Open and Active

Summary

---

Murder at The U – Episode 5: "Open and Active"

Podcast: Murder at The U (ESPN)
Air Date: February 24, 2026
Theme:
This episode investigates the Miami Dade Police Department's handling of the Bryan Pata murder case, focusing on what police have (and have not) done over the years. It exposes inconsistencies, investigative shortcomings, and the remarkable effort by ESPN’s investigative journalists to extract the truth—culminating in a legal battle that pressed the question: Was the police investigation ever truly "open and active"?

---

Episode Overview

Bryan Pata, a University of Miami football star, was murdered in 2006. For years, his family believed a teammate, Rashawn Jones, was responsible—something their police informant had told them early on, but police never confirmed. Through interviews, document requests, and a lawsuit against Miami Dade PD, ESPN’s investigation team uncovers the missteps, evasions, and bureaucratic inertia that haunted the case. This episode chronicles the team's relentless pursuit of answers and the revelations that emerged only when law enforcement was compelled to tell the truth in court.

---

Key Discussion Points

1. The Informant, the Suspect, and Family Frustration (00:00–02:45)

• The Pata family held onto information from an informant within the police—he consistently named Rashawn Jones as the likely killer, citing motive and his notable absence after the murder.
• The family’s frustration: "You look at this guy's page, you see he's living his life." (Edric Pata, 01:49)

2. Police Stonewalling and Contradictions (04:09–07:57)

• Detective Miguel Dominguez repeatedly downplays Jones as a suspect: "At the time, everybody was a person of interest, but he was no more or less than anyone else at the time – no." (04:23)
• Repeated evasions undermine police credibility and create friction with reporters.
• Discovery of police investigative gaps: No computer seized, little digital evidence collected, and misunderstandings about available technology in 2006.

3. Oversights in the Police Investigation (07:57–10:20)

• Detectives displayed a surprising lack of knowledge about the digital habits of college students at the time.
• Phone and text records: "I don't believe that in 2006 there was even text messages..." —Miguel Dominguez (08:41), undercut by evidence that texts and MySpace/Facebook were in use.
• Only three months of phone records pulled; lack of text content; unclear what digital records were obtained.

4. The “Active” Case: Police Deflections (09:38–11:48)

• Officers insist they’ve “applied a fresh set of eyes,” but supervisors acknowledge it hasn’t yielded much progress.
• Press officer Alvaro Zabaleta implies reporters may have more access to potential witnesses than detectives, highlighting investigative limitations.

5. Uncovering More Leads: The Emmanuel Jones Angle (13:01–16:33)

• ESPN reporters discover a tip about Emmanuel Jones allegedly confessing to the murder in jail.
• On-the-record call with Emmanuel Jones, who denies involvement and confirms a police timeline discrepancy: "That's not my M.O. I was nowhere around. No murder. I don't know anything about no murder." (15:12)
• Police had mistakenly assumed Jones had an alibi (in jail) at the time of the murder—he was not arrested until a month later.

6. Digging Into the Police File—And Its Holes (17:17–19:05)

• Detectives misunderstood case details, including Pata's car parking.
• Major revelation: No substantial investigative entries after 2009—a decade of apparent inactivity, contrary to claims of an active investigation.

7. Cold Case Assessment and Professional Critique (19:08–23:56)

• Former FBI profiler Greg Cooper (Cold Case Foundation) reviews the case:
  • “I don't have the sense that it's…exhaustive and thorough.” (20:31)
  • Identifies a need to re-interview several people, notes the case was much more solvable in 2006.
  • Concludes Rashawn Jones is the strongest suspect based on evidence provided: “He’s probably at the top of that person of interest list.” (21:51)
  • Major factors: relationship with Bryan (and Jada), his absence after the murder, inconsistencies in police documentation about his interviews.

8. ESPN’s Lawsuit: Forced Contradictions in Court (25:18–33:01)

• ESPN sues to obtain unredacted police records, challenging Miami Dade’s claims that the case is still “active” and thus exempt from full disclosure.
• Under oath, Lt. Joseph Zanconado admits police have had a main suspect since 2007 and were close to making an arrest:
  • "Yeah, we have a strong belief as to who's responsible for his death." (27:30)
  • “We were still missing a piece of the puzzle.” (29:25)
• ESPN’s lawyer exposes that only Rashawn Jones’ file was labeled “suspect.”
  • Police attorney repeatedly objects; judge overrules, forcing partial admissions.

9. The Aftermath and Systemic Evasion (33:01–36:36)

• The judge sides with police but stipulates that secrecy cannot last forever:
  • “A time will come when it will no longer be proper for the MDPD to keep the redactions at issue confidential.”
• Major police figures on the case (Gonzalez, Zanconado, Dominguez) leave or are reassigned soon after testifying to active efforts.
• ESPN’s story is finally published, revealing to the public that Rashawn Jones was the police’s main suspect for years.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Edric Pata (on the family’s long wait for justice, 01:49):
  “It’s frustrating, yeah, because... if you know who did it, and still that person hasn’t been brought to justice… You think about this stuff every day. It’s just, God damn you look. You look at this guy’s page, you see he’s living his life.”

• Detective Dominguez (on digital evidence, 08:41):
  "I don't believe that in 2006 there was even text messages."
  (Factually incorrect, highlighting investigative oversight.)

• Greg Cooper, Cold Case Foundation (upon review, 20:40):
  “I don't have the sense that it's…exhaustive and thorough. I wouldn't go that far.”

• Greg Cooper (on Rashawn Jones as top suspect, 21:51):
  “I think Rashaun is probably at the top of that person of interest list.”

• Lt. Zanconado under oath (27:30):
  "Yeah, we have a strong belief as to who's responsible for his death."

• Paula Levine, on police contradictions (32:40):
  “The biggest of which is that they were lying to us.”

• Paula Levine, on the police’s persistent secrecy (33:14):
  "When they talk about the prime suspect... we know based on the context [it] pertains to Rashaun."

---

Important Timestamps

• 00:00–02:45: Pata family’s informant, naming Rashawn Jones.
• 04:09–07:24: Detectives’ evasive answers; exposure of investigative shortcomings.
• 07:57–10:20: Discussion of digital and phone evidence — and missed opportunities.
• 13:01–16:33: Investigation into Emmanuel Jones; timeline error revealed.
• 17:17–19:05: ESPN discovers police inactivity after 2009 in official records.
• 19:08–23:56: Cold Case Foundation’s expert review and assessment.
• 25:18–33:01: Courtroom drama; police admit suspect status under oath.
• 33:01–36:36: Aftermath of lawsuit, police departures, and ESPN's reporting.

---

Tone & Language

The episode balances methodical, skeptical reporting with emotional resonance, particularly in the Pata family’s long frustration and the reporters’ mounting disbelief. The narration retains the respectful, persistent tone of investigative journalism while highlighting both the systemic failures and the stakes for those seeking justice.

---

Episode Summary

"Open and Active" is a damning look at bureaucratic inertia, systemic policing failures, and the power of determined investigative journalism. The episode methodically documents years of police evasion, gaffes, and contradictions—ultimately forcing official acknowledgment under legal pressure that Rashawn Jones was always the main suspect. Yet, even as the reporters uncover the truth, police secrecy and red tape continue to delay justice, leaving the Pata family and the community waiting for the “foreseeable future” that never seems to arrive.

---

Transcript

[Paula Levine]

Previously on Murder at the U.

[Dan Arruda]

Man, y' all need to look at the goddamn school. Patter had a lot of enemies. Rashawn, like, kind of rubbed some people the wrong way. Everybody was looking for him. Where's Rashawn? If you ask me point blank, do I think that he did it?

[Paula Levine]

The answer is no. The Pata family had a lot of reasons to believe Rashawn Jones killed Brian. One of the reasons, it turns out, was that in those early years, the Patas had an informant who was working the case. He'd tell them what the police knew in confidence. As Bryan's brother Edwin Pata told producer Dan Arruda, Just a few months after Brian's death, this informant told him that the police thought they knew who killed Brian.

[Dan Arruda]

He always used to tell me, listen, this is what happened. Or Sean Jones, are you sure?

[Paula Levine]

He was like, listen.

[Dan Arruda]

He would say the words, Rashawn Jones. He said he did it. And there are certain protocols and rules you got to follow, and you got to obviously prove beyond, you know, you

[Paula Levine]

got to have all this evidence and

[Dan Arruda]

witness and all that stuff. He was like, listen.

[Paula Levine]

What would he tell you why he

[Dan Arruda]

thought it was Rashawn? Did he give you any specific reasons? He's a guy that has a motive, and after Brian died, he was the only player that was not there, so.

[Paula Levine]

And why would he tell you that?

[Dan Arruda]

They couldn't arrest circumstantial evidence. No gun, no witness.

[Paula Levine]

For about a decade, the family held onto that information. They believed the police would eventually uncover more evidence. Edric Pata said the family would visit Rashawn's Facebook and Instagram, looking through his photos. Is it worse that you guys believe

[Dan Arruda]

you know who did it, and still that person hasn't been brought to justice? It's frustrating, yeah, because when they say that, you know, person really don't get rest until, you know, the case is solved. That's true. We experience it. This stuff is in the back of your head every damn day. You think about this stuff every day. It's just, God damn you look. You look at this guy's page, you see he's living his life.

[Paula Levine]

If the Patas informant was telling the truth, it meant the police had kept Rashawn in their sights for more than a decade. But somehow they never made an arrest. It also meant the police had been keeping the truth from us this whole time. They'd had a prime suspect all along. But the truth would eventually come out, and it would require us to confront the police in a way none of us could have seen coming.

[Dan Arruda]

Paula.

[Paula Levine]

I'm Paula Levine from 30 for 30 podcasts. This is Murder at the U. Episode five, open and active.

[Dan Arruda]

Rated T for teen.

[Paula Levine]

Hey, everyone, it's the best in the world. CM Punk. Back to shake up WWE 2K26. This year, the show never stops. You're running the greatest spectacle on earth

[Dan Arruda]

with the biggest roster we've ever had. Over 400 superstars and legends from every era. Stack the tables, break the rules, burn it all down.

[Paula Levine]

And yeah, my very own showcase. Telling my story the way it should have been told. Because when the show never stops, anything is possible. Available March 13, pre order now. You said you were over him, but his hoodie's still in your rotation. It's time. Grab your phone, snap a few pics and sell it on depop. Listed in minutes with no selling fees. And just like that, a guy 500 miles away just paid full price for your closure. And right on cue.

[Dan Arruda]

Hey, still got my hood?

[Paula Levine]

Nope. But I've got tonight's dinner paid for start selling on Depop. Where taste recognizes taste list. Now with no selling fees, payment processing fees and boosting fees still apply. See website for details. Once we learned of this tip about a potential suspect, we had to bring it up with the police.

[Dan Arruda]

Who is Rashawn Jones? Another teammate of his.

[Paula Levine]

This is an interview from 2018 with Miami Detective Miguel Dominguez, the lead investigator on Brian's case, The one who sported a horseshoe mustache.

[Dan Arruda]

And was he interviewed by my bpd? Yes. Was he ever a person of interest? At the time, everybody was a person of interest, but he was no more or less than anyone else at the time? No.

[Paula Levine]

This answer from Detective Dominguez directly contradicted what we had heard from the Patas and their source, which was confusing to us since their source was coming from inside the police department. So Dan tried to push Dominguez for answers.

[Dan Arruda]

Why do you feel the family has such a strong sense that someone on the team may have been involved? I don't know. That's a question you're going to have to direct to them.

[Paula Levine]

Over the next two years, we would continue to wonder exactly what the police knew about Rashawn Jones and Dominguez. And the other detectives would continue to deflect when we asked whether Jones was a suspect.

[Dan Arruda]

Honestly, everybody was a suspect at that time.

[Paula Levine]

In fact, they insisted over and over and over that they didn't have a prime suspect or even anyone they would call a suspect. They were looking at everyone.

[Dan Arruda]

The bottom line is, at the end of the day, we don't know who killed Brian Pata.

[Paula Levine]

We even offered to talk off the record in case they wanted us to know something but didn't want it to get back to them publicly, something reporters and cops do often. But they said no. We were going around in circles. The suspect or no suspect thing was just one of many questions that we had for the police. We were also looking into other motives and theories that may or may not have had anything to do with Rashaun, like the nightclub fight with supposed gang members, the threats from Jada's family, and the locker room call overheard by teammate Chris Zellner. We knew that Brian's computer, phone calls, and text messages could provide clues to move this investigation forward, but it hadn't been clear to us exactly how the detectives had approached this part of the case. So in early 2019, Dan and I sat down with Detective Dominguez and the supervisor on the case, Rudy Gonzalez, to see what they could tell us. The perpetual question in our mind, aside from who killed Brian Pata, Was what did the police know? And it was this interview that revealed a few things. What computers did you seize that had belonged to Brian, and what can you

[Dan Arruda]

tell us about that? We did not seize any computers.

[Paula Levine]

Why not?

[Dan Arruda]

We deemed it wasn't necessary for the investigation.

[Paula Levine]

Why did you feel that that wasn't necessary?

[Dan Arruda]

There was nothing that would indicate that the computer, you know, had any trace or involvement in Brian's murder.

[Paula Levine]

Apparently, the police didn't know what was on Brian's computer because they never collected it, and they didn't seem to think the online activity of a college student in his 20s would lead them anywhere.

[Dan Arruda]

I don't think there was social media back then. Right. I don't think email was that rampant either.

[Paula Levine]

So social media did exist in 2006, and Brian was on it. He had Facebook and MySpace pages. Someone even posted a tip there about a potential murder suspect shortly after he was killed. And I found this pretty odd because even in much lower profile cases I've reported on, computer forensics and online activity were typically put under the microscope.

[Dan Arruda]

We did have his phone zone, and we did get an announcement of his cellular telephone, so that.

[Paula Levine]

Yeah, so that leads me to the next question. Then I asked about phone records. If someone was on the other end of a heated phone conversation with Brian just an hour before he was murdered, phone records could reveal who it was. What can you tell us about how in depth, you went on pulling the phone records, looking at the phones, and what, if anything, came of that?

[Dan Arruda]

We pulled about three months worth of phone records. The phone records basically just show connectivity between cellular telephone back and forth and coming and outgoing.

[Paula Levine]

So there wasn't content from text messages?

[Dan Arruda]

No, those are things that you have to have probable cause and get warrants for. And there was no, like I said, there was no indication. I mean, I don't believe that in 2006 there was even text messages.

[Paula Levine]

Even in use, like social media. Text messages were definitely a thing in 2006. And Brian's friends and family members told us they remembered texting with him. At the time, I was genuinely surprised by what the detectives were telling us. It felt like a significant oversight in this investigation. Later we found out they did pursue records from MySpace and got at least some of Brian's text messages. But it's not clear what information they received or what they did with it. And we're not sure why. Detectives didn't seem to know about all the evidence they had in the case by this time. We'd been reporting on this story for more than two years. We'd interviewed over 50 people and had several conversations with police and other investigators. None of those conversations led us to believe Dominguez, Gonzalez and the Miami PD were making progress. So we eventually asked Gonzalez what they had done more recently.

[Dan Arruda]

One of the things that we did, starting about two or three years ago on the 10 year anniversary, was that we started kind of looking through the case file. So just a fresh set of eyes on the case file to go over and look at it. Okay, what's been done? Is there anything glaring that should be done? Did we miss something? Is there something that we should. That they didn't do that needs to be followed up on, and that process continues today. How has a fresh pair of eyes helped in this case? As of right now, I would tell you it hasn't helped much. They did a very, very thorough job from what I've seen so far, and looking through the reports and the people that they interviewed, and it seems like they did a very thorough job.

[Paula Levine]

So just before the Miami police had reached out to us for help, they said they'd applied, quote, a fresh set of eyes on the case. And what they'd found was that their work, which involved never looking at Brian's email, not seizing his computer, was up to their standards on that day. We talked to the police for about two hours. And at the end of our interview, I asked them if there were any threads of this story that we had missed. Detective Dominguez said no. And just then, a press officer named Alvaro Zabaleta piped Up. He said something that explained a lot about how the police saw us in this situation.

[Dan Arruda]

You guys are going to have a lot more flexibility than us. A. You don't have the guidelines.

[Paula Levine]

We have guidelines.

[Dan Arruda]

Yeah, you do, and you don't, in the sense of you're not going to go talk to a child unless they give parent permission and all that type of stuff. But as far as the legal guidelines, you guys can go to anybody in that roster and talk to them however you want, and they may speak to you. And it's, hey, cool espn. Let me tell you what I know. Oh, and they just let it all out. Where the detective will bring him in. Now, as soon as you tell them, can I get that formal statement from you? And you hear the word formal and statement together in one sentence, they go, nope, I don't want to deal with this. Call my attorney. And then, of course, the attorney's gonna say, you're not talking to him because he has nothing to do with this. And then there goes that door, and it gets shut down.

[Paula Levine]

In this moment, it seemed like the Miami police were implying that we'd have an easier time uncovering Brian's killer than they would, or at least talking to people central to his case. But even if some people are more inclined to talk to us, there's one big difference. Courts can force people to tell the truth under oath. We don't have that power. People can lie to us. People like the police. TaxAct can think of a million things more fun than filing taxes. TaxAct is going to name some now. Sitting in traffic, folding a fitted bedsheet, listening to your co worker talk about his fantasy team digging a hole. Digging an even larger hole next to that original hole. Unfortunately, TaxAct's filing software can't make taxes

[Dan Arruda]

fun, but TaxAct can help you get them done.

[Paula Levine]

TaxAct, let's get them over with. We started this story trying to figure out who killed Brian Pata. But now we'd found ourselves on a different trajectory. When Miami Dade reached out to us in 2017, it probably wasn't to invite a team of reporters to check their work for two years. We asked the police to share a copy of the police report for the case, but they refused. So we decided to submit a request for the documents under the state's open records law. In November 2019, the police finally released a copy of the report. Remember, it was nearly 200 pages and heavily redacted, blacking out any information that the police considered pertinent to an active investigation. But it did reveal something the police never told us in interviews, a lead involving an entirely different suspect and a jailhouse confession. Here's what the report told us. Less than a year after Brian's murder, the police received a tip. A man named Emmanuel Jones had allegedly confessed to Brian's murder while in a Florida state prison. He told his cellmate he'd killed Brian in a murder for hire. So I wrote a letter to Emmanuel Jones and asked if he would speak with me. A couple months later, I got a phone call. Okay. Is that better? This is better for me. Okay. Hey, so this is kind of an out of the blue contact, I'm sure, but you're still in Broward county there in the jail, right?

[Dan Arruda]

Yes.

[Paula Levine]

Then I asked Jones about the night Brian was killed. Brian Pata was shot November 7th of 2006. Do you remember, okay. That where you were November 7th of 2000? I know it's a long time ago, but, I mean, obviously this came up at some point. So do you remember where you were?

[Dan Arruda]

None of that has anything to do with me. I'm just asking, is you a detective? Do I need a lawyer present while you asking me these questions or, like, what's going on? You told me to reach out to you, and it's like you interrogate me. Right.

[Paula Levine]

Well, I told you in the letter I sent that I work for ESPN and we're looking into Brian Pata and what happened to him and. Right. If someone were to say, hey, you confessed to this murder, do you remember where you were in November?

[Dan Arruda]

I was nowhere around. No murder. That's not even my. That's not. That's not my M.O. like, I, I. That's not me. I was nowhere around. No murder. I don't know anything about no murder.

[Paula Levine]

Obviously, I didn't expect Jones to confess to a murder on a recorded phone line, but I was also asking that question for another reason entirely. Back in 2007, police had quickly ruled Emanuel Jones out as a suspect. They wrote he had an alibi. He was in jail for stealing a dirt bike in an armed robbery. But Weed discovered the police had the timeline of his arrest all wrong. Did you get taken into custody right at the time the guy reported you guys stealing the bike from him? Did you get taken into custody at that time?

[Dan Arruda]

I was arrested later on. I ain't get arrested that day.

[Paula Levine]

That robbery took place in August 2006. But Jones wasn't actually arrested until December, a month after Brian's murder. And we found no record, local, state, or federal, showing he was incarcerated in November when Brian Was killed. You were not arrested in August of 2006, correct?

[Dan Arruda]

I was arrested. I was arrested later. Later on down the line.

[Paula Levine]

The police had definitely made a mistake, and Jones had just confirmed it. The funny thing is, we'd figured out all of this from the detective's own case file. But when we asked police about this discrepancy, they declined to comment. In fact, Dominguez would later testify that he couldn't rule out Emmanuel Jones as a suspect. The more familiar we became with the police report and Miami dade's investigation as a whole, the more mistakes we encountered. Not only that, we discovered discrepancies between what police said to us in our interviews and what they actually had documented. Remember that first trip to the crime scene, Detective Dominguez told Dan that Brian had backed into his parking spot.

[Dan Arruda]

Brian's vehicle was parked backwards into the parking space. He backed into a spot? Yes. So his driver door was facing the road, the roadway? Yes, sir.

[Paula Levine]

Dominguez sounds confident here, but he's wrong. Crime scene photos clearly depict Brian's infinity parked nose in. In fact, Dominguez admitted in Dan's first interview that he hadn't studied the case file before speaking to us about Brian's killing. That made us wonder what other details Dominguez just plain got wrong. There was a question we asked Dominguez about whether Rashaun had been interviewed more than once.

[Dan Arruda]

He hasn't been interviewed a second time, but neither have any of the former players either.

[Paula Levine]

But in fact, they did interview Rashaun at least twice and other former players more than once as well. Out of all of this, what shocked us the most, though, was what we realized almost immediately after getting the police report. There were no substantive entries in the case file after 2009. There were no entries noting interviews, tips, or newly gathered evidence for 10 years. What had the police been doing all of this time, and how could they, given all of this, claim this investigation was still active? We had tried to get the unredacted police report. Tried and failed because Florida public records law allows police to withhold investigative details of a case if it is still active. But nothing about this case seemed active. In fact, it seemed very cold.

[Dan Arruda]

Testing. 1, 2, 3.

[Paula Levine]

Greg Cooper is a former FBI profiler. If you're familiar with the show criminal minds, that's a dramatization of the role.

[Dan Arruda]

Much of that is very accurate in terms of the substance of the types of cases that are worked by profilers. Usually it takes longer than an hour, however, to solve a case.

[Paula Levine]

In 2014, Cooper Co founded an organization called the Cold Case Foundation.

[Dan Arruda]

What exactly is a cold case and when do you believe active investigations end and cold cases begin? There is no generic definition for a cold case. It depends on the department. It really becomes cold if they're no longer working it. So you may say, well, it's any unsolved case that's no longer being worked, that's cold. But most police departments don't like to categorize any case as so cold that it's no longer being worked. In fact, you'll probably find it difficult to find a police department that's going to tell you we're not working that case.

[Paula Levine]

We gave the Cold Case foundation transcripts from all of our interviews up to that point and the files we had received from the police, including the redacted police report. They reviewed all the documents as if it were a case they were working on and they came to some conclusions about Miami Dade's investigation.

[Dan Arruda]

I don't have the sense that it's excessive. It's excellent, that it's exhaustive and thorough. I wouldn't go that far with it.

[Paula Levine]

What are the major shortcomings?

[Dan Arruda]

Well, I think there's more people that need to be interviewed. There's a list of people that we identify that need to be interviewed or re interviewed as a result of reviewing the case. The key to the case is the relationship between the victim and the offender. This individual wanted Brian dead. The key is trying to identify the

[Paula Levine]

motive for it, taking into account what Miami Dade police have done, but then also taking into account some of the shortcomings you guys have identified. Back when this happened. How solvable should this have been?

[Dan Arruda]

At the time, I think the possibilities of solvability were high above average. Now it's much more difficult because of the passage of time.

[Paula Levine]

Obviously Cooper and his team went through all the different suspects who might have killed Bryan. He wasn't satisfied with Miami Dade's efforts to cross those people off the list.

[Dan Arruda]

I don't think that any of them have been adequately vetted to eliminate them completely.

[Paula Levine]

Who do you think killed Brian Pota?

[Dan Arruda]

There's some persons of interest and they need to be eliminated. But I think Rashaun is probably at the top of that person of interest list. What puts him so firmly at the top of your list? His relationship with Brian and Jada. She's in the middle there. They at one time I think that they had had a relationship with one another. You've got the pre offense behavior and the post offense behavior that is questionable. The fight that he was Involved in Rashaun gets kicked off the team that day. We know that Rashaun did not go to practice that day, doesn't show up to practice. But now, did he get kicked off the team before practice? So he would not naturally have gone to practice then, obviously. Right, right. So that now doesn't become significant, the fact that it doesn't show up. But when everybody was called in after Brian's death that night, he's the only one that doesn't show up. That's correct. So he could have the legitimate excuse while I was kicked off the table. That is correct. On the other hand, I was kicked off the team. But, hey, this guy's a former teammate. Why wouldn't he show up at this

[Paula Levine]

point, one of our producers, Scott Frankel, read back a summary of the detective's first interview with Rashawn.

[Dan Arruda]

Mr. Jones. Rashawn told detective Pat Diaz that when he learned of the victim's demise, he responded to the University of Miami Heck center. And he never did. So we know that he lied. Yes.

[Paula Levine]

So right there in that moment, that evening, what would his motive be for killing Bryan?

[Dan Arruda]

Some perceived or actual conflict between he and Brian has developed over a period of time, and it could be proximate. My sense in a crime like this is not that there is a long period of time between. Between the decision to kill Brian and the killing itself. It's a short period of time.

[Paula Levine]

Cooper and his team at the Cold case Foundation had reached two clear conclusions. One, Miami Dade's investigation had fallen short. They'd missed opportunities to interview people who might have known important information. So what could have been a more solvable case in 2006 had dragged out into a 15 year ordeal. Two, based on all of the evidence we'd provided, the Cold Case guys thought Rashawn Jones looked like the strongest suspect. But we were still left with questions, questions we hoped to answer before we published anything related to the case. Questions only the Miami Dade police could answer. Like why hadn't they interviewed Rashawn since 2007? Why had they seemingly not interviewed anybody since 2009? And maybe most of all, why had so many years gone by without an arrest? The Miami Dade Police said this case was open and active. And so the details of the investigation, protected by Florida state law, had stayed hidden to us. But we had come to believe this wasn't true. And so in March 2020, ESPN sued the Miami Dade Police.

[Dan Arruda]

Just to let you know what's going on, we may run into some problems today.

[Paula Levine]

ESPN v. Miami Dade county kicked off. In July 2020, right at the height of the pandemic lockdowns, Judge Oscar Rodriguez Fonts presided over the case.

[Dan Arruda]

I've lost my Internet already a couple of times. I've had to reboot. So I'm having problems working in the pandemic.

[Paula Levine]

We all just kind of roll with it, right?

[Dan Arruda]

I apologize in advance for any interruptions.

[Paula Levine]

Everyone on our team logged onto Zoom to follow along. And Dan recorded the trial from his home. We had filed a lawsuit against the Miami Dade Police, alleging a unlawful withholding of open records. So to start, a lawyer for the police department laid out the case for why those redacted portions should remain confidential. The record and testimonial evidence presented to the court today will demonstrate that there are key details of the crime that the minus court orders that these key points of information be produced and no doubt broadcast all over the world by ESPN or other media outlets. The Brian hottest killer may never be brought to justice. In order to justify their redacted reports, the police had to prove that the case was still active. To do that, they needed to show that they were making progress toward an arrest. So they called a witness, a lieutenant overseeing the Homicide Bureau named Joseph Zanconado. Can you explain briefly what the 10 year anniversary of Brian Pota's death meant for your investigation?

[Dan Arruda]

Well, that was an opportunity for us to kind of, you know, like, renew the investigation. It gave us an opportunity to review all the reports, the case file, and, you know, we were trying to develop, come up with ideas as to how we could put this case back in the limelight in order to try and develop leads.

[Paula Levine]

Then the county's attorney switched gears. I'd like to now turn to the investigation that MDPD is conducting and talk a little bit about that. Does MDPD know who killed Brian Potter?

[Dan Arruda]

Yeah, we have a strong belief as to who's responsible for his death.

[Paula Levine]

All of us watching this Zoom were shocked. We had been asking the police this question for three years, and for three years they had said it could be anyone. Is there a main person of interest?

[Dan Arruda]

Yes.

[Paula Levine]

Now, under oath, Zanconado had made a statement that directly contradicted what police had been saying to us. Going back to the years closer to the date of Brian Pata's death. This would be 2006 to 2007. Was MDPD close to making an arrest in this case?

[Dan Arruda]

Yes, we were. What?

[Paula Levine]

You can hear Dan's reaction to this on his recording from home. The police not only had a main suspect, but they had been close to making an arrest way back in 2007. Then the lawyer asked Zankanato to make a prediction. Will you make an arrest in the foreseeable future?

[Dan Arruda]

Yes.

[Paula Levine]

The phrase foreseeable future is really important. It comes from the Florida open records law, which says a case is active if there is a reasonable good faith anticipation of securing an arrest or prosecution in the foreseeable future. But it doesn't offer a definition of what foreseeable future means. The police had a main suspect since 2007, but they still hadn't made an arrest. So why did they expect that an arrest was going to happen anytime soon? What, if anything, had changed? That's what Dana McElroy, the lawyer representing ESPN, asked Zankanato on cross examination. How was it that an arrest wasn't made in the last 12 years?

[Dan Arruda]

Because we were still missing a piece of the puzzle.

[Paula Levine]

And is that piece of the puzzle still missing?

[Dan Arruda]

Yes. However, based on the fact that we are actively working in this case, we believe that an arrest will be the foreseeable future.

[Paula Levine]

There's the foreseeable Future again. But ESPN's lawyer had another card to play. In a recent document dump, the Miami Dade Police Department had given us background files on people named in the police report. Each file had a handwritten cover letter with the person's name on it. And on one of those documents, the police left in one key word they probably meant to redact suspect. So McElroy started by asking Zanconado about the names of a few potential suspects. And I'd like to bring up plaintiff's composite exhibit 21. Do you know who Jerome Brody is, Perdain?

[Dan Arruda]

Yes.

[Paula Levine]

Be where? He's Jada Brody's brother.

[Dan Arruda]

Yes.

[Paula Levine]

Are you familiar with the name Emanuel Jones?

[Dan Arruda]

I've heard that name, yes.

[Paula Levine]

Okay. And is he a person of interest? Objection. Confidential information.

[Dan Arruda]

Restraint.

[Paula Levine]

How about Rashawn Jones? Confidential information. She's essentially asking.

[Dan Arruda]

Sustained. Sustained.

[Paula Levine]

Okay, if you could, we could please pull up plaintiff's composite Exhibit 2. Scroll down to the bottom. This document identifies Rashawn Jones as a suspect, does it not, Lieutenant?

[Dan Arruda]

It says suspect. Yes.

[Paula Levine]

Out of more than 100 cover letters, the one with the name Rashawn Trayvon Jones was the only one with the word suspect on it. Okay. Is he a suspect or not? Objection. Confidential information. The lawyer for the police objected again, but this time the judge overruled.

[Dan Arruda]

You guys turned it over and it's in evidence. I don't know how it's confidential anymore. So without going into any further detail, I guess he can answer the Question. There were a lot of individuals who were interviewed and who were looked at regarding this case. There's a lot of pieces of paper that were written on that piece of paper. Right. There is not necessarily evidence to our case.

[Paula Levine]

I'm not sure you answered the question. I asked if he was a suspect. The police's attorney again objected, but the judge allowed our lawyer to press on. Was he a suspect?

[Dan Arruda]

Rashawn Jones is one of a number of people who we've looked at in this investigation.

[Paula Levine]

Is he a current suspect?

[Dan Arruda]

I'm not going to answer that question based on confidentiality for the exemption. Rather,

[Paula Levine]

after the day's hearing, the reporting team got on a call to debrief. At the end of the day, regardless

[Dan Arruda]

of what happens, I am glad that

[Paula Levine]

we brought this because it revealed a couple things, the biggest of which is

[Dan Arruda]

that they were lying to us.

[Paula Levine]

And I'm glad we went through this process because had we gone with what we had, I think we would have been putting forward a story that was disingenuous and frankly, not true. Not for any fault of ours, but just for the fact that the police

[Dan Arruda]

department clearly, and I'm assuming that they

[Paula Levine]

were telling the truth to the judge,

[Dan Arruda]

that meant they had to be lying to us.

[Paula Levine]

And to be clear, you think they're lying.

[Dan Arruda]

Was that the fact that Rashaun has been their number one suspect this entire time and it hasn't been a. Oh, we have lots of leads and lots

[Paula Levine]

of things to look into. Well, when they talk about the prime suspect and they talk about the evidence, the material that we know based on

[Dan Arruda]

the context pertains to Rashaun. Yeah.

[Paula Levine]

And the fact that his is the only cover letter that had suspect on it. Yeah, that was a big gaffe.

[Dan Arruda]

Yeah.

[Paula Levine]

They talked about some of the slip

[Dan Arruda]

ups that they made and the stuff

[Paula Levine]

that they should have redacted.

[Dan Arruda]

That was. That was a big one.

[Paula Levine]

Two months later, the judge handed down his decision. He took police at their word that they were continuing to work this case and that there would be an arrest in the foreseeable future. It felt like a gut punch, but the judge's ruling came with a condition. In it, he wrote, a time will come when it will no longer be proper for the MDPD to keep the redactions at issue confidential. However, this court finds that now is not that time. In other words, that undefinable clock of foreseeable future. It was ticking. We knew it. Miami Dade knew it, too, which is why what happened next felt unbelievable. In the weeks after the judge's ruling, major changes hit Miami Dade's homicide team commander, Rudy Gonzalez.

[Dan Arruda]

Man, I don't believe that in 2006 there was even text messages even in use.

[Paula Levine]

Two months after he testified, we learned that Gonzalez was no longer working Brian's case. Lieutenant Joseph Zanconado.

[Dan Arruda]

We believe that an arrest will be the foreseeable future.

[Paula Levine]

Three days after this testimony, police records show that Zanconado was reassigned out of homicide. And as for Miguel Dominguez, the lead detective on this case since day one.

[Dan Arruda]

We have a multitude of leads that we're following and we are most definitely working this actively.

[Paula Levine]

One week after the judge's ruling, we learned that Dominguez had retired. I found all of this terribly disingenuous. All these people who swore to actively pursue an arrest had just hightailed it off the case. We asked Miami Dade about these departures, whether investigators had lied to the judge. A police department spokesperson told us Zancanato had not known ahead of time that he would be reassigned. And Dominguez's retirement was last minute. After the lawsuit ended, we decided to run a story with the information we had. It included everything we knew about the case, details of Brian's last day, the Zellner call, the various theories, Miami Dade's misstep with Emanuel Jones, our lawsuit and its aftermath. The story was also the first time that the public learned police suspected Brian Pata may have been killed by his teammate Rashawn Jones. It ran in November 2020. Our team had no idea how long Miami Dade would stretch out the limits of a foreseeable future. We were expecting years at least. But it turned out to be much sooner than we thought. Less than a year after our story ran, we got a phone call.

[Dan Arruda]

Hey, Dan. Good morning. Just turning on my phone. It's getting heating up really good. I think they about to make an arrest soon. I'm not quite sure when. They didn't say anything.

[Paula Levine]

That's next time on Murder at the U. Murder at the U is based on reporting by me, Paula Levine and Dan Aruda, with support from Scott Frankel, Elizabeth Merrill and ESPN's investigative unit. Our senior producer is Matt Fraseka. Our senior editorial producer is Preeti Varathan. Our associate producers are Megan Coyle and Gus Navarro. Story editing by Adeza Egan. Additional editing by Ben Weber and Mike Drago. Our archival producer is Matthew Fisher. Our line producer is Kath Senke. Production managers are Jason Schwartz and Sheena Williams. Fact checking by David Sabino. Original music and sound design by Ryan Ross Smith. Chris Buckle is vice president of ESPN Investigative Enterprise and digital journalist Marcia Cook. Brian Lockhart, Heather Anderson and Burke Magnus are executive producers for 30 for 30.