The Murder of Scott Macklem: The Guilt of Temujin Kensu Part Seven: Questions

Summary

Summary of "The Murder of Scott Macklem: The Guilt of Temujin Kensu Part Seven: Questions"

Release Date: June 17, 2025

---

Introduction

In this episode of Murder Sheet, hosts Áine Cain, a journalist, and Kevin Greenlee, an attorney, delve deeper into the complexities surrounding the murder of Scott Macklem and the conviction of Temujin Kinzu. Part Seven focuses on addressing listener-submitted questions, providing clarity on various aspects of the case, and discussing the ongoing coverage by the Murder Sheet team.

---

Ongoing Coverage of the Case

Kevin Greenlee [03:32]:

"We've been doing some pretty extensive coverage on the murder of Scott Macklem by a man who now calls himself Temujin Kinzu."

Áine Cain [05:34]:

"No, we're not done covering the case. We are done, for the time being at least covering it on a weekly basis."

The hosts clarify that while they have concluded the weekly updates, comprehensive coverage of critical case elements like the original case points and the commutation hearing will continue intermittently. They emphasize the need for ongoing reporting to explore various angles as they arise.

---

Protecting Sources and Encouraging Testimonies

Kevin Greenlee [06:29]:

"We protect our sources. We are very careful to protect our sources."

Given the harassment faced by those connected to the case, the hosts invite individuals with relevant information or personal connections to reach out, assuring them of confidentiality and protection.

---

Timeline of Events

Kevin Greenlee [08:38]:

"Crystal met the man now known as Temujin Kinzu in late April, early May, ish of 1986. She was the one who ended the relationship, not he."

Áine Cain [10:22]:

"The information on this Halloween party? I found that in a police report that was dated January 28, 1987."

The timeline outlines the progression from Crystal's relationship with Temujin Kinzu, through incidents of stalking, to the announcement of Crystal and Scott's engagement at a Halloween party, and finally Scott Macklem's murder on November 5, 1986.

---

Key Evidence and Motive

Kevin Greenlee [11:03]:

"Especially since by his own admission, Temujin Kinzu said that at the time of the murder, he believed that not only was Crystal pregnant, but she was pregnant, possibly with his child."

This segment discusses Temujin Kinzu's belief about Crystal's pregnancy and how it establishes a motive for the murder of Scott Macklem. The discussion underscores the relevance of Crystal's testimony in establishing Kinzu's motive.

---

Phil Joplin's Testimony and Alleged Deal

Kevin Greenlee [13:09]:

"Did Phil Joplin get a deal in exchange for his testimony against Kenzu...?"

Anya Cain [15:18]:

"No. So Phil Joplin was a person who spent a short time in kind of a holding cell where Temujin Kinzu was also in a holding cell."

The hosts address allegations that Phil Joplin received a deal in exchange for his testimony. They clarify that there is no substantial evidence supporting the claim of a deal, highlighting affidavits from prosecutors asserting that no such agreement exists. They argue that believing in a massive conspiracy would require disregarding credible legal testimonies and affidavits.

---

Defamation and Character Attacks

Kevin Greenlee [37:28]:

"We might cover some of the appellate stuff, and when we do, we'll certainly mention concurrences and things of that nature."

Anya Cain [40:03]:

"It's not right. I really strongly feel like you should not be getting into vague insinuations. You should be getting into where the evidence is."

The discussion turns to attempts by Temujin Kinzu's supporters to defame Scott Macklem's character. The hosts argue that without concrete evidence of wrongdoing by Macklem, such insinuations are baseless and serve to tarnish his reputation unfairly.

---

Shapiro Concurrence Controversy

Listener Question [41:50]:

"Why did you conveniently leave out the Shapiro concurrence?"

Kevin Greenlee [42:13]:

"The Shapiro concurrence wasn't even relevant for that reason, aloud."

The hosts explain that the Shapiro concurrence, a supplementary opinion in the appellate decision, does not alter the majority's verdict and is considered legal "dicta" that holds minimal weight in the context of the case. They reference an article from the George Mason Law Review that criticizes concurring opinions as "legal clutter."

Meg Penrose, George Mason Law Review [49:43]:

"Concurring opinions are the worst form of legal clutter... They are legal clutter."

This perspective reinforces their stance that the Shapiro concurrence does not significantly impact the case's outcome and should not be a focal point in discussions about the conviction.

---

Media Coverage and Public Perception

Kevin Greenlee [51:04]:

"Good coverage, responsible coverage versus bad coverage is are you given the information that makes you understand the outcome."

Áine Cain [55:57]:

"Our reporting, even if people who disagree with us can inform others..."

The hosts critique mainstream media's coverage of the case, asserting that it often lacks depth and fails to present comprehensive evidence, leading to public confusion and misconceptions about Kinzu's guilt. They emphasize the importance of thorough, evidence-based reporting to foster a clear understanding of the case's nuances.

---

Behavior of Team Kinzu and Public Harassment

Áine Cain [62:48]:

"They are doing it digitally. Temujin is in prison, so he can't kill anybody. But, like, the same impulse of like, you don't get to walk away from me, I will hunt you down kind of nonsense is still there."

The discussion highlights the ongoing harassment and stalking behavior exhibited by Kinzu and his associates towards Crystal and others connected to the case, even from prison. The hosts condemn these actions as unethical and harmful, distinguishing them from legitimate innocence activism.

---

Handling Disagreements and Ethical Reporting

Anya Cain [75:16]:

"Let's not attack victims with no evidence. Let's not post the phone numbers of rape victims and encourage people to harass them."

Kevin Greenlee [76:00]:

"None of us are safe from things like surveillance and data breaches."

The hosts advocate for ethical journalism practices, urging peers and other media to respect victims' privacy, avoid defaming innocent parties without evidence, and refrain from unethical tactics like doxxing. They stress the importance of focusing on factual reporting over sensationalism or bias.

---

Conclusion and Ongoing Efforts

Kevin Greenlee [89:51]:

"We're gonna step back from this case in terms of new episodes. We're gonna continue to report on it..."

Áine Cain [91:01]:

"Thank you so much for listening."

The episode concludes with the hosts indicating a temporary pause in focused coverage on the Scott Macklem case while assuring listeners that ongoing research and reporting will continue as new information emerges. They invite listeners to contribute tips and engage with the Murder Sheet community for further updates.

---

Notable Quotes

• Kevin Greenlee [03:32]:

  "When it comes to feeling bad or off, one top suspect should always be hormone imbalance."

• Áine Cain [39:49]:

  "But if there is a strategy that is credible, and I can imagine in certain circumstances, that strategy might have worked, you don't get to appeal."

• Kevin Greenlee [54:18]:

  "I, I think it was a very effective media campaign that Team Kenzu put on..."

• Áine Cain [66:55]:

  "I think people have a hard time walking away from something that they kind of just had this gut reaction to and never really questioned."

---

Key Takeaways

• Ongoing Reporting: Murder Sheet continues to investigate and report on the Scott Macklem case, with a focus on uncovering new information and addressing public misconceptions.

• Protecting Sources: The hosts prioritize the safety and confidentiality of their sources, encouraging those with pertinent information to come forward.

• Critical Evaluation of Evidence: Emphasis is placed on scrutinizing all available evidence, countering unsupported claims, and debunking baseless conspiracy theories.

• Ethical Journalism: A strong stance against victim blaming, defamation, and unethical reporting practices is maintained to ensure respectful and factual coverage.

---

For more information or to submit tips, listeners are encouraged to contact Murder Sheet at [e-mail].

Transcript

[Anya Cain]

Summer's upon us. So that means breaking out new lightweight breathable pieces. Or if you're like me and lacking in that department, it means it's time to go shopping. The good news is you can get timeless well made garments and fashion pieces that won't go out of style. Just check out our sponsor Quince.

[Kevin Greenlee]

They have summer styles that will make you look great this summer without submerging your bank account in the deep end.

[Anya Cain]

Seriously, I'm about to go shopping there and I don't even know what to choose. I they've got 100% European linen shorts and dresses from $30 Luxe Swimwear for the beach or pool, Italian leather platform sandals and more. I will keep you all updated on what we get.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Same I am tempted by some of their European linen shirts. They are a nice style and look perfect for summer. Quince is a great place to try out new things in terms of fashion because you know the product will be quality and the style would not go out of fashion. It's timeless.

[Anya Cain]

All Quint's items are 50% to 80% less costly than those of their competitors. Plus Murder Sheet listeners are going to get a great deal. Give your summer closet an upgrade with quints. Go to quints.commsheet for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's quince.commsheet to get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.commsheet boosting your own health makes you a bit like a detective. You've got to rule out possible leads and culprits and get to the truth.

[Kevin Greenlee]

When it comes to feeling bad or off, one top suspect should always be hormone imbalance. Fortunately, we have a sponsor who can help you with that.

[Anya Cain]

Happy Mammoth Happy Mammoth is a science backed wellness company with a focus on gut health and hormone balance. They can help you combat all the typical hormonal disruptors, food, air, skincare products.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Their two minute quiz will help you determine the best solutions for your needs.

[Anya Cain]

Their Hormone Harmony supplements have noticeably reduced my random cravings and help my gut health. I really love that and would recommend them to anyone.

[Kevin Greenlee]

For anyone dealing with menopause or perimenopause, it can help relieve those symptoms too. Think more energy, milder mood swings and better sleep.

[Anya Cain]

Also, don't sleep on their prebiotic collagen protein powder. It tastes good with a mild vanilla flavor and I'm using it a lot to keep my skin healthy.

[Kevin Greenlee]

For a limited time. You can get 15% off on your entire order@happy mammoth.com just use the code msheet at checkout. That's happy mammoth.com and use the code msheet for 15% off today.

[Anya Cain]

Craving your next action packed adventure? Audible delivers thrills of every kind on your command. Like Project Hail Mary by Andy Weir where a lone astronaut must save humanity from extinction.

[Kevin Greenlee]

No.

[Anya Cain]

Narrated with stunning intensity by Ray Porter from electrifying suspense and daring quests to spine tingling horror and romance in far off realms, unleash your adventure aside with gripping titles that'll keep you guessing. Discover exclusive Audible originals, hotly anticipated new releases and must Listen bestsellers that hook you from the first minute. Because Audible knows there's no greater thrill than the one that speaks to to you. Discover what lies beyond the edge of your seat. Start your free 30 day trial at audible.com wondery US that's audible.com wondery US content warning this episode contains discussion of murder as well as sexual violence, including rape.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Well, as I'm sure all of you know, recently we've been doing some pretty extensive coverage on the murder of Scott Macklem by a man who now calls himself Temujin Kinzu. It's a complicated case, we've gotten a lot of questions, so we decided we would take an episode to deal with some of those questions and have a discussion about them.

[Anya Cain]

And thanks to everyone who submitted questions. We really appreciate you. My name is Anya Cain. I'm a journalist.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And I'm Kevin Greenlee. I'm an attorney.

[Anya Cain]

And this is the Murder Sheet.

[Kevin Greenlee]

We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews and deep dives into murder cases.

[Anya Cain]

We're the Murder Sheet.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And this is the Murder of Scott Macklem. The Guilt of Temujin Kinzu Part 7 Questions well, I'll be honest, Anya, I always have a special fondness for easy questions. So I'm going to be kind and I'm going to ask the easiest question we got and I'm going to ask it of you to give you a quick win in terms of coming up with an answer.

[Anya Cain]

Well, thank you. I desperately need that.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Anya, we got this question. Are the two of you done covering this case?

[Anya Cain]

No.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Well, if you want to, you can elaborate.

[Anya Cain]

No, we're not done covering the case. We are done, for the time being at least covering it on a weekly basis. We kind of hit the main points of the original case and the commutation hearing, I think, but there's going to be room for other areas of coverage. It'll require time and reporting, so I think it's going to be something we continue to do. Just like how we check back in on other cases we cover extensively, like the Delphi murders or the Burger Chef murders. It will be part of the rotation. It's just not going to be weekly. I think it was important to cover things, this case in a weekly basis because it's a lot of information, It's a lot to unpack. So we wanted to kind of, like, get everyone up to speed. And now that we're sort of at that point where we are all up to speed together, we can kind of move forward there and kind of hit it where it comes up. We have a couple of different angles that we're working on, but sometimes reporting is a little bit like being some kind of fisherman. You put some lines out, you see what happens, and then you go forward.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yes. So we are still working on this case, and this may be a good time for me to say this.

[Anya Cain]

We.

[Kevin Greenlee]

We protect our sources. We are very careful to protect our sources. And this is one of those cases where there is some. A bit of fear, a bit of discomfort. We've reported on how these awful people, these kinzus, continue to harass people online who are connected with this case in any way whatsoever. And so a lot of people are understandably, a little bit wary about coming. Coming forward and potentially subjecting themselves to that sort of harassment. And I can tell you, frankly, we've talked to a number of people behind the scenes who have been reluctant to come on the program for reasons like that. So I just want to extend an invitation. If you are someone who has some sort of connection to this case, or if you have a story to tell about this case or domestic violence or any of these types of issues, you can reach out to us and we can have a conversation. Conversation. And we give you our word we would not use any of your information publicly without your permission.

[Anya Cain]

Yeah. But it could help us understand the situation better. But we want to hear from you. We'll protect you. You don't want to come on the show. You don't have to come on the show. You can just give us information. And when you say domestic violence, I think what we talked about earlier, Kevin, between you and I, was if someone. I think a lot of people don't understand, like, how domestic violence or domestic abuse happens, how sexual violence happens, why somebody would go back to somebody who sexually abused them. I think this can be an opportunity for an expert to come in and maybe talk about some of the aspects of this case to shed some light on that, to further Understanding. So if. If that's you and you're interested in that, let us know. We'd be happy to have you on. I just think it could be a good moment where we could all learn something about that. Because I think sometimes the discourse around this case has been a bit lacking in that.

[Kevin Greenlee]

More than a bit. Let me move on to the next question. Can you guys do a clearer timeline? That is, when did Crystal and Temujin get together? For lack of a better word, when did she leave him? When was the murder? So basically, Crystal met the man now known as Temujin Kinzu in late April, early May, ish of 1986. She was the one who ended the relationship, not he. And she ended it in late June of 1986, the next really big event. Well, actually after she ended it, there were some. Several incidents of stalking going on that summer. Sometime during the course of that summer, he also, Temujenkinzu, moved. But he did continue this stalking behavior. And then we had the Halloween party. And at the Halloween party, there was the announcement that Crystal and Scott were engaged and expecting a baby. Temujin Kinzu was possibly thought to have been at that party. And we know at the time of the murder, he, in his own words, by his own admission, says that he believed wrongly, of course, but he believed wrongly that there was a chance the child could be his. So the Halloween party and then the murder occurred on November 5, less than a week after Halloween.

[Anya Cain]

Right. So that hopefully gives people a little bit more context with the, you know, the whole timeline aspect of it all, because I know that's helpful for people. And what's the information on the Halloween party where they're supposedly there together?

[Kevin Greenlee]

The information on this Halloween party? I found that in a police report that was dated January 28, 1987.

[Anya Cain]

Okay.

[Kevin Greenlee]

So just a few months after Halloween, 1986, obviously.

[Anya Cain]

So people are saying we believe that they're at the same party that night.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yes.

[Anya Cain]

Okay, understood. So that kind of gives you more of a timeline. This all happened pretty fast, over the course of a couple of months, late spring into the summer, and then fall, Scott is dead. And I think it's really notable that there is this announcement at a party about Crystal and Scott expecting. And then very shortly after that, Scott is dead.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Right. So especially since by his own admission, Temujin Kinzu said that at the time of the murder, he believed that not only was Crystal pregnant, but she was pregnant, possibly with his child. And again, that's not true. It's not. It's not Temujin's child. So the question is, how? How did he know on November 5, 1986, that she was pregnant?

[Anya Cain]

Yeah, and I wanna stress that he admitted at the commutation hearing that he knew this. It's not like we're just putting, you know, thoughts in his head. He said yes at the time of the murder. I thought this yes. So that's not up for dispute. We know he knew about this, so I think that's pretty significant.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Anya, here's another question. What do you make of Crystal's keys being found in the glove box of Scott's car?

[Anya Cain]

Well, we know that Crystal and Scott both reported that their cars were being broken into, things were being stolen, uh, things were being rifled through. In one instance, Scott's belongings were, like, thrown on the sidewalk and, like, a lawn. So to me, the presence of Krystal's keys, which she reported stolen, her car, was left out. And then she gets there and her extra set of keys are gone. She still has one set, but now she's missing this extra set. Those being found in the glove box of Scott's car after his murder is an interesting fact. I mean, I don't think it proves anything definitively, but if we also know that someone is harassing them and breaking into their cars, and we also know that Temujin Kenzu had an obsession with Crystal's keys. He was constantly making her give her give him the keys so he can kind of control her. I think it's just another salient and interesting detail. I don't put too much significance on it, but it's another thing that kind of ticks the box with Kenzo, I think, where it's like, okay, the guy who's obsessed with her keys and then is accused of murdering her fiance, you know, and rifling through both of their cars. I don't know, it just seems interesting. But, you know, that's kind of what I think.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Ask me a question.

[Anya Cain]

Did Phil Joplin get a deal in exchange for his testimony against Kenzu, in which he said Kenzu made certain incriminating statements about the murder?

[Kevin Greenlee]

No. So Phil Joplin was a person who spent a short time in kind of a holding cell where Temujin Kinzu was also in a holding cell. And he later testified that Temujin Kinzu made incriminating statements to him about Temujin Kinzu committing this murder. And over the years, Temujin Kinzu, Team Kinzu, as we call them, have made all sorts of claims about Joplin getting a deal or recanting he never formally recanted. A defense investigator for Mr. Kinzu prepared an affidavit which purported to be Mr. Joplin recanting in some detail and announcing details of this deal. Mr. Joplin never signed that affidavit. So I'm not comfortable putting too much weight on that affidavit. What I am comfortable saying is that when Mr. Joplin testified under oath, which he did on two occasions on this matter, he said there was no deal. And two of the prosecutors in this case, Ken Lord and Robert Cleland, prepared affidavits under penalty of perjury in which they said there was no deal. The only argument is at the time he testified, Mr. Joplin had already been sentenced. And he just for a short period, I believe it was just a few months, and then he ended up serving his sentence, not being sent back to prison, but rather being sent to kind of a halfway house. And Mr. Cleland, the prosecutor, said, I had nothing to do with that decision. I would speculate that the reason they sent him to the halfway house instead of back to the prison is it might have caused some security concerns to have a snitch being in the same facility with somebody he snitched on.

[Anya Cain]

Right.

[Kevin Greenlee]

But if you want to believe that Mr. Joplin got a deal, you would need to believe that he lied about that under oath, told the truth about it when he was not under oath, and that two respected prosecutors also lied about it under oath. So you would have to believe pretty massive corruption, which is Temujin Team Kinzu. They certainly seem to lean in that direction. And I tend to think that if you acquire a big conspiracy theory with everybody being corrupt and liar and lying, except for these brave people who tell the truth when they're not under oath, I think you have some problems.

[Anya Cain]

That's a huge problem. I'm also going to add something to that. I'm going to say this. I think it's notable. Phil Joplin and Temujin Kenzu are not like cellmates in jail for months where Phil Joplin is pumping him for information, getting some key details, using that to his advantage. They are ships passing in the night. They are held for a few hours in a holding cell before a pre trial situation, I believe.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yes.

[Anya Cain]

And this all occurs very close to the start of Temujin Kinzu's trial.

[Kevin Greenlee]

I believe it was only days before jury selection began.

[Anya Cain]

And so the state felt they had more than enough to go to trial without this guy Phil Joplin. It was not the, the, the. The cinching of the case or anything. It was just yet another thing they added to it. So, so you have to believe that there's a massive conspiracy because again, it's not like, it's just we have a situation where, like, Wiley, Phil Joplin is tricking the prosecutors to get something or like it's feeding them information that he got from Temin, like there's.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And also because he's desperate to get.

[Anya Cain]

Into a halfway house, you know, instead of jail for a few. Instead of prison for a few months. And, and, you know, I, Again, you have to believe that there's masochism. You can't, you can't look at the Joplin situation and, and think that there's anything innocuous or bumbling or incompetent about the prosecutors. You have to say that they're part of the conspiracy. There's not a, There has to be a conspiratorial angle to this or it doesn't make any sense. And if you think there has to be a conspiracy, then I, I think that's something to, you know, that that's something to assess because that's, that's would require a lot of proof. And the fact that these prosecutors have, have said no, this is what happened, and no one's ever been able to raise, you know, oh, no. The prison officials say that, you know, Cleland was pushing for this. I, I don't. You know, it's just, it's weak. It's very weak.

[Kevin Greenlee]

None of us are safe from things like surveillance and data breaches. These perils are unfortunately part of the reality of living in a very online post privacy world. But you can take back some of the power. DeleteMe is a service that lets you remove your personal data online.

[Anya Cain]

We love Deleteme and we've used it long before the company sponsored us. We've gotten thinly veiled death threats, actual death threats, and all manner of nonsense over time that comes with the territory of speaking up for the truth in true crime. But seriously, some pretty bad people have told us again and again that they want to see harm done to us. So that can be a bit scary.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Delete Me has restored our peace of mind. It is a boon to anyone who's worried about harassment or doxxing or identity theft. They will remove your information from hundreds of data brokers that helps keep you.

[Anya Cain]

Safe, take control of your data, and keep your private life private by signing up for Deleteme now. At a special discount for our listeners today. Get 20% off your delete me plan by texting. Sheet to 64000. The only way to get 20% off is to text sheet to 64000. That's sheet to 64000. Message and data rates may apply.

[Kevin Greenlee]

You've heard us goof up technology on this podcast. A lot.

[Anya Cain]

Like forgetting to put in the music.

[Kevin Greenlee]

I think one time we accidentally set a Tuesday episode on a Monday.

[Anya Cain]

Sometimes we recorded in a library and ended up sounding like we were well.

[Kevin Greenlee]

But there's one app that's so good, so intuitive, so user friendly that not even the two of us have managed to goof it up. We're talking about Cash App. I set this up just the other day. It was so easy and fast that we've been able to get started right away using Cash App.

[Anya Cain]

It's really a breeze. Plus I love that you can customize payments with text and stamps and backgrounds. It makes paying someone back a bit more fun. If you aren't using Cash App yet, then download it from your phone's app store. Sign up. Enter our code msheet in your profile. Send $5 to a friend and you'll get $10 just for getting started.

[Kevin Greenlee]

There are no extra hoops to jump through. I love that they have plenty of measures to protect you. Cash App even flags it. If you might be sending money to a scammer. They are really looking out for you. That makes using it such a breeze. It feels safe, like a bodyguard for your cash. We highly recommend it.

[Anya Cain]

We've used other digital wallet type things before, around the time we started our infamous T shirt business. And they were not as intuitive and.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Easy for a limited time. Only new Cash app users can use our exclusive code to earn some additional cash. For real? No catch. Just download Cash App and sign up. Use our exclusive referral code msheet in your profile. Send $5 through a friend within 14 days and you'll get $10 dropped right into your account. Terms apply. That's money. That's Cash App.

[Anya Cain]

And can I also say that this isn't evidence. This isn't. I'm not saying this is concrete. I'm just. We're just talking now. We're just talking as people. When you look at Kenzie's posts, he's a. He's a prolific poster nowadays on the Internet. And you look at the way he talks to people. When you look at his letter to his daughters that I read in a previous episode that went on for like 30 minutes. When you look at that and the way he communicates with people and then you look at what Phil Joplin testified to, as far as what Temujin Kenzie was telling him about and just sort of info dumping. It fits, it fits.

[Kevin Greenlee]

It fits.

[Anya Cain]

Now, I mean, like, again, this is a situation where. I'm not saying that's an evidence of anything. I'm just saying sometimes the truth tends to hang together pretty well.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yeah, that, that's a great point. The truth hangs together very well and you start finding things to support the truth, even in unexpected places. And I'm going to digress just a bit to, to. To mention some of the most. That commutation hearing was so full of upsetting testimony. But some of the testimony I found particularly upsetting came from Mr. Kinzu's daughter. And she described things like how he assaulted her during a prison visit and some other things. And you might say, well, what kind of support do we have for this? That's one of the things Team Kinzu always says, basically, yeah, sure, a lot of people say he's terrible, but they're all lying. But the truth holds together and you find a corroboration for it in unexpected ways. I remember also in that testimony, Mr. Kinzu's daughter said that Mr. Kinzu's then wife was upset with her relationship with him and was contemplating filing for divorce. And since that episode's come out, one of many things we've discovered is that she did indeed, did indeed file for divorce before she died. And that is something I find very interesting and it supports the credibility of Mr. Kinsey's daughter.

[Anya Cain]

It does. These things add up. And it's like, again, I'm not, I'm not saying we have to be like, oh, well, it matches. So that's, that's it. It's just another thing to add to the pile. To me, it's not something that's particularly weighty. It's like if I was in a holding cell for one of my many serial heists and somebody told a story where it was like, oh, the execution of George Kendall in 1607. Jamestown came up and Anya shrugged her shoulders and said, well, I don't know, can we talk about something else? Like that wouldn't hang together if you know me, but if you, if you do know me. And, oh, she went off on that and started ranting about it and saying like, she has all these weird conspiracy theories about it that would hang together pretty well based on people who've talked to me and who know me. So, you know, I'm just saying, like, I, I believe, I believe Joplin under oath. I Think Joplin, who is not under oath, was ticked off at St. Clair county and probably tickled by the idea of getting attention from these reporters who are basically trying to promote innocence fraud.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And I have no idea what he may or may not have said to this defense investigator who prepared the affidavit was Mitchell Joplin refused to sign. I would have to imagine if Mr. Joplin refused to sign the affidavit, he must have had some reason not to.

[Anya Cain]

We've had a situation, actually. Burger Chef brings this out in. In a certain, you know, in. In people who we encounter through that, where people will talk our ear off about, oh, this guy must have confessed, and I saw this guy bloody on the night of the murders. Then you say, well, you know, are you going to make a statement to police? Oh, no. Because, like, it's like they're just BSers. Like, they're just, you know, they're going to BS you, and it's fun for them and they're telling a yarn, but, you know, it's not something they actually want to put on the record because they know on some level that they're full of it and they'll get in trouble. So, I guess, yeah, I mean, I think it's understandable why people wanted to look at Phil Joplin allegedly recanting. That's understandable. That's something that. It is good for the Kenzu side to look into, but to kind of hold it out as this huge deal all these years later is just. I mean, it doesn't. Doesn't add up.

[Kevin Greenlee]

I'm going to ask a question now, Anya, which I suspect both of us might have things we want to say about this one. This is a question we got. What do you think of people who say the real killer would be found if we looked more at Scott Macklem's background?

[Anya Cain]

Well, I think that's an understandable way to look at a crime. Look at the victim's background and look at who might have a problem with that person. And they did, and it was Temujin Kenzu. So, yeah, got him.

[Kevin Greenlee]

There is some sort of myth, and I'm gonna say it's a stupid myth, that no one, in the course of all the decades since 1986, has ever looked at Scott Maglem's background. He has been thoroughly investigated, including by Mr. Kinzu's own defense investigators, who I'm going to assume are competent and good at their jobs. You heard us talk about our exchanges with Herb Wellser, a professional investigator who's been looking into this case. For a long time. You heard, we asked him any evidence Scott was involved with drugs, Any evidence that he did nefarious things? No evidence. No evidence whatsoever. These people are desperate to find something that they can pin on Scott Macklem. They want to drag this 20 year old young man's name through the mud. They want to attack him and they want to vilify him. All in the cause of trying to get his killer out of prison. And I find that tremendously offensive and upsetting.

[Anya Cain]

I look at it in a, in a, in a, maybe a slightly different way. I think you do need to really look into a victim's background and you might find some things that are not so flattering.

[Kevin Greenlee]

You're right.

[Anya Cain]

No, yeah. So we're in agreement on that.

[Kevin Greenlee]

But at some point you stop, at some point you say, we've looked at, there's nothing there.

[Anya Cain]

If you have a bunch of people who are, who are motivated to find anything negative on a guy because it could clear their client, for lack of a better word, looking for decades, looking for, we're talking about decades at this point. And they find nothing but just people with an agenda vaguely insinuating, like, you know, like Paula Kenzu saying, well, I heard he was in drugs. Well, Paula, no one cares about what you heard about because you're like, you do anything to, to, to, to further, you know, your husband's cause like that, that is like, let's look. I mean, like it's like if you have a bunch of bloodhounds, you know, or, or hunting dogs searching the forest for a fox to find and, and they're running everywhere and they're going all around. And this is happening for years and years and years and years. They don't get anything. At some point you got to say, well, maybe there's nothing there. Maybe the fox is not in that forest. And maybe Scott was just a normal guy who was a student at a community college who liked to play golf and was not into crimes. Maybe the thing that his victimology points to is that he fell in love with a woman who had been abused, raped and stalked by a guy with antisocial personality disorder who saw her as his property and saw Scott as an existential threat to him obtaining his property, Crystal and the baby she was carrying. This man sees his children as extensions of himself. He's just a narcissistic relationship with these kids. And for him, the ultimate weakness, the ultimate being dominated by another man would be some other man raising his child, some other man getting with his woman, his property. So yeah, I think the victimology does tell us who killed Scott. It was the guy who was stalking him and threatening him for months before he was murdered. Imagine that.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Imagine. Yes, I think it's very, very clear. And this family has gone through an unimaginable loss. There is a child that never got to know a father. It's horrifying. And I would hope people would stop smearing Scott Macklem's name until and unless you can come up with evidence that he actually did do something nefarious. And I don't believe he ever. Yeah, I think it's time to move on from this.

[Anya Cain]

Drop it. Unless you got something. Put up or shut up.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Hemogen Kinzu took this young man's life, and now Team Kinzu is trying to take away his reputation.

[Anya Cain]

Yeah, it's not right. I really. I really strongly feel like you should not be getting into vague insinuations. You should be getting into where the evidence is. The evidence is that he was a normal dude not doing crimes very much, unlike Temujin Kenzu. So I don't know. I. I think I. I think he was.

[Kevin Greenlee]

He.

[Anya Cain]

He just crossed. He like. Like Crystal. They crossed paths with the wrong person. And for a lot of people, Temujin Kenzu was that wrong person. Not all of them, they didn't end up dead, but he hurt a lot of people along the way. And I think he was escalating over time. I think he felt like he was untouchable. I think he felt like he was smarter than everyone else, which is we're going to talk about. It's not true.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Anya, who were those two mysterious men stalking Scott? And what is the incident that is being discussed there?

[Anya Cain]

An incident that is honest, misinterpreted, or kind of misinformation is put out there. And I. I think most of the people are putting out the misinformation. They're not trying to mislead anyone. I think they're just confused. And I think this is one of those talking points that's gotten repeated so many times by people.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Well, I think some of the people who put it out are trying to confuse.

[Anya Cain]

Okay, that's true. But I think. I think others are just more of like, oh, I heard this, and this makes me, you know, think he's innocent. This incident is. Is discussed where two men are said to have gone to Scott's workplace and lurked around, and Scott made comments to a co worker saying, you know, like, these people are, you know, like, I. I need to avoid this. And. And basically kind of the the sense was that they were going there to start a confrontation with Scott. Scott hung back. They left without incident. But it was this kind of incident that's like. Okay. And what the Team Kenzu side says is that we don't know who those men are. Who are those mysterious men? They were stalking Scott. Maybe he had other enemies. Okay, when you frame it like that, yeah, that sounds like he might have other enemies. But the problem is that they were identified, or at least one of them was identified as Temujin Kenzu. Yes, we know that that was Temujin Kenzu because Scott said that and because.

[Kevin Greenlee]

One of the people who witnessed the encounter later identified one of the people in the store is Temujin Kenzu. So it is technically true to say we don't know who those two people were, but it is true to say we know who one of them were?

[Anya Cain]

Yeah. Didn't Scott say something like that? One of the guys was like, had a thing with Crystal and was being really weird about it or something like that?

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yeah. And again, one of the employees later looks and identifies Temujin Kenzu.

[Anya Cain]

So we know that there's no mystery there. There's no other stalker. I mean, there. I'd be curious to know who the guy with Temujin Kenzu was, I guess, but I mean, it's one of his. It's one of his friends. It's one of his little lackeys, you know, I mean, he. It's not. It's connected to the Temujin Kenzu stalking. It's not connected to anything else.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yeah, one thing to give Temujin Kinzu credit, one thing he is good at is attracting lackeys and people to do his bidding.

[Anya Cain]

Yeah.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And he continues to do so.

[Anya Cain]

I don't know why, but he does have that. He does have that skill for some reason. But, yeah, it's. It's like, again, this is something where if you see people talking about this, correct them they're wrong. I mean, it's just. It shouldn't be getting repeated in 2025.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Sonya, why is it okay for Temujin Kinzu's prior bad acts, such as his repeated rapes and abuse of Crystal, to come into his murder trial? Isn't that not allowed?

[Anya Cain]

This is a really good question, and I really appreciate this person for asking it, because what we hear often in true crime is, hey, you can be a dirtbag, you can be a scumbag, you can be an awful person. And that shouldn't really come into your murder trial because it may not be Relevant. So, for instance, if somebody has a history of like, you know, being really mean or screaming at their. Let's say someone gets in a bar fight, right? And then they're later accused of a rape murder, right. The bar fight's not really necessarily linked to that. So, you know, you don't want to bring that in just to show the person's violent, because that doesn't really have any bearing on the facts of the rape murder case. It didn't happen in a bar. And the effect would be so prejudicial for the jury to hear that where they're just kind of, oh, well, this guy sounds like a violent guy, so maybe he would do this. It's not fair. It violates the defendant's rights, and so it should not be allowed. But there can be an exception to this general rule. Do you want to talk about that?

[Kevin Greenlee]

Well, it. Basically, it boils down to, is there a connection between these acts and the actual crime? And in this case, the fact that Temujin is making threats, the. The fact that he has this violent relationship with Crystal, these. These establish a motive. They explain why he committed this crime. And so that makes it relevant to bring it in. That's not like a blank check. Certainly. When we visited the commutation hearing, we learned about a variety of other women who had been abused terribly by Temujin Kinzhen. And I can say with some confidence, I feel there are other women out there who have not come forward who have also been abused by him. And it would have been inappropriate to bring in at the murder trial the testimony of, say, Jane Doe saying, oh, he raped me too. Because there's no connection between what he may or may not have done to Jane Doe and what he did to the person that he was worried might raise his child.

[Anya Cain]

Right. So, I mean, I'll bring up an example from the commutation hearing. A woman we called G brought up that Temujin Kenzu had chased her down. She was on a date with a man, and he physically assaulted that man and was. Was stalking them. And this is after they had broken up. So, I mean, you might say, well, that sounds pretty similar to his reaction to Scott and Crystal dating. And you're right, but it doesn't have anything to do with the. It doesn't have any bearing on Scott's murder per se. I mean, it kind of does because you're saying, well, it's a pattern of behavior, but it's. That's a. That's a thin link. You can't make that work legally. So that didn't come in. They weren't getting that in. All they got in was his treatment of Crystal, which was remarkably horrible, and his statements to Crystal about wanting to harm Scott and his possessive nature with Crystal and all the threats he made to her. So that has a bearing on what happened to Scott. So therefore it's okay. And one thing we can all rest assured about is that, you know, yeah, the appeals courts in Michigan and the higher courts in Michigan are filled with judges who, you know, scrutinize this pretty heavily.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And I'm sure it's no surprise judges take this sort of thing extremely seriously. They think about it very, very hard. And they look at everything. They don't just look at a couple of newspaper articles or talking points from defense investigators. They look at the entire record. And again and again and again and again, the judges in Michigan who have looked at this case have found no reason to overturn the trial.

[Anya Cain]

So when people say, well, they just character assassinated him with Crystal and whatnot. Well, no, they gave a motive. They gave a very strong motive. Crystal's testimony is crucial for establishing a motive. If you don't know the background with Crystal and Scott and Temujin's statements to Crystal and Temujin's treatment of Crystal, you don't really have the motive.

[Kevin Greenlee]

You don't understand it. And it's like, oh, what, he just killed a stranger for no reason? Yeah, you need to explain or why.

[Anya Cain]

Would he kill this guy? Because, you know, they were broken up, so why would he care about this Scott guy? You know, you have to look at what Crystal has to say. And let. Let's be clear. The jury got to sit through Crystal's testimony. The Crystal was there was the cross examination. So there was an opportunity for Temujin's side to knock down what Crystal was saying or to dispute it or to say, no, no, no, you're lying about this. And for the jury to say, well, I don't find her believable.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And that's actually, I'm delighted you brought that up, Ms. Kane. Oh, I thank you, Mr. Greenlee, because that leads me to 1993 decision from the Michigan Court of Appeals, which they talked about this bad acts testimony being allowed in. And they said, well, maybe some of it could have been excluded if the defense lawyer wanted to. But they point out that the defense attorney strategy seemed to be focused on attacking the credibility of Crystal and making Crystal seem ridiculous. And so as part of that strategy, they made the decision to let some of this testimony in. So they could then ask questions like, oh, if he raped you, why did you go back to him? And all these other things. And the thing is, if there is a strategy that is credible, and I can imagine in certain circumstances that strategy might have worked, you don't get to appeal. Strategy that goes badly.

[Anya Cain]

Yeah. Oh, whoops. The jury actually believed her over your client. Well, that's tough, you know, but I mean, but that, that's the victim blaming kind of strategy of like, let's put Crystal in the hot seat, let's put her on trial. It just didn't work in this situation. But it was tried.

[Kevin Greenlee]

So, yeah, they really tried hard to shake Crystal's credibility and say, oh, all this stuff he told you about ninjas, I bet you got that out of a movie. They really tried hard. And Crystal was such a good witness who also had the benefit of telling the truth, that the jury saw through those efforts. You don't get to appeal. Bad strategy.

[Anya Cain]

I mean, I think it was a. I think it's a strategy that morally makes me uncomfortable because also asking things like, why did you go back to him after he raped you? I mean, if anyone understands anything about sexual violence, I think we can answer that question for ourselves. I mean, that, that's what happens.

[Kevin Greenlee]

I mean, that happens a lot.

[Anya Cain]

That's very common.

[Kevin Greenlee]

I think we as a society, thank God, know and understand a lot more about sexual abuse and violence in 2025 than we did in 1986, 1987.

[Anya Cain]

But, but the fact is that back in 1986 or 1987, I can understand why the defense attorney went that way. Even if I find it uncomfortable, I can understand why they went that way. It's not even a bad strategy. It's, it's a valid strategy for the time. It doesn't play well. Now, I think in certain instances it might, but I think it's much riskier now back then, I don't know, I mean, kind of a roll of a dice. And that's taking a completely amoral stance on it. You know, I don't, I don't believe victim blaming is, is right even in these instances, but I can understand why this defense attorney did it. And yeah, there's no accounting for strategy. This was a strategic decision. And like, I don't know, it's just, it's been looked at. It's been really heavily scrutinized legally. So when people just sort of say, oh, bad acts, bad acts, if the bad act is completely relevant to the, to establishing motive, and it's not, you know, it's just sort of allowed in in this instance. It's. It's not a problem. It's. It's. It's just not. So here's a question, a little bit of a heated question. We got. We'll answer heated questions.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yeah, this.

[Anya Cain]

This one was pretty mad in their email. But, you know, I mean, hopefully they.

[Kevin Greenlee]

This question amused me.

[Anya Cain]

There is a whole long rant, but I'll boil it down to the essence of, I think, what they're asking. And it's a fair. I mean, we'll answer whatever you guys send us. Why did you conveniently leave out the Shapiro concurrence?

[Kevin Greenlee]

The Shapiro concurrence would have changed everything. So.

[Anya Cain]

So I just imagine, like, we're playing Uno and someone throws down something in like, a. The Shapiro concurrence, and we're like, whoa, oh, my goodness.

[Kevin Greenlee]

So let's. Let's talk about this. And first, there's a bit of background.

[Anya Cain]

What the hell is the Shapiro concurrence? Some people may be wondering.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Well, first of all, let me say it's very interesting to me that Team Kinzu really is upset if you don't include every single last one of their precious talking points. And they don't mind if you leave out facts that go against them, including huge facts that go against them, like a history of rape and violence or tampering with witnesses. So the Shapiro concurrence, first of all, when we talk about concurrence, that is, when a case is heard before a court, oftentimes you have a majority of the opinion issued where the court issues its opinion. And then some judges will issue what is called a concurrence, where they say, well, I agree with the result, but I have a few other things to say, too. So that is what a concurrence is. And one thing that might come to mind right away is that the focus of our coverage was testimony. We were not doing episodes based on appellate decisions. And so the precious Shapiro concurrence wasn't even relevant for that for that reason, aloud. And secondly, the Shapiro concurrence is also not super relevant for other reasons. There is a concept in judicial opinions called dicta. And dicta are things that are included in a judge's opinion that don't really relate to the final decision he makes. If I'm a judge writing an opinion about, I think Anya looks good in a big hat, and that's my ruling. And then in the middle of the ruling, I just suddenly said, well, you know what? I also really like Rice Krispie treats. Okay, maybe it's interesting that I like Rice Krispie treats. Maybe that's some sort of key insights into my character. Maybe it gives you an idea how I might rule if I get a Rice Krispie treat related decision to. To make. But it doesn't really mean anything because it doesn't deal with the holding. And also, you could make an argument that concurrences themselves aren't really super relevant because if you're writing a concurrence, you're basically saying, well, I agree with the majority, but I could not get them to agree with this particular argument.

[Anya Cain]

So you're basically saying, no one else agreed with me, but I'm going to riff on this for a minute. Is that what you're saying?

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yeah. So kind of like you're a podcaster.

[Anya Cain]

I guess, podcast moment for a judge.

[Kevin Greenlee]

So there was this, I believe it was a three judge panel, one of whom was Mr. Shapiro, and they had a decision to make about whether or not a particular set of facts warranted giving Kinzu a new trial. And the, the judges decided, no, it doesn't.

[Anya Cain]

So Shapiro included.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Well, he issued a concurrence, which means he joined with that decision. Okay, so then he issued a concurrence saying, yeah, I joined in this decision, but. And this is paraphrased.

[Anya Cain]

Well, let me do a backflip to show you.

[Kevin Greenlee]

All this is paraphrased. He said, hey, I concur that he shouldn't get a new trial over this one particular argument. But do you remember, do you remember, folks, a few years ago when in another court case, this whole thing about prior bad acts came up and another court said that having that testimony wasn't enough to get him a new trial. I would have ruled differently. Now there's more to it than that. And if we do appellate stuff, I'll go into it. So basically he is making an opinion about an issue that wasn't before him and it didn't have anything to do with the actual decision that was before him. And I think that this is the big thing that Team Kinzu has, is this offhanded riffing by a judge. I don't find that too compelling.

[Anya Cain]

No, it's not. They do do this. There's a website that they have where it's all these. Oh, these, all these people agree with us. And that's like one of the big things. And it's like, it's like, it's basically like a footnote in a book being pulled out and touted as like A huge deal, but it's not even a footnote, would tell you relevant information about sourcing and whatnot. This is like somehow like less relevant than that because it's, it's basically like this isn't what we're talking about here today. But let me tell you, and let's.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Talk about what they were talking about there today. Let's talk about, instead of talking about this concurrence, let's actually talk about the majority opinion of the case. And I think majority opinions carry a lot more weight than dicta in a concurrence. And I'm going to read a couple of paragraphs from what the other judges ruled in their majority opinion. Kinzu argues that the evidence was weak against him. This assertion, however, is unsupported by the record. There was testimony that Kinzu had a strong motive to kill Macklem and had threatened to hurt him on multiple occasions. Kinzu also made incriminating remarks during his four hour telephone conversation with Krystal and in conversations with police investigators. In addition, Kinzu made further incriminating remarks to his cellmate Joplin. Although Kinzu claims that Joplin recanted. The only thing to substantiate this is the affidavit of defendant's investigator recounting a conversation with Joplin. In any event, Joplin testified on two occasions at trial and at an evidentiary hearing that Freeman had made incriminating remarks. Although no shotgun was ever found, Crystal testified that she saw a gun in Kinzu's possession that matched the description of a shotgun as opposed to a rifle. A green army jacket was found in Kinzu's car which was consistent with the testimony of the eyewitnesses. The man seen in the bushes and driving away from the parking lot was in a green army style jacket. With respect to his alibi witnesses, the jury heard that Kinzu attempted to manipulate several of these witnesses. Finally, although Kinzu claims to have established an airtight alibi through the testimony of disinterested witnesses, a review of the testimony indicates that his alibi was not as airtight as he would like the court to believe. Kinzu received a trial that resulted in a verdict worthy of confidence. End quote. So maybe instead of clinging to this Shapiro concurrence, maybe we should start looking at majority opinions of the judges in these courts. Because I think if we did, we would walk away with a fuller understanding of this case.

[Anya Cain]

Yeah, and again, I like well said. I mean, do you want to read this thing from George Mason Law Review about these concurrences? And dicta.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Do you want to?

[Anya Cain]

Okay. I mean, you found it, but do you want me to?

[Kevin Greenlee]

This is an article by Meg Penrose in the George Mason Law Review, just.

[Anya Cain]

In case you think we're being overly dismissive of dicta. I guess.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yeah, go ahead.

[Anya Cain]

Quote. Good judges are clear writers, and clear writers avoid legal clutter. 1. Legal clutter occurs when judges publish multiple individually written opinions that are neither useful nor necessary. This essay argues that concurring opinions are the worst form of legal clutter. Unlike majority opinions, concurring opinions are legal asides, musings of sorts, often by a single judge, that add length and confusion to an opinion, often without adding meaningful value. Concurring opinions do not change the outcome of a case. Unlike dissenting opinions, they do not claim disagreement with the ultimate decision. Instead, concurring opinions merely offer an idea or viewpoint that failed to garner support from the rest of the court. They are cries for attention that are usually better left unwritten. Concurring opinions are legal clutter. End quote. That is brutal, and I love that. But it's also, you know, it's sort of like someone standing on a soapbox telling you their opinion about something that's irrelevant. I mean, yeah, but. But legally. And like, I can see where maybe there are instances where you want to do that, but I don't think it means that we need to all take it super seriously in the context of this case.

[Kevin Greenlee]

We don't need to drop everything we're doing to include the Shapiro concurrence.

[Anya Cain]

And Shapiro was basically saying he would have left more of the bad act stuff out. Right. In the past.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Well, he thought that the bad act stuff should not have been included.

[Anya Cain]

Okay. Even though it goes to motive. Well, thanks for your input, Mr. Shapiro, but.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And I want to talk a little bit more because I think it's important to talk about this whole question of what should or should not be included when you're covering a case. I was really struck, Anya, when you and I were covering Delphi, that a lot of people who were getting information about the trial from other sources were shocked at the outcome of the case. And I think one yardstick of good coverage, responsible coverage versus bad coverage is are you given the information that makes you understand the outcome? And that doesn't mean you necessarily have to agree with the outcome. But I would say if you listen to our coverage of the Delphi trial, no matter where you stand on the verdict, you understand why that verdict happened. And I think a lot of the coverage of this Temujin Kinzu case over the years has left out so much absolutely crucial information that people are left confused and bewildered and they don't understand what happened. And I think that speaks to the failure of the press coverage of this case. And one example is this whole thing about him calling Temkinsu, calling and manipulating witnesses in order to concoct an alibi. This was literally cited in trial testimony, and it was literally mentioned by a juror in the press as to why they voted the way they did. And yet no one talked about this.

[Anya Cain]

No.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And I think leaving things like that out, that is a huge failure that leaves people confused and not understanding. And I suggest that not mentioning the Shapiro concurrence doesn't mean anything.

[Anya Cain]

I, I, again, this person was very upset with us. I, like, I'm not. I'm not putting that person on blast or whatever, but I, I do feel like there's an element of, like, I. Okay, why are you not upset with anybody else for mentioning, like, the majority opinion or, like, anything else about this case that's inconvenient for Kenzu? I mean, that, that's. There seems to be a bit of a cognitive dissonance coming on. And, you know, and again, people ask us about the Shapiro concurrence, we'll talk about it. But I really feel like I agree with you. The mainstream press's coverage of this has been very lacking. It's got a lot of holes in it, and they seem to skirt around a lot of issues that are more negative for Kenzu. And that also would explain why he was found guilty and why multiple courts have reviewed this and basically said, you.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Got a fair trial.

[Anya Cain]

Got a fair trial. Not guilty. Yeah.

[Kevin Greenlee]

We might cover some of the appellate stuff, and when we do, we'll certainly mention concurrences and things of that nature. But one thing that's important to realize is attorneys tend to disagree about things. So the fact that you might have one person saying, oh, this wasn't right, doesn't really mean anything. You just have to go where the majority is.

[Anya Cain]

Yeah, look at the majority. And also, like, I mean, again, I guess it's a situation where I think if we want to talk about things that were left out of the coverage, there's probably more salient things to talk about than this. Again, I'm not.

[Kevin Greenlee]

None of our coverage.

[Anya Cain]

No, I mean, the general coverage of this case, and I'm really looking at the mainstream press because it's been. You look this stuff up and it's, it's. There's a lot of columns about how Kenzo is missing Christmas at home. And there's not really a lot of anything else about like, you know, what actually happened at trial or in the appeals. It's just, it's just these journalists that cover it seem to take for granted and take at, at face value that this is a wrongful conviction and he's definitely factually innocent. And that's a bad place to start when you're covering. And it tells me that this media campaign, this sort of media bombardment that's been going on from Team Kenzoo for years has been very effective. It's been very effective because you have immediately, I think it's like, you know, a journalist sometimes goes into a situation not really knowing the facts, but they also don't want to seem stupid so they don't ask the right questions. And it becomes like, Mr. Kenzie, how do you feel about your wrongful conviction? As opposed to like, well, what is your response to these allegations of like you raping multiple women? And that's a problem. That's not really journalism. That's just kind of taking a bunch of pre chewed defense talking points and spitting it back out at your audience.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Or Mr. Kenzoo, why were you trying to manipulate witnesses?

[Anya Cain]

Instead it's like, Mr. Kendu, can you tell me how it feels to be such a good person in such a bad position? And it's like, no, that's not, that's not good coverage.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Anya, what did we do to research and corroborate what we reported?

[Anya Cain]

Well, I mean, we really relied mostly, I mean, as you can imagine, based on our statements about the press coverage, we really relied mostly on reading the entire trial transcript and reading the entire.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Commutation transcript, as well as thousands of pages of court filings. And let me quickly say about that, I would like to try to figure out a way to make some, if not all of that available. The problem is there's a lot of personal information in those files, so we.

[Anya Cain]

Need to redact it heavily.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And right now we're very, very busy and I'm, I'm not sure, maybe we can pick out a few highlights here or there.

[Anya Cain]

Yeah, maybe we can do that. It's like we want, I mean, I'd love to just like do it like, oh, here they are, you know, but like, I, I mean, I don't know that that's not really responsible given the situation here and considering their harassment, given the fact that Paula Kenzu lurks around and basically stalks people over this case. Yeah, it's not, it's not responsible I mean, there's, there's people doing horrible things out here, so I, I wouldn't feel good about that. I would rather. And she may already have a lot of this information, but it doesn't, it doesn't make it right for us to just not redact it and throw it out there for, you know, whatever, public consumption. But we can maybe find a compromise where we kind of take some selections of stuff we've emphasized a lot and put that out there in a redacted format.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And we talked to a lot of people.

[Anya Cain]

We talked to a lot of people behind the scenes. You may not realize that because obviously we didn't do, like, interviews on this, but a lot of people do not want to be interviewed. They don't want to, like, have their voice out there, but they're willing to talk to you about their own experiences. And we talk to a lot of people who we will be keeping private because we protect our sources. If you want to talk to us and you don't want that to be revealed, we will keep you safe. We will keep that off the record. And you can email us at murder Sheet gmail dot com. We protect our sources. We talk to a lot of people for this case, and we will not be divulging that unless in the future they say, actually, let's go, let's go public. I want to tell you what I know, but, yeah, in most, I mean, in a case where we're doing a deep dive, we are going to be, at the very least attempting to talk to a lot of people if we don't get a response, you know, but we'll be doing the reach outs or at least attempting to. So, I mean, that.

[Kevin Greenlee]

We certainly reached out to the Kinseys.

[Anya Cain]

That that case is. I mean, but this case is no different in that sense. I mean, like, and, and frankly, I feel like in a case like this where there's so many moving parts and whatnot, it. It makes sense to also talk to people behind the scenes to kind of get a sense of, you know, what's what and what's happening. So. And again, we offered to do that with the Kenzus themselves, and, you know, they did not take us up on that request. And then they acted like we didn't talk to them. And it's like, well, we tried.

[Kevin Greenlee]

What a surprise that the Kinzus were less than scrupulously honest about that.

[Anya Cain]

I know, it's so weird. It's like a pattern.

[Kevin Greenlee]

What question do you want to deal with next?

[Anya Cain]

Yeah, all right. I, I I guess here's a question we got from. From a listener. And again, thank you guys all for asking questions, even some of the questions that were mad at us. We appreciate you because it gives us the chance to talk about stuff. So this is a question that was not mad at us. It's just. Given his pattern of using proxies to harass and attack his targets, what role do you think proxies might have played in his campaign against Crystal and Scott? We know that he had a guy with him when he was stalking Scott at one point. Other than that, it's hard to know. I mean, I don't want to speculate and say other people were involved in the murder because I don't have evidence for that. The evidence points to Kenzu. So it's a good question, and it's something I'd be very curious in, knowing more about Kenzu's social circle at the time of the murders and just learning more about him in that sense. But, you know, other than that, what we've seen it directly manifests in is him getting women to marry him and then basically be his handmaidens of support and, you know, like, help meets who go around and make their whole personality about getting him out of prison. And in a way, Paula is one of them. The latest in, you know, Amiko was before her. She's passed away since. I. I feel bad for these women on a certain level. I mean, they're doing it to themselves, but it just seems like getting manipulated to spend a lot of time, money, energy, and basically wasting their lives over this guy. So, I mean, in a way, it's tragic for them too, even if they're, uh. I. What we. What we've heard from people is that Amico was not necessarily harassing people in the same way as Paula in that. I don't know. I mean, from what we've heard from sources, I don't feel like Amico was necessarily like, attacking people at that level. It was more of like, let's get him out, let's get him out. And. And with Paula, it's been more personal attacks on people.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Well, Emiko did do some things. Like, I'm struck again by. In the. The testimony of Mr. Kinzu's d. She's in an elementary school and she's called into the office. Emiko is on the line with the principal, and she's gotten Temujin Kinzu also on the line. So she would allow herself to be used to get Temujin Kinzu included on cause which he would not have been able to make directly from prison.

[Anya Cain]

I'm not excusing Emiko. Emiko did horrible in harassing things as well. I guess I'm more saying Paula seems to have a lot of anger about this, to the point where she's posting people's cell phones online and including, you know, crystals, including her husband's rape victims. So I guess it just seems like she's. What we've heard is that she's a more intense iteration of this phenomenon.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yeah.

[Anya Cain]

And, you know, and that's, again, like, it's. It's pathetic. It's. I think. I think we need a stronger term than pick me girl for women who do stuff like this, for women who basically fall under the thrall of a predator and then are hurting other women in their actions around their, quote, unquote, activism around it. This is an activism. This is deranged. Saying this is innocence activism is an insult to people who do innocence activism. You don't see people who are innocence activists in other cases, I hope, posting victims cell phone numbers and telling people to call and harass them. Yeah, you don't see that, nor should you. That's not appropriate. That's not activism. That's being a horrible person. So, yeah, this is who Paula Kenzoo is. I'd be really curious, I guess, just to know if, like, people in her life just look at her and say, like, what is she doing? Or, like, I mean, does anyone care enough about her to be like, hey, knock it off. This isn't, this isn't a good thing for you to be doing. I just don't know.

[Kevin Greenlee]

I would also be curious. As far as I know, no one on team Kinzu has come out and said, you know what? It's wrong for Paula to be putting the phone numbers of rape victims out there. It's wrong for Paula to falsely accuse Scott Macklem of rape. And previously, before we release our episode on that, you could say, well, maybe Team Kinzer just didn't know about those things. But now when Team Kinzu is silent on those points, it raises other questions. But let's move on. How many potential witnesses did Kinzu try to contact and influence? We know of at least three, probably more. You say he's a serial rapist. How many women did he rape? Again, from the commutation hearing and our own reporting, we know of at least three. But our feeling is it is much, much higher than that.

[Anya Cain]

Yes, I believe it's higher, but three documented, at least in the commutation hearing. And, and, and, and, and from all interviews that we've. I mean, from conversations we've had. But I, I believe these women. I mean, I believe these women in this situation. I don't, I'm not of the school that you should just believe rape accusations. I think false rape accusations can happen. But when people are coming forward separately and saying, I went through the same exact modus operandi of a, of a predator, of a rapist, that's pretty compelling. Yeah, that's pretty compelling. And I, I believe Crystal. I believe she has credibility. I don't think her story has changed. I believe these other women. There was another woman who came forward and, and even her mother was talking about, yeah, you know, he, he raped my daughter. I mean, it's, it's heartbreaking.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Anya, why do people talk about Kinzu like he's an incredible person?

[Anya Cain]

I don't know. I don't know. That's the biggest mystery for me.

[Kevin Greenlee]

That's what I was about to say. I mean, you can go online and one of the. It used to be one of the top hits on Google was this article where it talked about how great Kinzu is because, oh, he started crying, talking about puppies. Oh, he's just an old softie. It's like, what kind of nonsense is this? And it also strikes me a lot of the people who have affiliated themselves with Team Kinzu seem to have gotten, like, certain impressions of him. I don't think they've really grappled with the violence or, frankly, the stupidity. He's not a smart man. One of the myths out there is people say, oh, he's smart. He's not smart. I check in on his Facebook page the other day. On Facebook, he was expressing curiosity about Flat Eartherism. You know, this is not a smart man.

[Anya Cain]

When you said, oh, my God, Kenzie's flirting with the Flat Earth movement, I thought you were kidding. I was like, that's, that's too perfect. That's too much of a punchline. But, you know, he's just, he's just a conspiratorial nut. I mean, like, like, there's no. I mean, there's no. We don't have to be impressed with this. I, I, I, I, He, He's. There isn't a conspiracy theory out there that he hasn't, like, fallen in love with, it seems like.

[Kevin Greenlee]

I don't find him charming. I don't find him smart. I understand that. Some people do. It baffles me. I don't get it.

[Anya Cain]

He was trying to be a backwoods Charles Manson in the 80s and it blew up in his face and he killed someone and got busted for it immediately. He's not an impressive person. I mean, why people kind of fall under his sway, I don't know. I think what if I had to speculate, I think people who are good hearted and care about justice hear a story where this guy would have had to fly a plane hundreds of miles and like get in under the wire and they, they immediately make up their minds, not guilty. And then they dismiss kind of things that don't sound as good about him or things he says that kind of hit a little bit off and they're coming from this place of like, he's not guilty, he's not guilty. That doesn't matter, that doesn't matter, that doesn't matter. And they get the blinders on. That's what happens.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yeah. Then they grasp onto things like, oh, prior bad acts. People are just prejudiced because of the prior bad acts. And no, that's not it. There is specific evidence that ties him to this crime.

[Anya Cain]

I think it was a very effective media campaign that Team Kenzie put on where again people are learn, people learn about the case with this kind of crazy plain theory, oh, the prosecutor must have been corrupt because who could believe it? And that's not what happened. But people hear that and there's the anchoring bias of immediately like, well, that's what I heard. So that's what I'm going to believe. And I'm going to be suspicious of things that might change my mind at this point. I think that's what we are seeing. I also think there's people who fall into the category of like, I'm basically undecided or I don't think I would have voted to convict. But I'm not saying he's innocent. And that's, to me, that's an intellectually honest way to be that that's fine. I don't have a problem with people who are just like, I'm not there for conviction. I mean that that's fine. I don't have, I don't have a problem with that. I might disagree, but you know, I feel like that's a place where I can understand being. But I think for the people who become very much sucked in by his whole shtick, it's more of like they, they get hit with this thing, they can't believe it. They hear his version of it and then it's a, it's, it's like some of this stuff just hasn't been really roundly Debunked. I, I've heard people say, well, I've heard both sides already. Um, you know, I, I don't think the case for guilt really was out there. I don't.

[Kevin Greenlee]

I, I looked. I looked really, really hard.

[Anya Cain]

I don't know what these people are talking about. Maybe they got something that was more down the middle and then pro innocence. But I don't think that, like, the, like, the guilt side has really been out there.

[Kevin Greenlee]

I never found anything on it. I. Look, I've seen some people say, oh, I vaguely remember seeing something about guilt. I don't know. I, I haven't seen it.

[Anya Cain]

If you find it, let us know. I'd be curious. But I, I don't. I, I just think people have a hard time walking away from something that they kind of just had this gut reaction to and never really questioned.

[Kevin Greenlee]

All the coverage I saw was, oh, he's obviously innocent. This is one of the most obvious examples of wrongful conviction out there.

[Anya Cain]

I think best case scenario, maybe a couple of articles here and there that were more down the middle, but nothing that was really making the case as it was presented to the jury.

[Kevin Greenlee]

So, Anya, here's another question to ponder. Why do you believe Kinzu's terrorizing of Kristals and others and his antisocial personality disorder have been ignored by the standard coverage of the case?

[Anya Cain]

I think once a narrative takes root to the extent that it's just accepted at face value that it's harder for information counter to that narrative to come in and take root. So I'm not saying that people who were reporting that he's obviously innocent were, like, ignoring that. I just don't think it was coming out. And I think the reason. It's like, it's almost like a rainforest. Like, the, the tree canopy is so thick, it's not allowing some of the plants on the ground to really grow because no one's, no one's looking at that. And frankly, nobody really wants to hear that because it's. It's uncomfortable. And I think I have a lot of respect for people who are in the mode of like, hey, I think he's. I don't know if he's guilty or not, or maybe I kind of lean towards not guilty, but he did these things. He's a predator, and he's a really horrible person, because I think that's an intellectually honest stance. You know, you can be a bad person and not guilty. Kevin and I are of the opinion that he's very much guilty as charged of murder. And guilty of doing these other things as well. So, you know, but I think you also, I mean, it's hard. I mean, now people have to be in, you know, are we going to just. Oh, these, these people who, you know, said he raped them, they're all lying. Everyone's lying about him. Like every, you know, he never attacked anybody, he never raped anybody. And he, he's alluded to. I used to be kind of a bad person. But again, the, the sense I've gotten is that he's basically saying I used to be kind of a wild guy who had sex with a lot of ladies and they were all crazy about me and then some of them lied about me and I went to prison. Like, that's not admitting wrongdoing. That's a fantasy. You know, like that is a fantasy. I don't think he's really capable of admitting wrongdoing to the extent that he did wrong or making amends or anything like that, which is also one of the reasons I think he should absolutely not be let out of prison ever. But why has this not come out? I, Again, I, I think, I think it's just, it's. I think it, it. I, I don't know, honestly. I mean, on some level it's baffling to me because you were the one who started looking into this. Kevin. Was it difficult to find any of this information?

[Kevin Greenlee]

No.

[Anya Cain]

No. Okay. I think people are getting pre chewed food from either defense aligned people or people who are literally on Team Kenzie and it's just not digging more. And like, I'm not saying anyone had any intention of hiding anything, but I've.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Said it before, I'll say it again. What happened was I read an article, I believe it was an NBC article about the case which made a number of bold claims which came from Team Kinzu. And those claims were such that I thought to myself, if this was true, he would not have been convicted and he would have been let out a long time ago. Gosh, I wonder what the truth is. And I got my hands on some court documents and pretty quickly realized what the truth was.

[Anya Cain]

I'm gonna talk about this later, but I also see it something where, like, I see some of the discourse and people. And people have emailed us this too, where it's almost like people get into the mode once they're so certain of something that like they're running everything in that mode through the lens of, well, he must be innocent. I think they're doing that in this case to a kind of insane degree. I Mean, everyone's capable of doing that. It's just that like, I think one, one thing is that like, I think when you're doing that, when you're kind of reporting on something, like for mainstream journalists, I think it's like, oh, well, you know, his girlfriend said he was horrible, but like, you know, I mean like, you know, she's the one who kind of pinned it on him. So I don't know, maybe she's not to be believed. And they're not really reading through the trial transcripts and they're not really. You took, how long did it take you? Because you did it first and then I think I took longer. But how long did it take you, who is a very fast reader, to look through all of this stuff?

[Kevin Greenlee]

I believe the trial transcript is like what, 14 or 1500 pages. The commutation transcript is about 12 or 1300. And then there's probably another at least a thousand or more pages of police reports, affidavits, briefs, filings. Took a long time.

[Anya Cain]

So like when, I'm just gonna tell you when I see like mainstream reporters or when I see people who are like opining that this is the most egregious wrongful conviction in the world and like lending their quotes to this movement and they say they read the whole thing, they haven't. I don't believe them at all. I don't believe them at all. This is our full time job. And it took you that long to do all of this? I, yeah, and also I, their statements don't actually match the facts of anything. So yeah, I, I don't know. I, I, I hope that this, I hope that what our reporting has done and what our episodes have done have at least opened up the conversation to people having to grapple with some of the terrible behavior, even aside from the question of guilt or innocence. That can be a separate conversation. Maybe it should be, but I mean it shouldn't be in the case of his bad acts against Crystal and Scott. But it can be with the other women and it can be with the other people he attacked and hurt. And it can be with his continued horrible behavior online.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And a lot of people talk about ethics in true crime. I think it would be great if people said let's not attack victims with no evidence. Let's not post the phone numbers of rape victims and encourage people to harass them. Let's not smear the reputations of 20 year old murdered men. I think that would show a real concern for ethics in true crime. And I think that would also Show a real concern about the impact of all this on families.

[Anya Cain]

I'm gonna say this. I just thought of it and it was one of our listeners and I, I don't want to just name them. It was on social media. They commented this and it really, I didn't even think about it, but they summed it up really well. And it was talking about, like, with Temujin and Paula's continued stalking and harassment of Crystal and, and her husband, her current husband. They're almost demonstrating the same exact behavior that they did with her and Scott. Like, they're doing it digitally. Temujin is in prison, so he can't kill anybody. But, like, the same impulse of like, you don't get to walk away from me, I will hunt you down kind of nonsense is still there.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yeah.

[Anya Cain]

So you have to wrap if you, if people are going to be going around talking about how innocent he is, I think they have to reckon with some of this stuff.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yes. There's a few questions here that are kind of related. Are you guys mad at people who disagree with you or you're in debate? The prosecutors, the consultant. Inconceivable. What's the dialogue between you and the prosecutors about this case? Not mad at people who disagree with you. We respect those other podcast hosts. We've had very little dialogue with them about the case behind the scenes. The most substantial. I just looked it up back in the summer of 2023. The prosecutors posted on their Twitter feed something about Temujin being innocent. I sent him a paragraph or two saying, well, here I think he's guilty, here's why. He sent me back a paragraph or two saying, well, I think he's innocent. Here's why. And I think that was the only time we've really had a substantive conversation about it. It's perfectly fine for people to disagree. I personally don't feel a debate.

[Anya Cain]

We're not doing a debate, guys. I mean, I just, we've gotten, I really appreciate everyone who asked or to do a roundtable or whatnot, but, you know, the roundtable can exist in your own heart because you can just listen to our episodes and everyone else's episodes, you know, one after the other. I, I, we're not looking to do these things because I kind of, I don't know what everyone else knows and I don't know what everyone else has reviewed and there might be, you know, the way I see it is our reporting, even if people who disagree with us can inform others reporting and they can have a completely different conclusion, but it can benefit everyone in the way that certain talking points can be debunked and they can focus more on what they feel is stronger about their position. Does that make sense? So it's like, we can clear some of the stuff off the table now that we've put it out there, and they can come into it with a renewed focus of, like, okay, but I still think he's innocent because of this, this and this. And that doesn't require attacking his victims, and that doesn't require bolstering him up to be some sort of, you know, canonized saint, which he's not. So there can be an indirect dialogue through things like that without. I. I guess I just. I'm like, I. I don't. We did a whole episode with Dr. Stephen Nolla talking about, like, debate and. And true crime and. And sort of, you know, what. What's the best way of getting out the truth? I don't. I don't think debates and roundtables are necessarily that. I think that rewards people who are the best at debating or, you know, throwing their point out there.

[Kevin Greenlee]

That would obviously be you.

[Anya Cain]

Well, maybe, but I just. I don't know. It's just like, also, like, these people are peers. We like all of them. I feel. I feel, like, weird about, like, come fight us. You know, Like, I just. I did. That's just. That's not how we operate, and it's not what we're going to do, and it's never what we were going to do, and it's never what we do in any of our cases. So I guess I just. I don't. I don't see that. And I feel uncomfortable with. And again, like, I understand why people are asking for it, and I get that. And I. We appreciate the interest. It's just. It's not our style. Maybe it works for other people. It's not what we do. You know, we're open to answering anybody's questions if they have questions about our coverage or, hey, you said this, but where is that in the record? So we're happy to be a resource behind the scenes or in front of the scenes or whatever, but, um, I think you can get people's points articulated just by listening to what their previous coverage has been. And if there's more coverage going forward, maybe now that we put out some of this information, it can be more streamlined on both sides to kind of, you know, I think it strengthens someone's position on the innocent side if they can drop something of some of the talking points that just aren't true. Does that make sense?

[Kevin Greenlee]

That makes sense.

[Anya Cain]

But yeah, no one's mad at each other. There's no divorce, there's no fighting. We're all adults and people can disagree. I think that's really important. I know, like, we're in a very polarized environment in the United States and in our country. But, like, I am, I am not going to be like mad at someone for disagreeing with me on this case. I, I, I might be upset if someone was like, crystal's a lying, horrible person and we're going to come after her. That's just bad behavior no matter what you're doing. But I'm not going to be mad at someone for saying, well, I looked at it too and I think he's innocent. Okay, cool. Like, I disagree strongly but like, that doesn't make me think anyone's a bad person or, or someone's undecided. Like, I don't know, like, it doesn't, true crime shouldn't be like that. It should not be tribal. It should not be this tribal nonsense of let's all fight constantly. It should be like, you think this, I think this, this is where our ideas are coming from. And I think you're, I think you're cool. And we probably agree with most of those shows on like the majority of.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Cases and it's okay to disagree. I, I, I do believe this is not a particularly challenging case. I think his guilt is very obvious, but it's, it's okay to disagree. A couple questions, again, that are related. Anya. We got some about how is it legal for Kinzu to harass, stalk and dox his victims from prison. It seems like there has to be a legal way to stop this behavior. We're looking into this. We've reached out to Michigan Department of Corrections and this is, this is an angle we are doing some reporting on.

[Anya Cain]

And if there's an angle that you want answered, you know, that would help you understand the case better. Send us an email. We want to hear about it. I want to, we want to look into this even more and there's an opportunity for us to do some more kind of long term reporting on it. So if there's something where you're like, it'll be great to get this cleared up, let us know. We want to hear from you. Even if you disagree with us, even if you're like, well, I think he's innocent or I'm undecided, you know, but I would still love to know about this. Let us know. I mean, we'd Be interested in digging into it. I mean again, we feel very strongly about his guilt. I'm open to seeing stuff that could change my mind. I, at this point it seems, it's pretty overwhelming for me. I would have voted guilty if I were on that jury and I would have, you know, been surprised if they'd gone the other way.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Ms. Kane, don't you think the real killer would have had to have been less impulsive and more calculating?

[Anya Cain]

So this is kind of a boiled down thing of a couple of different questions we've gotten or you know, conversations we've had and it's, it all kind of comes down to the same thing. Don't you think the real killer would have been X? And basically saying that people feel that Temujin Kenzie's behavior does not comport with what they would have expected out of the killer of Scott Macklem. And I think the, these sorts of questions are flawed. No offense to anybody. These sort of questions are flawed on their face because people are essentially in this sit in by asking this question they are making up a murderer in their minds. This sort of ideal murderer of Scott Macklem, of like what, you know, and ascribing a bunch of traits, assuming a bunch of things and describing a bunch of traits to them and then using that to clear Kenzu. I've seen online people sometimes accuse each other of like making up a type of person to get mad at. You know, if people say something like oh, all these silver age Superman comic book fans who you know, like to wear button down shirts and you know, enjoy having a nice hamburger, it's like what, like who? Well they're talking about Kevin but, but you know, what are we talking about here? You're like making up someone to get mad at. I feel like people are making up a murderer to hang this on, you know, instead of going by the evidence. And again, the most common refrain is well, Kenzoo's an impulsive poster online and therefore he couldn't have waited in a parking lot to kill somebody. Like do we hear how that sounds? Like do we hear. It's, it's not a very good point in my opinion. First of all, we don't even know that he's an impulsive poster. We're looking into this and a lot of what we're seeing indicates that you're not supposed to have necessarily direct access to social media in prison in Michigan. So if he's not posting himself, then he is somehow getting his thoughts and opinions back to somebody. Paula Kenzie, his wife, most likely and she's posting them for him. So that's not really impulsive. That's kind of calculating.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Yeah, he's.

[Anya Cain]

Yeah, if that's true. So he.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Or.

[Anya Cain]

Or he has somehow managed to flout Michigan rules in prison in order to be posting, which is also kind of calculating. So, I don't know. I mean, when people use his kind of Internet history and his Internet, you know, freakouts about vaccines and flat earth and, you know, Gretchen Whitmer is the devil, you know, that can look impulsive, and I can understand why you'd think that. But the mechanism by which he's getting that out there may actually point to something a bit calculating.

[Kevin Greenlee]

And please remember, in the commutation hearing, we heard awful stories from women who had been stalked by him in a very planned and calculating way. I agree. It's just people making up their own ideas and just twisting themselves into rhetorical pretzels in increasingly ridiculous attempts to clear an obviously guilty man of murder. One thing that I found amusing in a dark way, I saw someone say, well, if Kemejen Kinzu had committed this murder, then it was the perfect murder, by God. The man was picked up for it within a couple of weeks, and he's been behind bars ever since. That's not a perfect murder. This is not a smart man. This is a man who thinks he is smarter than he is. And when you think you're smarter than you are, you do things like believe in flat earth, or you do things like call up witnesses and say, oh, you remember I was there, don't you? This is what stupid people do who don't know they're stupid.

[Anya Cain]

Yeah, but he thinks he's, like, a genius. I'm gonna tell you this like that. That does touch upon what I was. What I was talking about with the impulsive versus calculating. First of all, all of us as human beings are capable of doing both impulsive and calculating things. Just because I impulsively, you know, buy some candy at the store doesn't mean I'm also not capable of, you know, doing something calculated later on. I mean, it kind of just depends on the stimuli and what's going on and my mental state and whatnot. Uh, second of all, I'm glad you said about the perfect murder. It that only is true if you assume from the jump that he is innocent. That is not an intellectually honest way of thinking about this case. That is not intellectually honest because you're already saying, well, he can't be it. So the real killer must have been a genius. Who's still out there, and we need to catch him before he strikes again. It's like, no, you can. You can look at it. This is like, such an obvious case to me. You can look at it as an. A guy who has a horrible personality and has done horrible things, escalated to the point where he killed somebody. And because he had threatened that guy and his fiance and had stalked them in a very public way in which people were aware of, he got busted immediately, and that's what happened. And then he went to jail for. He went to prison for a, you know, life. And ever since Michigan, courts have been like, yeah, that. That works for us. I mean, that's a pretty. Pretty obvious case. Or you can over complicate it in your mind, like so many true crime people do, and say, no, no, no. The. Everyone's. I mean, I don't see how you can argue that this case is wrong and see it any way other than it's a massive corrupt conspiracy, because that's the only thing that would actually make sense in that context, you know, and so I guess I'm just like. Or you can. You know, I think it's intellectually honest to be like, I'm undecided based on what I've heard. I don't know if I would have voted for guilty. But there's a lot here. So there's different positions you can take, but I think the one that I find most annoying is, like, don't you think the real killer. Yeah, they got the real killer, and he's kind of dumb, and he, you know, got caught pretty quickly. So, I mean, I think the system worked in this case, and people can be impulsive in calculating and also, like, I don't know. To me, when you look at the history of things he's done to other people, the stalking, the harassment, the escalation, the seeing women as his personal property that he should have domain over, the weird narcissistic views towards his children as, like, extensions of his own will who shouldn't talk back to him, or he'll, like, you know, just annihilate them verbally. I think. I think all of that points to somebody who's very capable of killing Scott Macklem and lying in wait and stalking him as he had been doing, and figuring out a way to do that, and then gloating about how he has the perfect alibi and how they'll never find the car or the gun, which they didn't, and. And getting busted. I just. I think it's. We don't need to overcomplicate cases sometimes. Sometimes they are just what they look like, and I think that's the case here. So, yeah, again, if you have any information on this case, murdersheetmail.com, we'll protect you.

[Kevin Greenlee]

We're gonna step back from this case in terms of new episodes. We're gonna continue to report on it, and you can certainly expect other episodes on the case to come up.

[Anya Cain]

Absolutely. Thank you guys so much for listening.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Thanks so much for listening to the Murder Sheet. If you have a tip concerning one of the cases we cover, please email [e-mail] if you have actionable information about an unsolved crime, please report it to the appropriate authorities.

[Anya Cain]

If you're interested in joining our Patreon, that's available at www.patreon.com murdersheet. If you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests, you can do so at www. Buymeacoffee.com murdersheet. We very much appreciate any support.

[Kevin Greenlee]

Special thanks to Kevin Tyler Greenlee, who composed the music for the Murder Sheet and who you can find on the [e-mail] if you're looking to talk with.

[Anya Cain]

Other listeners about a case we've covered, you can join the Murder Sheet discussion group on Facebook. We mostly focus our time on research and reporting, so we're not on social media much. We do try to check our email account, but we ask for patience as we often receive a lot of messages. Thanks again for listening.