but this time police had A witness, Eliza's 8 year old son, who offered some insight into what happened the night before. The little boy told investigators that a man had come into his room and asked where his mother kept her money. When the child said he didn't know, the man warned him to cover his eyes unless he wanted to die too. It was something to work with. Although the boy wasn't able to provide a description of the man other than the fact that he wore a rag over part of his face and he wasn't sure if the attacker was white or black.
- [14:30]
C
No one should be brutally murdered like that, and no child should have to be a witness in their mother's murder. But this poor child was. And people sometimes assume that children are either completely unreliable or completely honest. But neither of those extremes is supported by the research. Children can provide very valuable information about events that they directly experienced. In this case, he was told to cover his eyes unless he wanted to die. If he followed those instructions, then that would help explain why he was unable to provide much of a description. He also observed that the offender had covered his face. We also have to consider the effects of fear. Fear can cause attention to focus on what feels most important for survival. And for an 8 year old child, that is not likely going to be any kind of identifying details. It will likely be the threat itself. A strange man told him that he would die too, if he didn't comply. And for a child, that is likely going to immobilize him with fear. And the fact that he remembered being told to cover his eyes is consistent with that. It stands out to him as the most salient part of that experience. But also, children don't have the developmental or cognitive abilities to necessarily know, hey, I need to pay attention to these identifying details. In this moment, they aren't thinking, the police are going to need them later. And the brain is not always prioritizing details during moments of fear. It's prioritizing survival. So it's not surprising that his description was limited. What is potentially valuable is that his account may tell us something about the offender's behavior. He's deliberately concealing his identity, so he's avoiding detection. So it's likely he fears that he will be personally recognized by people in this community. This is the 1800s. Most people lived, worked, socialized, and went to church within relatively small communities that were very tight knit. So it's very likely he lives among them too. I'm not saying he does for certain because I certainly have no way of knowing that, but it is highly probable he does.
- [16:41]
A
That is terrifying. And, and the fact that the attacker let her children live, Eliza's children were still obviously alive and even interacting with, with him. What might that suggest about this attacker's criminal mentality or his intent?
- [16:56]
C
Yeah, I think now there's a pattern because now we have two murders and in both cases there were other people present. In Molly's case, Walter was severely beaten and left unconscious, but he was left to live. In Eliza's case, the offender spoke directly to her son, threatened him, and then let him live. That suggests the offender was not simply attacking every person he encountered. His violence appears selective. He was willing to harm or threaten others when necessary, but he wasn't indiscriminately killing everyone in the home. And from a behavioral standpoint, that may indicate a specific objective. Whether that objective was the women themselves, robbery, or something else, the other individuals present may have not been central to his goal. So in this case, he made it seem like he was there for robbery with his interaction with Eliza's son. But I don't necessarily believe that because the level of violence appears disproportionate if robbery was the sole objective. And we don't even know if he actually took anything from the home to begin with. But this is purely speculative. But the sense I get is that he did not expect to find her son awake. This is nighttime. Eliza put her children to bed. I'm thinking he probably knew that maybe he was watching, he was caught off guard and said the first thing he could to Eliza's son to prevent him from screaming. It was pretext, a way to control him. And it worked. That's the speculation or theory that I have.
- [18:21]
A
With those few critical details from Eliza's son, police believed they finally had something to work with. And later that same day, they zeroed in on a suspect. 19 year old Andrew Williams was a young black man who police had noticed lingering near the crime scene. Shortly after Eliza's body was discovered, officers found it suspicious that Andrew wasn't wearing any shoes, especially considering the barefoot prints found near the murder scene. But despite the suspicion, police once again had no hard evidence tying Andrew to the crime. Plus, a lot of people in the neighborhood couldn't afford shoes, so even their circumstantial evidence was weak. Over the next week, investigators struggled to uncover new leads until finally one of Eliza's neighbors contacted them. Soon, what seemed like a promising lead would spiral into a new wave of prejudice and fear. Thanks for listening. For part two. Follow serial killers and murderous minds on Apple podcasts, Spotify or wherever you listen to podcasts. You've been listening to crime house 247 bringing you breaking crime news. I'm Vanessa Richardson. We'll be back tomorrow morning with more developing stories. Stay safe and and thanks for listening.
- [19:46]
B
I'm Lindsey Cormack, host of Government that Doesn't Suck with Greg Jackson from History that Doesn't Suck. A narrative history podcast about the American institutions that you'll never look at the same way again. Listen to and follow Government that Doesn't Suck available now wherever you get your podcasts.