Anya Cain (83:46)
I'm going to be super blunt with you here. In cases like Kayla's, families are left devastated. They're left reeling, they're left angry. In some cases, those families seek an outlet for that anger, namely someone to blame. That blame can go toward a theoretical perpetrator. Or in cases where charges do not get filed quickly or at all, or where the case does not result in the desired outcome, that frustration or even anger can splash out onto police investigators, coroner's offices, prosecutors, judges, defense attorneys, or other representatives of the system. That impulse is always understandable and perhaps even a natural part of grieving. Sometimes it is also completely warranted. In other words, officials mess up or there is indeed a specific perpetrator or party deserving of full or partial blame, or someone who truly just gets away with a crime. Other times, the targets do not deserve the criticism. And then there's all sorts of shades of gray in between. That is the nature of this kind of loss. For those who experience it, it is dizzying, sickening, sudden. Trying to make sense of a senseless tragedy can make us want to figure out what happened and who is responsible. Even in cases where the only answers are unsatisfying. That what happened was actually an accident or a suicide or an overdose. Not a murder, not anything suspicious. And the only one responsible for what happened is the deceased loved one. I have seen this play out in cases of suicide and overdose again and again and again and again. We are not a true crime show that plays into this dynamic in order to exploit grieving families and get content. We do not like to make people think a conspiracy is afoot because frankly, that's the true crime industrial complex. That's not who we are. But here's the thing that has compelled me about Kayla's case since I started covering it. Maybe the Mitchells are totally wrong. Maybe the police files have nothing new, nothing that will tell them exactly what happened to Kayla. Nothing of real value. Maybe the witness had nothing to do with what happened to Kayla. Maybe he just made a few confusing choices on the fly because he was rattled. Or maybe there's more information in the police file that clears everything up. Maybe there's nothing more to this than an overdose. Or maybe there are questions that just can't be answered. Maybe all the investigating in the world would not have changed the outcome. Maybe there's just not enough to do anything about it. I think all of that could very much be true. At the end of the day, all of that can be true. And yet I still feel that this situation reveals something is wrong. Because I am here to tell you, I actually fell into the same loop as the Mitchells and that tells me everything. See, I did some reach outs with those involved and I ended up in, frankly, the same position. The Coroner's office in UConn was pretty open and responsive and answered my questions. The RCMP didn't budge much because they claimed it was a coroner case. That is the sort of conundrum that can drive families to become more suspicious than they might be already. It's just the nature of the situation. So, as I mentioned, Chief Coroner Jones was open and answered my questions. She noted where the police would be better suited to answer my questions, though she clarified to me why there was no autopsy on the case, replying, quote, as per COVID protocol for YCS in 2021, we relied on expedited toxicology analysis. In this case, cause of death was not in question. All of this was discussed with the family both at the time of the investigation and when the parent made contact. A few years following our closure, she clarified the comment about determining whether Kayla was pregnant, saying, we have no way of determining pregnancy without a specific request. To do so so we would not have made that confirmation. She clarified how the judgment about the cause of death was determined, saying the cause of death was determined by toxicological examination and thorough investigation of circumstances with the assistance of rcmp. RCMP ruled out any foul play. However, I do suggest you speak to them about their investigation. When I asked about the Mitchell's contention that the witness who discovered the decedent said that he did not call 911 or try to chase down the bylaw officer he had just been speaking to after finding Kayla dead, but instead put her body in a little wagon and pulled that into his driveway, at which point his roommate saw what was happening, dialed 911. Chief Coroner Jones said this is not consistent with the information coming from the RCMP investigation. As reported, the witness began life saving measures immediately and moved the decedent from the basement for better access by ems. When I asked her about sending the decedent's family a report two years after the decedent's death, she replied the final report was completed and made available to the primary next of kin seven months following the death as the investigation came to a close. The parent is not the primary next of kin. The report was requested by the parent More than two years after our closing. I asked her about the Mitchells still not receiving the full case file from the rcmp. She replied, that would be a question for rcmp. I was of the understanding that the family you have had contact with did reach out and had extensive conversations with the RSCMP investigators. This would have included informing them of the formal process for obtaining their file information. You may want to confirm that this was done. When I noted that the Mitchells are confused why the witness who discovered the body was not investigated more intensively or charged with a crime removing the body, she said, again a question for rcmp. Their investigation was thorough so they will have an answer if this is something they would normally provide after investigation. The case didn't fall under the criminal code. I noted that I imagined some questions may be for the RCMP more than her and she said, I appreciate your interest in doing a full investigation prior to releasing hearsay information publicly. She also concluded saying, again, I appreciate you reaching out for clarification on these points and again too, I do hope you go through the proper channels to be able to obtain factual information from RCMP and if their investigation is of interest to you, I hope that what I have been able to provide does help clarify some of the facts we have identified. I also reached out to Corporal Bowden he was very cordial and responded and I so appreciated that. But he noted that the rules meant that I would need to go through RCMP's communications process. I tried to do so. A communications representative wrote me saying, quote, this is a UConn Coroner Service led investigation and we are not able to provide you with any information. Your questions are best directed to that office. We recognize families may share information as they navigate loss. Police must comply with privacy legislation. Any requests for police records need to go through access to information and privacy process.
