324. The West Memphis Three Part 23 -- Julia Cowley on Terry Hobbs and the Profile of the Killer(s)

Summary

The Prosecutors: West Memphis Three Part 23 – Julia Cowley on Terry Hobbs and the Profile of the Killer(s)

Podcast: The Prosecutors
Hosts: Alice & Brett
Guest: Julia Cowley, retired FBI BAU Special Agent, host of "The Consult"
Date: August 20, 2025
Episode: 324

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Alice and Brett are joined by retired FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit Special Agent Julia Cowley for an in-depth discussion of the West Memphis Three case, focusing on their interview with Terry Hobbs (stepfather of victim Stevie Branch) and more broadly, on profiling the unknown killer(s). The trio analyzes Hobbs’ demeanor, responses, and role as a suspect, then pivots to Julia’s expert profile of the potential offender(s) based on the crime scene and known facts.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Introducing Julia Cowley & Her Expertise (starts ~00:46)

• Alice and Brett effusively praise Julia’s experience and knowledge, highlighting her gold-standard interviewing skills and humility.
• “We truly have actually one of the preeminent experts in the country who made this her profession.” – Brett [03:00]

---

2. The Interview with Terry Hobbs (Begins ~05:12)

Terry Hobbs as Suspect and Victim

• Recognized as a major “alternative suspect,” yet also a grieving stepfather.
• Noted: Hobbs had not been formally interviewed by police until 2007, 14 years after the murders – a significant investigative failure.

Hobbs’ Willingness & Manner During Interview [05:58–09:21]

• Julia describes Hobbs as someone open to speaking “as long as you’re courteous,” but quick to become defensive if insulted.
• His manner in their interview was consistent with other “friendly” interviews: even-tempered, guarded at times, but not evasive.

The Significance of Friendly vs. Defensive Interviews [06:35]

• In adversarial settings (e.g., depositions), Hobbs becomes defiant, “like a child, very defensive,” but never loses his temper.
• Julia emphasizes the detrimental impact of not interviewing Hobbs contemporaneously in 1993; timelines and memories are now unreliable.

“Every parent needed—you need to sit down and go through a timeline with them right away… That would just be common sense.” – Julia Cowley [15:08]

Emotional Regulation & “Impression Management” [09:55–14:23]

• Hobbs struggles to regulate “emotional leakage,” especially when sensitive topics arise.
• He is particularly guarded about timeline questions, aware of criticism over memory lapses.

Surface Impression of Terry Hobbs [18:03–24:14]

• Julia notes a strong emphasis on being a responsible father and provider.
• “He has this really strong emphasis on responsibility as a father and on family… He kept things together.” – Julia Cowley [18:03]
• Despite this portrayal, contradictions emerge: he claims there were almost no rules for Stevie, implying a less strict reality than reputation suggests.

Humanizing Details (The “Pool” Memory) [24:14–26:00]

• Hobbs repeatedly references their backyard pool, a symbol of happiness and safety before tragedy.

The Unreliability of Timelines and Alibis [15:08–16:34]

• Any reconstruction of the events is hampered by delayed questioning.
• “It’s reckless to try to pin him down… It’s not fair because they’re both being interviewed so many years later.” – Julia Cowley [16:18]

---

3. Assessing Hobbs’ Demeanor and Response Patterns (30:12+)

• Hobbs is careful, not evasive, about specifics; he refrains from speculating to avoid statements that could be misused.
• Julia suspects his guilt centers more on possibly not searching hard enough for Stevie than any implication of direct involvement in the murders.

“He was not really looking that hard. And I think that bothers him… There’s this passiveness up until there’s a point where he realizes something’s wrong.” – Julia [39:38]

• Impression management is about mitigating perceived parental failures rather than covering up murder.

---

4. Analysis of Crime Scene Knowledge and Behavior (49:36+)

• Julia’s interview strategy includes indirect questions about the crime scene (visibility of bikes, layout).
• She finds no “slip-ups,” evasions, or signs Hobbs secretly possesses incriminating knowledge.

---

5. Post-Crime Behavior: Moving Away (54:23+)

• The group discusses whether Hobbs’ decision to leave West Memphis is “suspicious.”
• Julia finds the move plausible and not indicative of guilt, given his stated reasons and the intense local scrutiny.

---

6. Profiling the Offender(s): Julia’s Expert Assessment (62:49–89:32)

Crime Scene Assessment

• Three 8-year-old boys, viciously murdered, tied/hidden in a drainage ditch, some evidence of attempted cleanup afterward.
• Julia believes the killer was extremely familiar with the woods and likely lived nearby.
• The crime shows elements of both blitz (surprise, brute force) and control.

Number of Offenders – One or Several? [63:46–67:29]

• Despite multiple victims, Julia leans toward a single offender based on statistics and case details.
• “Even when you have multiple victims, you have most of the time one offender… it’s overwhelming.”

Planned vs. Opportunistic Attack? [67:49–68:15]

• Leans toward an unplanned, opportunistic encounter: “it looks more like it was accidental only because…they were out riding around.”
• Noted: The killer’s post-crime behavior (concealing scene, bikes) shows focus and local knowledge.

“After extreme violence, [the killer] gathered themselves and cleaned that scene up and did a really good job.” – Julia [68:15]

Concealment: The Importance of Place [70:47–73:21]

• Unusual focus on hiding not just the bodies, but evidence the boys entered the woods—a possible sign the killer had a connection to the woods themselves.
• “The woods are meaningful to the person because they either live there, spent time there, and they don't even want the person to know that the boys were even in the woods.” – Julia [71:29]

Truck Driver and Mr. Bojangles Theories [74:17 & 81:24]

• Rejects truck driver theory (killer likely entered from the neighborhood).
• Regards “Mr. Bojangles” possibility as odd but highly coincidental; doubts that someone cunning in the murder/cleanup would then stagger, bloody, into a public bathroom.

Offender Profile – Age and Motivation [76:21–78:40]

• Killer is probably somewhat older, emotionally mature in their violence. “Not a satanic ritual.”
• Possible motivations: personal cause homicide (not necessarily knowing the boys) or potentially a “rape-murder” (sexual assault, then murder to cover up).

Evidence, DNA, and the Hope for Resolution [86:10–89:32]

• Julia sees slim hope of reconstructing the truth so long after—the best chance lies in DNA.
• Family DNA on the bodies doesn’t prove anything, but DNA from the convicted or a stranger could be compelling.
• “I would think that there would be... DNA, skin cells from the friction of tying and pulling the shoelaces out...” – Julia [87:14]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Law Enforcement’s Mistake:
  “I don’t know why that [early interview] wasn’t done. That would just be common sense in any case… It's all lost.” – Julia Cowley [15:08]

• On Comparing Terry’s Strictness to Reality:
  “He claims there were almost no rules… so there’s a little contradiction there. Maybe in practice he was a little lax.” – Julia [18:03–22:19]

• On Guilt and Grief:
  “If Terry has attempted to go to grief counseling, then I find that very hard to believe that the person who did that to those boys has any grief… where I see Terry’s guilt lies more in the timeline and not looking for Stevie.” – Julia [47:22–48:28]

• On the Single Offender Theory:
  “I still lean toward one offender… even when you have multiple victims, you have most of the time one offender.” – Julia [67:15]

• On the Killer’s Knowledge of the Area:
  “This is somebody extremely comfortable being in those woods. They know the area, they've probably been in there a lot, and they probably live right there.” – Julia [73:21]

• On the “Satanic Ritual” Narrative:
  “The one thing I will say with certainty is that this was not a satanic ritual. I will say that 100%. It was not.” – Julia [94:35]

---

Timeline of Important Segments

| Time (MM:SS) | Topic/Segment | |------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------| | 00:46 | Introduction of Julia Cowley & her background | | 05:12 | Transition to Terry Hobbs interview discussion | | 09:55 | Emotional regulation and impression management in interviews | | 15:08 | Consequences of not interviewing Hobbs in 1993 | | 18:03 | Julia’s impressions of Hobbs—responsibility vs. practice | | 24:14 | Pool memory as a window into Hobbs’ mindset | | 30:12 | Discussing corroboration with other witness statements | | 49:36 | Analysis of Hobbs’ knowledge about the crime scene | | 54:23 | Post-offense behavior: moving out of West Memphis | | 62:49 | Julia’s offender profile: crime scene, single offender theory | | 67:29 | Planned vs. accidental attack? | | 70:47 | Concealment, and connection to the woods | | 74:17 | Truck driver theory dismissed | | 81:24 | Mr. Bojangles as alternate suspect analyzed | | 82:56 | “Personal cause homicide” defined and distinguished | | 86:10 | Prospects for further resolution: what DNA could mean | | 89:32 | Wrap-up & recommendations for Julia’s own podcast | | 94:35 | Absolute rejection of “satanic ritual” explanation |

---

Final Takeaways & Tone

The episode stands out for its measured, deeply informed approach—balancing empathy, expert behavioral analysis, and true investigative skepticism. Julia’s seasoned, cautious voice provides fresh insights into both Hobbs as an interview subject and the evidence-based profile of the true perpetrator(s). Both the hosts and guest are candid about the limitations of cold-case work, the perils of speculation, and the necessity of both scientific and human perspectives when evaluating notorious cases like the West Memphis Three.

---

Key Takeaway:
While Hobbs demonstrates some classic “impression management” as a parent, Julia finds no significant evidence or demeanor in the interview to suggest criminal guilt. Julia’s expert profile points toward a single offender—likely local, familiar with the woods, older, with a violent background—and strongly rejects any “satanic ritual” explanation. The greatest hope for future clarity lies in modern DNA testing—not in the imperfect, decades-old memories.

---

Recommended Next Steps:

• Listeners are encouraged to hear Julia on “The Consult” for further profiling analysis.
• The hosts tease their own upcoming “theory episode” to wrap their West Memphis Three coverage.

---

Transcript

[Jessi Pere]

Hi, I'm Jessi Pere. And I'm Andy Cassette. Welcome to Love Murder, where we unravel the darkest tales of romance turned deadly. Our episodes are long form, narrative driven and deeply researched. Perfect for the true crime aficionados seeking stories beyond the headlines. Like the chilling case of Blanche Taylor.

[Brett]

Moore, the so called black widow who.

[Jessi Pere]

Left a trail of poisoned lovers. Or the shocking murders of Chad Shelton and Dwayne Johnson, where family ties masked a sinister plot. Subscribe to Love Murder on Apple podcasts.

[Brett]

Spotify or wherever you listen.

[Alice]

I'm Brett.

[Jessi Pere]

And I'm Alice.

[Alice]

And we are the prosecut. Today on the Prosecutors. Julia Cowley joins us to discuss the Terry Hobbs interview and to profile the killer in the West Memphis three case. Hello, everybody and welcome to this episode of the Prosecutors. I'm Brett and I'm joined as always by my third wheel of a co host, Alice.

[Brett]

Not even mad. Not even mad about it because the real two wheels isn't even you and Julia, Brett. It's just Julia.

[Julia Cowley]

It's just Julia.

[Alice]

It's a unicycle today, you guys.

[Julia Cowley]

You.

[Brett]

We've been covering West Memphis three for approximately three years at this point. And since day one, you guys have asked for the consult. Julia Cali, FBI BAU Special Agents. Thoughts? And finally we've convinced her to come on here.

[Alice]

It was so hard. Julia's the best.

[Julia Cowley]

I'm always happy to join you.

[Alice]

And you're so giving with your time and it's amazing.

[Julia Cowley]

I'm retired.

[Alice]

That's what you were saying earlier.

[Brett]

You're retired from one job and full time in another. And the thing we have to give you a little background on, obviously you've heard now our interview with Terry Hobbs. But Julia is such a professional, she will never brag on herself. But when we were prepping, you know, you always prep to make sure that you have the right facts. You know, you're all on the same page before you talk to any witness. This is how we run our investigations as well when we interview alongside our law enforcement agents. And Julia was telling us all these stories of basically how she was able to crack serial killer after serial killer. And federal prosecutors around the country were pointing to her interview specifically as what should be the gold standard of how all law enforcement interview. I'm not overselling this. She is just too humble to tell you that herself. So, Julia, I'm sorry, I've blown your cover.

[Julia Cowley]

Well, it wasn't exactly that, Alice. It was like one interview I did once and Assistant United States Attorney said it was really Good. That was it. It's not over.

[Brett]

No, no, no. I say all this because I think this is very important. The interview that you guys have heard and the analysis you're going to hear from Julia today, this is not just another person online telling you their thoughts about one of the most famous cases of all time. We truly have actually one of the preeminent experts in the country who made this her profession. And she has approached this case, this interview, and this analysis as she does the most series of cases that she investigated. And I think that's worth noting here because there are a lot of talking heads out there who talk about all manners of cases who may or may not actually know what they're talking about. That could be me and Brett, but it's not Julia. Julia knows what she's talking about.

[Julia Cowley]

That's not true at all. You. You know exactly what you're doing. You do it very well. And it's a whole area that, you know. I don't know prosecutions like you do. I don't know the law like you do, so. But I appreciate that, Alice, just continue this praise fest.

[Alice]

The thing I kept thinking is, I was sitting there. I wish we could have worked with Julia. It's so much fun.

[Brett]

Do you know what I was thinking, Brett? The case that took us all over the country, we were on the plane together all the time. Brett and I racked up some, like, airline miles, but it was so fun because we got to hang out with our law enforcement agents all the time. Had to go through the special check in because they were, like, essentially designated air marshals because of all the guns they were carrying. But no one else on the flight knew. It was so much fun. And they were fun. I loved them. But, Julia, if you were in the mix, we would have never gone to sleep at night. We would have just stayed up top.

[Julia Cowley]

Oh, we would have. I'm an early bird. I'm no fun at all. I go to bed early. I get up early. I'm just. I'm like an old lady.

[Alice]

Oh, whatever.

[Julia Cowley]

I've never been fun.

[Alice]

So transitioning to the subject at hand, which I'm sure Julia would be very fun. You're coming to crime con, right?

[Julia Cowley]

I am.

[Alice]

Oh, we're gonna be partying all night long. A lot of that. Okay, so Terry Hobbs, obviously, Terry Hobbs is someone who is a popular alternative suspect in this case. Sort of wears these two hats because he's an alternative suspect. He's also a stepfather, a victim, somebody who's gone through a lot. I will Say this just off the top, and I'm curious what you think about this, because I feel like it could cut a couple ways. But Hobbs, he's given some interviews before, but his willingness to sit down with two federal prosecutors and an FBI behavioral analyst, I thought was interesting. I thought it was interesting that he was willing to do that.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, it was interesting. I mean, he's. I don't think he's. I just think he kind of comes across. Yeah, I'll talk to you, and then if you're going to insult him, he'll probably hang up on you or be very defiant. That's. But if you're courteous to him, he'll sit down with an interview with anybody, probably.

[Brett]

So let me ask this, because like Brett said, he has given other interviews. You've heard them before, and then obviously you got to be on a video call with him for an hour and a half. How did you think our interview compared to the way that he has interviewed in the past in terms of. Not substance yet, but in the way he was related to us and the way he answered our questions and the way he was kind of portraying?

[Julia Cowley]

Very similar to other friendly interviews, I'd say. I've seen a couple on the news, and then I've heard another podcast and interviewed him. And when he's not being attacked, he comes across the same way. He's very consistent in his behavior, his presentation, the points where I think he's sensitive about, if he's questioned about them. And then, of course, there's the deposition where he was questioned and he was. He just came across pretty bad, but he was on the defensive the whole time. See, you get a sense of how he's going to be when he's on the defensive. And I'm not saying that it's wrong for him to be on the defensive. I mean, he was being questioned, I think, by somebody who thinks he'd killed the boys. So the questions were very pointed, and he had severe memory lapses and was very difficult. And that's not the kind of interview. When you asked me to participate, that's not the kind of interview I wanted to do with him. It's. It serves no good to shut him down, to try to interrogate him, especially after all these years. He wasn't even first question until, what, 2007 by the police, and by then, which is insane. It really is. You know, that's just. That's unfortunate, but that's what we're working with. So his memory is not going to be as good. You really, it's not fair to pin him down on certain times. And he was very defensive about that. He's like, I'm not going to tell you. Certain times is I've got myself in trouble. I get picked on for that. And he's absolutely right. And I didn't expect him. And it wasn't going to be, walk us through the entire day and give us the times. That's not the kind of interview we can do with him. So what I wanted to do and what every interview should be about is to get as much information about the situation. I mean, he was somewhere we weren't. He saw things we never could see. So try to draw out as much as he can remember about things. Not necessarily specifically about the crime itself, but just about what was going on that day, what his memories were. And then also questions geared toward, okay, what are his views? What's important to him? What are the themes that we're seeing throughout the interview? So that's the whole point of the interview for me. When we constructed the questions we were going to ask him, I'm sure people were saying, why are you asking that? Well, there's a method to our madness in interviewing this, to learn about him. I want to know what's important to him. I want to know what he remembers, what did he think about Stevie, what kind of relationship did they have, all these things. What does he value, what doesn't he value? And I felt like I came away with a pretty good sense of him from our talk with him.

[Alice]

Can I just ask you one question? Going back to something at the beginning, because it's very common, I think, those of us, just normal human beings, when you see something like the deposition and you see someone who's being sort of, they're shutting down, they're angry, they're combative. You see this in testimony at trial. And even if you know somebody's being cross examined by somebody, a lawyer who's being a jerk, they're reacting with the same energy. A lot of people will judge the witness for that pretty harshly. In your experience, is that how much can you tell from that kind of reaction to questioning?

[Julia Cowley]

Well, I think you can tell how much experience somebody has being questioned or have they been trained in testimony? I mean, you know, as a law enforcement officer, even before the FBI, but training with the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, we were trained on how to testify. We went through moot court. That was part of my training. Before I could be certified as a forensic scientist. I went through a moot court, got beat up Pretty bad. Videotaped. Had to sit and watch with my training agent. It was terrible. And the same thing with the FBI. We're taught how to testify and we prep with the prosecutors who are going to be questioning us in court, and then also prepping what to expect on cross examination. So it can be really hard not to be offended or come across as a smart aleck when somebody's insulting you or making fun of you when they're questioning you in some way, shape or form. And so I think sometimes when you see people lose their cool, you think, okay, well, they haven't been trained. That's my first thought. They just haven't been trained very well. You know, obviously it doesn't come across. You don't want to be defensive, even when it's human nature. I've seen people cross examined and they've just been beat up pretty bad. And most anybody would just say, if this was a normal conversation, you would say to that person, do not talk to me like that where I am getting up and walking out of this room. You can't do that. When you're being insulted by a defense attorney or your integrity is being questioned. You have to sit there and take it and be professional and calm and never let your reactions come out. That can be very hard to do unless you've had a lot of experience and a lot of training. So that's, I guess that's my 2 cents on when people become really defensive and angry.

[Brett]

Kind of along those lines. I know you said that his demeanor, his affect was very similar to other friendly interviews he's had. Can you describe for people since they didn't get to really, you know, see him face to face, what that affect was? And I say this because when we're looking at our witnesses, we think about, hmm, are they calculating, Are they malingering? Are they intentionally evading questions? Or are they being as straightforward as possible, recognizing that the way typical people communicate may not actually be very clear, but that may not be an indication of evasiveness. So I'm throwing out a bunch of different things I see in witnesses. How did he come off to you in the way he was kind of answering our questions in the way that you were describing, you know, trying to get to know him, what's important to him?

[Julia Cowley]

I mean, he comes across, he's very mellow, he's very even keel, at least with us, because it was a friendly interview. Never lost his temper, even when he was being questioned, the deposition, he never really lost his temper, but he was just. Was like pulling teeth with him. Became like a child, like, very defiant, but he's just very even tempered. I think he's not great at regulating some of his emotions in a way. Like, he doesn't lose his temper or cry or become heated in any way, but he's just not really great at regulating his emotional leakage. You can definitely see the points that stick with him, that bother him. He has, you know, we were just talking about passive aggressive people, Brett, and I'm just kidding, but he gets his digs when he talks about Pam, he's got to get his dig in on her. But, you know, a lot of that can be normal, too. I mean, these are, you know, I'm not here to beat up on Terry at all, but those are just some things I noticed about him. And that's what we're doing. We're. We're talking with him. We're trying to notice what are the patterns. What is his normal reaction to things. Is he being deceptive or is he being protective because he's been accused of being a murderer? And when he's tried to give information and it doesn't align with maybe what other people have said or it's not exactly the same as what he said before. He feels as he's. I think he said he'd been picked on, attacked, so he's very guarded. And, you know, there's some topics. He wasn't guarded. He wasn't guarded. When we asked him about Stevie and what he was like and what he liked, he wasn't guarded at all. I thought those were genuine memories, fond memories that he had that he shared with us.

[Alice]

Yeah, and just going back to something you said earlier, because I think this needs to be clear in case anyone's confused about it. Obviously, when a child is murdered, the first suspect is going to be family, stepfathers, parents. And the West Memphis police, for whatever reason, chose not to interview him in 1993. And like you said, he did not sit down for a formal interview, it seems, until 2007, which is 14 years later. Can you just express how wrong that was and how detrimental it was to figuring anything out, particularly about him not having that contemporaneous interview. How much does that harm your ability to do any kind of assessment of.

[Julia Cowley]

It doesn't harm my ability to assess him, but it does harm the investigation into. Does he really have an alibi? We'll never really know with. With the timeline. You. I mean, you can't trust. People are comparing his statement to David Jacoby statement. You can't Trust either one of them. And I'm not accusing either of them of lying, but, you know, some of their memories align with each other, others don't. And it's just like, how can you trust what either one of them are saying? But everybody and your listeners know this, and I know I'm preaching to the choir, but every parent needed. You need to sit down and go through a timeline with them right away. And where were they? Who did they see? What time was that? Right when it's fresh in their minds whether you might maybe can't do it right that night, but as soon as possible. I don't know why that wasn't done. That would just be common sense. In any case, I know you're dealing with three missing kids, so you have six parents to sit down. But that needed to be done when they were doing neighborhoods and everything. All that had to be done. And it's all lost. And I think Terry's right when he says, people just pick on me. It's just not fair to try to pin him down. And, okay, we're going to believe what David said versus Terry. Well, that's not fair because they're both being interviewed so many years later, and it's hard to say who's lying or not, because it could just be that they just don't have a clear memory of it.

[Brett]

You know, one of the situations that was stark in my mind that, like, we'll never know is I think we asked him, any memory of Stevie coming home and potentially eating. Like, did you remember cleaning up a bowl where he ate something? How could we possibly actually expect him to remember? If he were even asked 14 years later, even asked really a year later, how could he remember something like that? But that is such a key fact that probably is lost forever. That information existed at one time, but I would not expect him, and it would really be him or Pam that would really know that, because Stevie's sister was much too young at the time to probably remember. So that's like a piece of information that would have been great for the investigation that I think now just no longer exists in anyone's mind. But with that knowledge that we can't possibly expect him to remember everything or really much, to be honest. Back then, you know, the way you framed the questions was about a lot of the rhythms of life with Stevie. So not that particular day, but, you know, what time did he normally come home? Were you normally home with him? Did he come home before dark? Those sorts of questions. I'm curious because we didn't debrief after this. You said that you felt like you got a good sense of who he was after those types of things. Questions, Twofold question. You can answer however you see fit. One, did you feel like you found out any additional information that was helpful either in assessing him or about the case that you had not previously learned from the other interviews he's given? Second, what was that impression that you got from him? You said you did get a feel for who he was. What was that feel that you got about him?

[Julia Cowley]

I think the one thing that I took away from our interview with him was he. He has this. I mean, the theme that was present throughout the interview is he has this really strong emphasis on responsibility as a father and on family. And, you know, he was the one who said. And this is where the passive aggressiveness came in a little bit. You know, I did homework with Stevie. I helped him because Pam either wouldn't or couldn't, but he was the one. He kept things together. He said. He described how Stevie called him Daddy Terry and his role. At least this is what he's expressing to us. He sees this as very important. And even when he was describing to us David Jacoby, I asked him, what was David like? What was your relationship with David like?

[Alice]

We called him like a family man. Right?

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah. I mean, he said he was praising David. He was a good man. He was a good. He was a provider for his family. These were attributes that he described David and that he felt this is why David was a good person, because he provided for his family. So you see this as. This is something that's really important. And I think another thing I took away from Terry, and this is his perception, this is what he thinks is important, it doesn't necessarily mean he was responsible. I'm not saying that. I'm just saying this is what he's expressing to us. But the other thing that I thought was interesting, and first of all, what I want to say is anything that I read, unless it's the actual case file, I'm always careful because I know there could be an agenda there. So this is not from the case file. This would be from books and maybe some documentaries or. And I would. I had this impression of him that perhaps he was a real disciplinarian and he may have been. He may. You know, I. I've heard maybe allegations of abuse, but, like, I just thought he would. Real strict, like. Like he was gonna have his finger on the pulse of what his kids are doing all the time. And he expresses that with us. Like, Stevie was always home. I watched him. But then we asked him, you know, what were the rules? Something along those lines. And the listeners will hear. Exactly. So I'm just paraphrasing, but what were the rules? What? And he's like, well, we really didn't have rules. It's just like, my only rule was something like, you need to do good, and there's no rules. So there's a little contradiction there. A little contradiction of, like, I value these attributes and a father figure or a father and my. As my role, being a good provider and controlling everything and making sure everybody's okay, but yet I don't really have any rules other than you just got to do good. And, you know, you would think somebody was a strict disciplinarian, like, well, you better not back talk. You better not, you know, leave the house without permission. All these things. But there were no rules. So it comes across maybe that. My impression is that while he projected. These are important qualities. Maybe in practice he might have been a little lax. Like, maybe he wasn't as strict and he could, you know, like I said, Stevie was mouthing off to him. He might spank him. I think he said he used a belt to discipline his children. This is not in our interview, but some other interviews. But was he a little lax? Like, there really were no rules, which could be a little confusing for Steve, like, where I don't really need to be home at a certain time. That was kind of what we were going with. Like, did he know he had to be home at a certain time? Well, it sounds like maybe he didn't. So there's a little bit of a contradiction there with what he perceives as being important versus what he may practice. That is normal, and that is absolutely normal. We all think these are great qualities, but do we always live up to those qualities? No. So I'm not trying to be a jerk about it, but these are just little things, you know, here we are, we have this opportunity to interview somebody who's some people's main suspects and one of the highest profile cases. And so, you know, you want to learn as much about this person as possible. And those are some of the takeaways. I had kind of a surface level with Terri.

[Brett]

Yeah, one of the takeaways from that. I thought it was really interesting because the whole. I think we had heard or got the impression that if Stevie weren't home by a certain time, right. To eat his dinner or something like that, there were going to be consequences or it was going to be some Disciplinary action. And it wasn't even like a visceral reaction. Sometimes you can't help but viscerally react when you ask a witness a question that is offensive to them, right? Like, I mean, this is an example of a way I've asked a question before that gets a visceral response from a witness. Even if they don't verbally say something, it's like. But like, you like little kids, right? I mean, that. Something like that, right? Where they'll be like, well, no, he didn't even respond to the fact viscerally that I could see when we were like, well, there was a time that Stevie had to be home, right? He was like, no, not really. Like he was trying to reach back in his memory. And I thought that was so humanizing for a moment because I had this image, based on a lot of the lore around this case, that he was this incredibly strict person. But the way he was talking about his role as daddy Terry, as being the one who made sure homework got done, for example, because work was getting more difficult by this grade and he was making sure that the kids were doing their homework in the right way, it felt like maybe his response to the no rules was less no rules, but rather like when you look at the way parenting is, there's every situation, it has the facts around it, and it's that kid for that situation. So, like, yes, you're not supposed to jump on the couches, but maybe, you know, if we're celebrating your birthday and you're so excited you got that new Lego set, you get to jump on the couch. And so in my mind, there's no rule that you can't jump around the couch. It's that I am a present parent. And that was something that kind of clicked for me when I was talking to him was the way he was. He forgot almost every detail about everything in my general assessment of the interview. But the feeling of what it was like to be a father, I think came across to me in a way that I had not appreciated in the case file. I'm curious if you saw that too.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, I did. And I saw it too, when we were asking him. He didn't have a time to be home. Well, this was the first time Stevie was not right there. He would only bike, you know, a block away. And Terry said that, which I'm not sure is true, but, you know, he said I could always see him. He was not too far away. And I don't think he even did that a lot, because, you know something? Terry Brought up over and over again, which is a theme is about the pool. He talked about the pool. We even made a joke about it. I'm like, you have a pool? Because he kept talking about how Stevie liked to swim in the pool and he was always in the pool and that's where he usually was. And he just talked about that pool a lot. And so I got the impression that that was the last real happy memory he had. He just kept going back to. That was, it was a, it was a happy memory. It was safety. And I think I've heard him interviewed before where he said, you know, Stevie was a very strong swimmer. He has a lot of memories about Stevie in the pool and being in the pool and having that pool at their house. But yeah, back to what you're saying, Alice. I think it's because there weren't a lot of rules. I don't know if they didn't need them. Because Stevie never wandered off too far, was always around. This is the first time, I think we asked him was this the first time he really was gone? And it was. This had not happened before. He wasn't allowed to or he. I don't know if he wasn't allowed or he just never did. But he didn't wander the neighborhood. He was within eyesight of Pam or Terry when he was out on his bike or he was in the pool. So this was an unusual day.

[Jessi Pere]

Summer is here. While we might set goals for swimsuit season, lose weight, exercise more, eat better, it's hard to achieve them without a plan. That's what makes Prolon's five day fasting, mimicking diet your summer ready secret weapon. Prolon gives you a science backed structured approach to target fat loss and support lean muscle and reset your metabolism so you can look your best and feel confident all season long. Prolong is a plant based nutrition program featuring soups, snacks and beverages. It's designed to nourish the body while keeping it in a few fasting state, triggering cellular rejuvenation and renewal. NextGen builds on the original prolong with 100% organic soups and teas, a richer taste and ready to eat meals. It's developed over decades at USC's Longevity Institute and backed by top U.S. medical centers. Prolong has been shown to support biological age reduction, metabolic health, skin appearance, fat loss and energy. Guys, I wouldn't have believed this if I didn't do it for myself. I don't want to fast. I like eating and it's really hard for me to completely not have any food. Enter Prolong. They have this amazing system where they deliver everything to your door. There are snacks and soups and teas that actually help you eat, but stay in a fasting state. I couldn't believe how effective it was. For a limited time, you can be first in line to experience the new next gen at Six Special Savings. Prolon is offering the prosecutor's listeners 15% off site wide plus a $40 bonus gift when you subscribe to their five day nutrition program. Just visit prolonlife.com prosecutors that's P-R-O-L-O-N-L-I-F E.com prosecutors to claim your 15% discount and your bonus gift. Prolonlife.com prosecutors this episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever find yourself playing the budgeting game, Shifting a little money here, a little money there and hoping it all works out well? With the name your price tool from Progressive, you can be a better budgeter and potentially lower your insurance bill too. You tell Progressive what you want to pay for car insurance and they'll help find you options within your budget. Try it [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates Price and coverage match limited by state law. Not available in all states as summer winds down, I'm all about refreshing my wardrobe with staple pieces for the season ahead. Quince nails it with luxe essentials that feel effortless and look polished. Perfect for layering and mixing. Their styles are so versatile I find myself reaching for them again and again. Think chic cashmere and cotton sweaters Starting at just $40, washable silk tops and classic denim pants. Timeless styles you'll keep coming back to. And the best part? Everything with Quince is half the cost of similar brands. By working directly with top artisans and cutting out the middleman, Quince gives you luxury without the markup. And Quince only works with factories that use safe, ethical and responsible manufacturing practices and premium fabrics and finishes. Guys, there are so many different pieces in my wardrobe that I go to again and again, and they're all from Quince. Especially with the weather starting to cool down. Hopefully soon. I love my cashmere wear from Quince. Nothing is quite as soft or as luxurious, but an incredible price point. So elevate your fall wardrobe essentials with quints. Go to quints.com prosecutors for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's Q-U-N-C-E.com prosecutors to get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com prosecutors.

[Alice]

You know, it's interesting to see what he says and can you match it up with other things? He talked about how Stevie couldn't go out unless his homework was done. And if you read Pam Hobbs interviews, she talks about how that day she said that to Stevie, she said, you can't go out to do your homework. And he said, I've already done it. And he had it. He's like, see, I've already done it. And so that's one reason she let him go. And so that sort of matched up with what he was saying, that this was kind of unusual, that he would just go out instead of staying close by. Now she thought he's coming back at 4:30, you know, in her mind, can't get that far because it's already probably 3:30 or something. Right. When this happens, just going back to what you were saying about him as sort of a disciplinarian, one thing that I thought was interesting, I expected he would run away from that more. Because the theory most people have, I mean, there's the wild out there theories that are absurd, but I think the theory that most people have is he was mad that the boys hadn't come home. He goes out, he finds them in the woods and he's punishing them and it gets out of hand.

[Julia Cowley]

Right.

[Alice]

I mean, that's sort of the theory. So I thought he'll probably run away from this whole notion of being a disciplinarian because he'll want to distance himself from that theory. But when you asked him which one of Stevie's friends was the troublemaker who caused mischief, he was like, nobody calls mischief in my house. Like, I didn't play that, you know, he was very sort of like, no, when you come to my house, whatever the rules are, and it's not really.

[Julia Cowley]

Defined as you're doing good.

[Alice]

Yeah, you're going to do what's right, or, or you're going to get in trouble. I don't know, it was a little thing, but I thought that was interesting.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, I mean, he does say things that fly in the face of, well, he might be guilty or not, you know, the key. And I've heard him say, this is not something I don't think we actually specifically asked about. Maybe we did, yeah, we did ask him about playing guit, but as we know, David Jacoby says he was over at his house playing guitar for an hour. Well, that would benefit Terry, I think, to be over there for an hour.

[Alice]

Right.

[Julia Cowley]

And yet he denies it for whatever. So he doesn't seem to be too strategic in trying to answer the question in what would paint him as in the best light and give him the best alibi. You know, he doesn't do that. Like, he should say, yeah, I was over there for an hour. In fact, it might have been two, three hours, you know, but, I mean, that's what David says, but he denies that. And, you know, I, I don't know that we specifically asked him, but he did distance himself. Like, I wasn't over there all the time. I, I think he. His normal day was to come home from work, hang out with the kids, and if it was a nice day, they were in the pool.

[Alice]

That's what he said.

[Julia Cowley]

He's like, I didn't know, basically, that he didn't really go any place. That was what he was telling us. That was a typical day.

[Alice]

And I guess they were relatively new to the neighborhood. Like, he knew David Jacoby, but it wasn't like they had a lot of really close friends. I mean, for instance, he had not met John Marbirus until that night. I mean, the first time they meet each other is over at the Morehouse. So.

[Julia Cowley]

Right. Yeah, he. It didn't seem like they had a lot of friends in West Memphis or in that neighborhood. And David and I think his wife were the friends at least that Terry knew and socialized with, if really even that much. But, I mean, he had nice things to say about David and about David's ability to provide for his family. So that was really important. He definitely has mistrust. He's careful about what he says because things have come back to haunt him. You know, it's not fair, and it's reckless, I think, to try to pin him down on every little story and then accuse him of being the murderer because his timeline didn't match up with David Jacoby's timeline. And it's just like, that's just not fair to do that to him. And so he just wouldn't with our. And I. I knew he wouldn't because I heard him on other interviews. He's not going to answer questions. Okay. What time did you wake up? When did you get home? What time did you see Dana Moore? What time did you see Mark Byers? What time did you go over to this area? There was one thing that I caught and I thought it was. So that was the only.

[Alice]

The only time he knew is something happened when Wheel of Fortune was coming up.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, he had talked to somebody who said he had to get in to watch Wheel of Fortune. Yeah, that was a witness that was prob. One detail that he offered us. But I'm going to have to go back and look. But there was one point where he was talking about the next morning or the next day when they had heard the boys had been found. They were at the school. He talks about how they went over to where I guess it was the parking lot of the Mayfair Apartments. I think that's what he was describing. And the way that he phrased it was like this time we went over there, it was like it was a different place than he'd been before. And so I thought, okay, he hasn't been to that area because it was a. Just something I caught. I'm like, okay, they never went to that area before because it sounded to me like this was the first time. The way he phrased it. I don't think that's something he could do on purpose. That's just, you know, I don't think he's not that savvy of a manipulator or liar or something that he's going to say something like, well, this time we went over there and just seemed like, okay, this is different. He hadn't been over to the Mayfair Apartments before or the parking lot area.

[Brett]

The like slip of the affect. It wasn't even like a main feature of what he was saying. He wasn't saying, this is my first time. There was the way he phrased it. And I can't remember how he said it, but, yeah, kind of along those lines. Because I think some people will be wondering this. I'll give you my assessment. You tell me if it's right or not. Very, very often he would not get defensive but say, I'm not going to even speculate on that. My sense was that there was probably more information if he wasn't being interviewed. If he was just talking to someone one on one, he had some idea of what the answer may be times or what he did or what someone may have done. But it was such a foggy memory that he knew if he said something, it would be kind of spun out of control. It would be pegged on him. People would be looking at it as if it were written in stone. And he's like, I'm just speculating from a knowledge base, but I've now learned from my past mistakes. I'm not even going to do that. So kind of like how we counsel people to answer questions on the stand. Don't speculate. If you don't know, then don't say you know that you know. But I did not get the sense that he knew something, like not speculating, but he knew something and did not say it or said something that was like false or not true to what he knew. So there was very little information that we could pin him down on. But I felt like he was holding himself back, recognizing it's going to be more speculation than fact. But I did not get the sense of kind of being misled or not being able to pull out information that he knew for sure. Was that the sense that you got in the way he was answering questions?

[Julia Cowley]

I don't think he was trying to purposely mislead us. What I think he does do, what I want to say is this happens in many cases with many parents where a child is missing or they're found deceased. Parents lie. They do, they tell lies, they leave out things. It's called impression management. And they may be hiding something that's completely unrelated and that is normal. And that's why you have to kind of get through that to get to the truth. What, you know, what is the truth? What are they trying to hide? And I think that's all he was trying to do with us, is manage our impression of him. And I do think he holds back and I think he is not telling us everything. But I don't think that means it's the ultimate truth that he's the murderer. I don't necessarily think that. What I found, he seemed to be more fixated on the fact that people keep accusing him of not telling Pam sooner. And that seems to really bother him. And he's like, people keep forgetting that. And I don't know if this is an exact quote, but I jotted it down. People never remember that it was Pam who let him go ride his bicycle. Instead. People only talk about how he. I didn't tell Pam that I couldn't find Stevie until I picked her up from work. So he's like really self conscious about how the timeline reflects on him. But it's more about that he didn't go tell Pam and a couple of things. There was something he said when she's like, why didn't you tell me? And he's like, he told us that they just hadn't run across him yet. He's like, he didn't really think Stevie was missing. I just didn't think we ran across him. That is not a frantic parent. He was not frantic. He, he's like, we just didn't run across him. That. That is very passive to me. Like, you know, we couldn't find him. If you're out actually looking, then you're gonna say, I couldn't find him. Not, we didn't run across him. It's very passive. So I get this sense of. That he was not really looking that hard. And I think that bothers him. Now, whether he killed them, I don't know. I don't. I'm gonna say I don't think so. But it really, like, there's this passiveness up until there's a point where he realizes something's wrong.

[Alice]

This is why I think he doesn't say what I think was the truth. She was over there playing guitar with David Jacoby that night because I think he was supposed to be out looking for Stevie. That's what Pam thought he was gonna do. And he blames himself for that. Like, he feels guilty about the fact that he didn't think it was a big deal until much later on. And that sort of goes along, I think, with what you're saying. I think, yeah, they were going to run across him. They were going to find him, whatever, no biggie. And then it starts to become obvious that actually, no, there is something going on. And like you said, that managing the impression, making it seem like, no, no. I was really concerned from the beginning. You know, Stevie never left the front yard. And so, of course I was looking for him the whole time I wasn't playing guitar. Like, he's more concerned about making sure people think he cared than he is about constructing an alibi that might keep people from thinking he committed a murder. Which I think is really interesting.

[Julia Cowley]

I think you're right. And I think that comes across. I mean, he was not really looking for him. And this is where the contradictory in his, like, how strict was. He was. I think he was just sort of like, he'll show up, we'll come across him. And when that didn't happen, the weight of it is like, oh, this is not good. And the one thing we do have to understand about Terry, and I've gotten this from other interviews and from our interview as well, he's not really good at. I mean, he's good at taking responsibility. Like, I'm the man of the house. I provide for the family. I keep things in order. I'm Daddy Terry. That's really important to him. But he's not really good at taking responsibility for other things. Like, if he's engaged in violence against Pam, like, it's always just kind of like, I was pushed toward it more so than. So he's not great about that. And I think he's he struggles to take this responsibility for. I wasn't really looking for him maybe the way I should have been. I think it's because he didn't really think something was wrong. That. And he's like, then it starts to get a little dark. He's getting a little more like, I was a little concerned there. But he said, then when Pam's parents came, you start getting a little worried. So it took other adults, like her parents to come say, this is a serious situation, he's out. And that's like. That was the moment I think he realized maybe I should have taken this more serious. Like, I think. I mean, that's not what he told us, but that was the moment. Because I wanted to know, when were you really worried? Well, when Pam's parents showed up. There are other adults. They're concerned. And I think that was when it hit him like, something's wrong and maybe I should have done something sooner. That was what I took from some of that questioning.

[Brett]

One thing to add to that, what you've been saying about that night and maybe not taking it very seriously, is he. All throughout the interview, he did get his digs in about Pam. You know, we know that that relationship soured, so that's not surprising. Looking backwards, but. But on that day, too. And it could go multiple ways, but he kept emphasizing, if I were home, he wouldn't have gone out, because when I'm home, he's at home doing his homework or he's doing other things before he's allowed to go out. But I had no control, because when I got home, I was like, pam, where is he? And she's like, well, you want out already? And so there was very much. I wonder if there may have also been a fight between him and Pam that night or that day, because he kept emphasizing how this was completely out of the ordinary. If he were home, then there was no way that Stevie would have gone out because every other day he was home with the two kids. He kept saying that the kids are always with me. Pam worked nights, so they were always with me. Of course they were with me, you know, and he said it multiple times. And there was, of course, kind of an underlying animosity towards Pam throughout the interview. But that particular day, I wonder if this shaded a lot of his impression management. As you said. I can imagine if you're mad at Pam, I'm not going to do what you tell me to do. He's fine. You let him go. You deal with it. I'm going to go play guitar. Or something along those lines. And that's a more complex thing to explain to the police now after the fact, when, you know, Stevie and his friends have been brutally murdered. So that was one thing that I caught when he kind of kept putting blame back on Pam. Of course, also, that's a lot to carry for any one person to think that they were someone who could have prevented a horrible, you know, horrible murder. So I would expect him to want to place blame. But I also wonder if there's more there interpersonally that has nothing to do with guilt, innocence or guilt or alibi that we don't know of, because there was more interpersonal strife that had nothing to do with Stevie specifically, but maybe with him and Pam that affected his seemingly lack of a difficult approach to the missing situation.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, and I agree. I don't think their marriage was perfect before this happened, and then it deteriorated. There were. I think there absolutely. There were interpersonal problems. There may have been, and I don't know know if I know this or I'm just assuming this, but I think there may have been domestic violence between the two of them prior to this. So you already have a tense relationship, and then you have. And this is also normal something. You know, this. The child is missing, and there is blame, both parents. You let him go. Well, you weren't looking for him. And I'm sure that that did not help things between their marriage. And obviously they stayed together for a while, but ultimately the marriage ended. But, yeah, I think there was a lot of blame. And he does say, at one point, I think he said, well, Pam blamed herself. So he wants us to know Pam was taking responsibility for this mistake she made. So he's kind of letting us know that's again, kind of his. His side coming out saying, see, this wasn't my fault. And the other thing he said about in the aftermath of the, you know, when the boys are found that, you know, Pam's family is very protective of her. And so I think what was going on is he's saying Pam let him go, and her family's saying, yeah, but you weren't even looking for him. And they were protecting Pam, and he kind of got ostracized already. And, you know, they. I think, you know, they were protective of her because they felt like maybe they needed to protect her from him generally. But he was ostracized. And it's like that was a sticking point to him. Nobody ever remembers it. It was her who let him go. And if she had not let him go, this never would have happened. We wouldn't have lost our son, and I wouldn't be here being blamed for this. And we would have had our pool and our life. And it's like. Just this whole, you know, it's kind of this symbolism here with him.

[Alice]

Yeah.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah.

[Alice]

It's like a perfect life before. And then it all.

[Julia Cowley]

It's like what I see it as is like if a child passes or disappears and never comes home. It's like, you know, a parent may latch onto a favorite toy or go into their rooms, or. I know a mother who lost her daughter and they moved to a different home, and she moved her room and left it exactly the same. So this is. To me, that's. This was Terry's thing to hold on to. And I think that pool is really important. And like I said, we. We made a little joke about it, and. But I made light, you know, of something that I think I just. Just because I made the little joke in our interview to lighten things up does not mean I did not realize the significance of it. I don't know if he realizes it, but I was gonna say I don't.

[Brett]

Think the joke registered with him, which is when it really struck me how kind of important that symbolism was to him.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, I just don't think he quite realizes because I don't know that he's dealt with everything. He did talk with us about going to grief counseling, trying to go. And he's been kicked out of some groups because some people think he's guilty. But I thought that was really interesting. If that's true, if Terry has attempted to go to grief counseling, then I would find that very hard to believe that the person who did that to those boys has any grief. And so it just. It really. I thought, if that's true, I'm pretty sure he didn't kill the boys, because the person who killed the boys, I don't think has grief over it. I don't think they have remorse over it at all. None. And where I see Terry's guilt lies more in the timeline and not looking for Stevie and being blamed for not telling Pam sooner, that just seems to be where his guilt seems focused, as opposed to feeling guilty about actually having committed the murders.

[Alice]

So one part of the interview that I thought was fascinating and hope people appreciated sort of the window that you got to see there, because this conversation was not unlike most interviews with witnesses and suspects. It's not like it is in the movies. I mean, I guess sometimes it is with, like, the light shining on them and the good cop and a bad cop one, cops yelling. It may get to that at some point, but initially it usually is much more sort of friendly. Trying to build rapport, having a conversation, asking questions that aren't pointed but are if the person is guilty. And the questions you asked about the crime scene, whether you would have been able to see the bikes, the parking area, like, these are all things that if he did it, he knows the answer to, because he would have parked there. Because he didn't walk a mile and do this and then walk a mile back to the neighborhood, he would have had to have parked there. He would have seen the bikes on his way into the woods because that's why he would have known where to throw him. Like you asked, where were they found, who found him, all this stuff. Like, I thought that was a really fascinating part of the conversation. And I was curious how you thought his responses, if his responses to those questions told you anything.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, I mean, I was looking. I was hoping for slip ups, like, oh, you shouldn't know that. I agree with you, Brett. I felt he. I don't think he was being evasive on. I think he was trying to be helpful, but he really didn't know some of the answers. Like, I don't know if you can see that. I don't know. Like, there were things too, where I thought he was very honest. I'm like, well, would you have been able to see them from standing up where you would have, like, parked? I was asking about, like, is there a parking area? And he's like, I don't think so, because it was pretty overgrown. I think he was trying to be helpful, trying to remember. And there's nothing there that I thought that doesn't make sense to me, or I think you're lying about that. I just. Nothing stood out. I thought he was being honest. I think some people will listen to the interview and say that he's being evasive, you know, and I think he might be in some ways being evasive, but also I think he just doesn't remember, you know, it's 1993.

[Alice]

I do want to transition to sort of a more general discussion of the crime, but are there any other questions you had, Alice, or any other thoughts you had, Julia, that you wanted to highlight about the conversation?

[Julia Cowley]

So, yeah, one other thing. You know, I had asked him if when the three were arrested or when they made the arrests and the homicide, was he relieved? And he had no relief. And I would think the guilty person. And he could be lying again, but the guilty person would at least have some sense of private relief. But he. He just said, no, I'm angry. I was angry. And he just, in that anger really seemed to be very authentic to me and not something. It was just like anger that was tangled up in grief, and it didn't appear strategic or calculated. It seemed like a real response. And I think he's gotten in touch with, like, the 12 stages of grief because. And so clearly, he's had some grief counseling, which, again, goes to, like, would this killer really seek out grief counseling? Is Terry Hobbs such a calculated killer that I'm gonna go get grief counseling to make it look like, you know, I. I don't think so. I don't think he's that strategic. But I thought that just was a genuine reaction. I was angry. There's. And I was thinking, yeah, I was a little relieved. I'm like, well, you're relieved because you're the killer. No, but that was just another little thing. You know, I. This isn't an interview where, you know, I know for sure he did it or he didn't do it. I came away from it feeling like, okay, here's what's important to him. Here's where he's focused. It doesn't seem that he seems to be guilty over murders. He's maybe guilty or mad about other things, but not because he committed murders. And, you know, I know he wants to be perceived as a certain way, and maybe he was like that sometimes, but I don't think he was like that all the time. And I think that's the impression that he's trying to manage. That's what I think, ultimately is maybe what he's hiding and covering.

[Brett]

Yeah. No, I think that was an incredibly poignant question you asked in his response wasn't textbook in the textbook sense of. Sometimes people will give you answers because they've seen it on movies where they know that's the right response to give. Many of his responses really did feel genuine in his response in the sense that I don't think there was an overarching theme. I didn't feel like I was being toyed with, or maybe he was so good at it, I had no idea that it was happening. But with respect to, like, the relief point, you could see that you had triggered in him how angry and terrible that point in time was. There were some questions where he was just answering it from, like, a very stoic perspective. But that was one of the times where I, like, saw the emotion come through that seemed to reach back to 1993. And there weren't many times that he could access that even, you know, of course he's going to be guarded. This is a videotape interview with prosecutors and former FBI.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah. And I agree with you. And the questions that we asked him were designed to not be the same questions he's been asked before. It's to elicit responses that are unexpected. And I think we got that he was asked questions he wasn't expecting and he had no issues. We had a very nice conversation with him. He wasn't uncomfortable at all. Never seemed to be at all. And I think because he hadn't been asked these questions before, we got some very genuine reactions. And if you take away what I think the timeline is, which I think makes it really difficult for him to be responsible for this. If you're just looking at the interview, I just don't see him as the person who committed these murders. Based on our conversation with him, this was a little window into Terry Hobbs. But I appreciated the opportunity to sit and talk with him. I think we got a lot out of it.

[Alice]

Let me ask you just one more question, because it is something people always point to. It's sort of a cliche thing in profiling. He talked about leaving, talked about leaving the area. He talked about sort of Pam was investigating, she was investigation mode and all that sort of thing. What did you think about that part of the conversation?

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, I mean, that's always suspicious when somebody just picks up and leaves the area suddenly without a reason. Usually they make up a reason or they get out. He has a reason. He has a reason he left. And that's what we're usually looking for is like an unexplained trip that somebody or they just pick up and leave or their reason doesn't make sense. His reason for leaving does make sense. And you can't just say, okay, this is suspicious. It's certainly something you always look at. We always look at people's post defense behaviors. But you have to look at it in the context of, okay, did this make sense or did he run off and dye his hair blonde and have a good point.

[Alice]

$10,000 that they just accidentally got that.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, I mean, he had a reason. He's open about why he moved away. And he explained that to us and. But yeah, it was interesting because originally we had asked him, well, what did you do? Like I was asking him how he coped and he said, well, you just. The media is hounding you and you just kind of hide away. Well, they only stayed in that house for two more weeks. So he really wasn't there for very long until they moved. So, yeah, certainly that raises a little bit of a red flag. But I thought he explained it. I understood it. I don't think it's something I would say, aha, you did it. There was another thing, one more thing from the interview, which something I think is important. I mean, Terry was pretty clear about what the media was reporting, and they were reporting a lot of things. So much so his dad had come down and said that I heard on the radio that their mutilation and castration. And he said the media was asking them questions. They were hearing more in the media than they were from the police regarding. I mean, he had no issues with the police. He said they were communicating with him, but they were hearing all the rumors. And I just want to get a sense of what was going around, you know, being in that area and coming across this crime. There is no way that these detectives that originally found the boys didn't go home and maybe tell somebody what they saw, who told somebody, who told somebody. You know, the police may not have been providing information officially, but this was going around. You see that in other people's interviews. People calling in saying, oh, you know, I gave Jason Baldwin a knife. Well, how do you know it was a knife? How do you know? Because you heard they were stabbed. I mean, there were rumors. I mean, there. And you see that with a lot of the interviews that people give, they call in information. Well, they're calling in information based on what they've heard. And Terry verified that they were hearing all sorts of things I had heard. Well, we didn't hear anything till trial or something. But Terry knew things long before trial. Like within days of the finding of the bodies, the media was reporting all sorts of horrible things that turned out to be somewhat true.

[Jessi Pere]

Look, guys, I love true crime probably more than most people. But know what? I don't love thinking about true crime all night. I spend so much time researching these cases and getting into all of the bloody details, then end up scaring myself to death and spending even more time trying to get myself to sleep. For the longest time, I would wake up groggy, dragging myself around and binging coffee all day to keep myself awake and hold off the crash. But I've finally found something that breaks that cycle for good. Enter Beam's dream Powder. Because when it comes to solving the case of your sleepless night, dream is a lifesaver. When I found dream, everything changed. I started sleeping through the night without tossing and turning and I woke up energized, not groggy. It's been a game changer for me. Dream is made with a powerful blend of all natural ingredients. Reishi, magnesium, L theanine, apigenin and melatonin. It's designed to help you fall asleep, stay asleep and wake up feeling amazing. And unlike other sleep aids, there's no next day grogginess, just great restful sleep. Plus, Dream tastes incredible. And it's become a part of my nightly routine. Simple, easy and effective. My focus and energy came back and finally felt like I could tackle life head on instead of just trying to get through it. And I'm not the only one. Beam has already improved over 17 and a half million nights of sleep, helping people across the country wake up and feel their best. And here's the twist. Beam's giving our listeners an exclusive offer of up to 40% off their best selling dream powder. That's right, up to 40% off. To finally crack the case of your bad sleep, go to shopbeam.com prosecutors and use code prosecutors at checkout. That's shop B-E-A-M.com and use code prosecutors for up to 40% off because better sleep. That's the kind of mystery you can solve. This is an ad by BetterHelp. These days, I feel like there's advice for everything. Cold plunges, gratitude journals, screen detoxes. But how do you know what actually works for you? With the Internet and information overload about mental health and wellness, it can be a struggle to know what's true and what actions to take. These days, using trusted resources and talking to live therapists can get you personalized recommendations and help you break through the noise. I know for me, it's so helpful to know how to be my best self. To learn positive coping skills, how to set boundaries and enter BetterHelp. With over 30,000 therapists, BetterHelp is the world's largest online therapy platform, having served over 5 million people globally. And it works with an average rating of 4.9 out of 5 for a live session based on over 1.7 million client reviews. And it's very convenient. You can join a session with a therapist at the click of a button. As the largest online therapy provider in the world, BetterHelp can provide access to mental health professionals with a diverse variety of expertise. Talk it out with BetterHelp, our listeners get 10% off their first month at betterhelp.com prosecutors that's betterhelp.com prosecutors Guys, we spend so much time caring for the skin on our face. But what about our neck? With summer in full swing, your neck and chest are more exposed than ever. Whether you're rocking sundresses, swimsuits, or strappy tops, your neck is out there for the world to see. And it's one of the first places to show signs of aging. That's why Gopure Beauty created their revolutionary tighten and lift neck cream. Perfect for your summer skincare routine. It's powered by clinically proven active ingredients. This advanced formula is designed to visibly firm, smooth, and rejuvenate the delicate skin on your neck and chest in as little as four to eight weeks. I've been spending nearly every day this summer at the pool and honestly, my skin started to show the effects of being in the sun all the time, especially my neck because I'm always in a bathing suit. Well, once I started GoPure, I really.

[Brett]

Saw how incredible it was.

[Jessi Pere]

It wasn't just about transforming the skin on my neck. They have these full line science, back skin and body care to tighten, lift and smooth skin from head to toe. All Gopure products are cruelty free, paraben free and sulfate free. So you know you're giving your skin clean, effective care without the harsh chemicals or compromises. With over 1 million jars sold, this beauty secret is no longer a secret. For a limited time, our listeners get 25% off GoPure with code PROSECUTORS at checkout. Just head to GoPureBeauty.com use code PROSECUTORS and you're all set. And after you buy, do us a favor. When they ask where you heard about Gopure, tell them it was from our show.

[Alice]

So talking about those horrible things, let's talk about this case in general. I don't want to keep you all night, but I think we'd be remiss if we did not get your expert opinion. Just some assumptions which I think are true and I think we can say so. We have a crime scene here. Three boys, eight years old, brutally murdered. Whether they were stabbed or castrated, whether that was animal predation, doesn't matter. They were brutally murdered. Lots of anger, beaten, tied up in this very unique way secreted in this ditch. Then whoever did this appears as though they took the time to clean up the area, to clean off the blood, do that sort of thing. So based on that, just sort of what we have here, like if you were just walking into this case and the detective said, look, here are the facts of the case, what are your sort of initial thoughts? It's located in sort of a small Wooded area. You got a neighborhood on one side, you got a truck stop on the other, you have an interstate, like all that stuff. What are your thoughts about this crime?

[Julia Cowley]

So I'm going to caveat this as I always do. Brett and Alice. So we do plan to cover this in a very narrow way on our show. We have not discussed it, so I have not consulted with my colleagues. And so I want to put that out there. My opinion could change talking with them if they see something I don't. So my initial impressions would be that somebody likely followed the boys in there from that neighborhood or the person was already out there. So very obviously you have familiarity. Now, I'm well aware of the controversy surrounding the injuries. It has always been my opinion, and I'm not like an anim expert or anything like that, but I have seen a lot of things and a lot of those injuries do look like. I mean, especially when you get in water, you get fish and, and crabs and stuff. And they, they do nibble. Fish will nibble on low hanging areas. And a lot of that does to me look like, you know, animal activity. But, you know, I'm not a medical examiner, I'm not an expert, but that's what I would have assumed, especially having been in water for the length of time we've pulled bodies out of water, they have like little bite marks on them and nibbles and stuff like that from aquatic life. And aquatic life is very active. So that would be my initial response. I don't know that I would say stabbing, but obviously you have to do the autopsy very brutal, like almost like a blitz attack, bashing them in the heads. To me that seems to be like, that's probably the first thing that happened. Likely they weren't expecting it. And I also see, and I think we've talked about this before, somewhat of a loss of control. You have maybe control over two. One gets away. And to me it seems like if you had multiple offenders, you might have better control over the scene. And obviously three people were arrested and convicted. So many people think more than one person involved. And therefore, and because they have three victims and the tying and their different knots and stuff like that, I'm not at this point willing to say I think it's more than one offender. Just statistically, I will always say with information available, it's likely one offender. And there have been times where I have gone outside against my better judgments that I, oh, I think a woman did this, or I think there may be more than one offender. And every single time I'VE had a colleague say, we don't see that very often. And they're always, they've always been right. I'm like, that's not right then. So I'm really careful when I go against statistics. So I need to look at it a little more closely. I want my colleagues to look at it. I want to have a discussion with them about, do we think it's more than one offender? I still lean toward one offender. Just because even when you have multiple victims, you have most of the time one offender. And it's not even statistically. It's like 99%. I made that up. But it's overwhelming. And I don't know to me that the different knots necessarily change. I mean, you know, Joe d', Angelo, he tied different knots. There were a lot of people who thought there were multiple people involved with his crimes. And victims even heard, you know, I heard him talking to somebody. So there were times where they thought they were multiple people because you had the way they were bound, you had what you heard talking. And Walika, they were convinced there, that there was more than one offender and there wasn't.

[Brett]

So following up on that, you mentioned.

[Julia Cowley]

And I could change my mind totally.

[Brett]

We are giving you. That's why we laid out the set of facts.

[Julia Cowley]

This is, I want to say I am not, I am, am perfectly fine with somebody changing my mind and saying, you know, I think I was wrong about that. I, I am good at that. I'm humble enough. I can do that.

[Brett]

No, and I, I think this is helpful, though, because we're saying you've just walked into the crime scene.

[Julia Cowley]

Right?

[Brett]

We all have to work off of the information. And this is helpful because your initial gut reactions do tell you a lot based on your past experience of your next investigative steps as well. But you said blitz attack, and you said in your mind, someone who knew the area either followed them in or saw them go in and after them. With that in mind, with what, what, you know, you've just walked into the scene. Does this look like a planned attack or an accidental encounter that ended horribly?

[Julia Cowley]

Well, it looks more like it was an accidental only because I know that they, you know, they were out riding around. I mean, I know the, the history of it with the fact that it just doesn't seem like it was necessarily planned because you would have to know that the three of them were going to be there. And I don't think anyone necessarily knew that. And I know we talked about this before, but I think at one point Michael Moore or said to someone, we're running late, we gotta go. And I thought that was pretty curious. And I wondered, are they meeting somebody or are they going to see something or. So that's the case, then. Maybe. Maybe we did have something more planned. But it doesn't appear on its surface to me to be something that was planned. But what you do have is you have somebody who, after extreme violence, gathered themselves and clean that scene up and did a really good job. I mean, I don't know that I would say sophisticated, but it was well done, and it was done probably pretty quickly. This is not somebody dealing with delusions or this is somebody who's rational, logical, knows I've got to hide these bodies because either they find them and they know it's me, or because I have a close relationship with the boys, or somebody saw me with the boys. Another thing I've thought about in this particular case is that we always associate the concealing of a body with a close personal relationship or a known relationship of some sort. And when I say known relationship, it could be two people met, they were seen together. The offender knows they were seen together. And so, you know, the offender needs to create time and distance. The other thing I've thought, and it's. I think it has to do with the bikes being thrown into the bayou. I just wanted, like, somebody. They didn't even want anyone to know they went into the woods at all. And so it's almost like, are they concealing the entire area? Because if they respond to that area, then that person would be a likely suspect. And so I've always wondered, does it have more to do with the woods themselves or with a known relationship of the boys? Because it just always bothered me the bikes were thrown in there. And so to me, it seems like somebody went in the woods that direction, came out of the woods, and either going in through the bikes in, coming out through the bikes in. But I really feel it's somebody close by in the area. Like, really close by, like. And they don't want anyone even near the woods.

[Alice]

This is why I love you. Because. And not just because you just said something that I've thought about. But so.

[Julia Cowley]

Yes, so no, it is because I did. Because if I was saying something, I'd still love you. But that's terrible.

[Alice]

The idea. I love this, but I want to talk about it. The woods are the reason for hiding the body because it could be someone who was known to be in the woods. And so if the boys were killed in the woods, that person would be a suspect. Because people would say, well, you know, Johnny, whatever, he's always down there in those woods. You should take a look at him, because he's somebody who might be down there. And so the hiding of the boys could be not because there's a connection to the boys, but because there's a connection to the woods. Is that essentially what you're saying?

[Julia Cowley]

Yes. Yeah. Or a connection to the area, like anyone coming near the woods, just like vicinity. Wise too. Yes, it's exactly what you're saying. But it also could be because they live right there. I don't want anyone even coming over here because I live right here. And if they're over here looking, they're going to know I'm a suspect. I don't even want them here. So I think that's a possibility to consider. And this is something I. I've always thought of when, you know, when I've kind of looked at the case. I always thought that, like, even back when I was watching the documentaries and was, I gotta say, heavily influenced, I've learned my lesson, by the way. I was young and impressionable, but I've changed after seeing documentaries done on my own cases. So I'm like, that's so wrong. So, yeah, I've thought about it a lot. And, you know, the wood woods, I think, are meaningful to the person because they either live there, spent time there, and they don't even want the person to know that the boys were even in the woods. And that's why you have this effort now. Like I said, we see this kind of effort when somebody knows the victim really well. But I think it may be tied to the woods themselves. I mean, there's an extraordinary amount of effort to hide them, and that's high risk. And somebody who's comfortable in those woods, you take that time. Now, I don't think the crimes took as long as maybe some people think. I think you're probably. If you're diligent, you probably accomplish this 15, 20, 25 minutes, maybe, let's say 15 at the minimum, and that's 15 minutes. You've got a crime scene of three victims that you've brutally murdered that you got to clean up. Parents are starting to look. People are probably calling their names. This is somebody extremely comfortable being in those woods. They know the area, They've probably been in there a lot, and they probably live right there.

[Brett]

And along those lines, with the woods being kind of. We've said this before. The woods is like a character in this entire story, right? A very important one. But the interesting thing is, if they knew this area, and I agree with you, I think they did, they would also know that this piece of water that they're hiding the crime scene in will dry up. So it's not a forever thing. But we've also heard the theory, of course, of a truck driver. You would think that if you either knew the woods or wanted to secrete these kids, long term, you would try to remove them from the area. You can't do three boys and bikes without some sort of vehicle. So if you don't have vehicles, you certainly can't do this. So the best thing you can do maybe is just to hide them there, but that you would even know it's a temporary solution. So these things are. I don't have an answer to that. It's just. I agree with you. But then it's also like the person who has knowledge of area also has knowledge that this creek is not a permanent creek. It's going to dry up relatively soon.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, but they have no other choice. They may know that, and their point is to delay it as long as they can. And then the one thing about it being a truck driver, the bikes are parked right there. This is somebody who entered that way or came out that way. So if you're coming from the other side, you're not going to have seen the bikes. They didn't come from that side. They came from that neighborhood. Whether the killer. In my opinion, the killer came through that. And I know the three don't live in the neighborhood, but if I was, as Brett said, if I'm walking into this, I'm like neighborhood canvas right now, it's somebody right here in this neighborhood, lives in this neighborhood. So let's identify every single person. Let's get an alibi for every single person you know. And starting very close to the edge of the woods and moving your way out, also family members, of course. So those. That's where I would start. But I think the person entered the woods and maybe, you know, they entered the woods, threw the bikes in, knew what they were going to do, encountered the boys. I don't think that's necessarily what happened, but I think they saw them go in there, likely followed them in, threw the bikes in, went and did what they were going to do and then came back out.

[Brett]

That's so one thing you noted that I think is very interesting because obviously Mr. Bojangles, man is. Is also a character in a lot of people's mind of an alternate suspect. And from the little we know of him, because he was not interviewed, is there seemed to at least be some sort of delusional aspect or something was happening there. And you noted that whatever happened, if it was a blitz attack and it wasn't planned, the killer or killers was able to gather themselves and act rationally. And you were shy of using the word sophistication. But with the crime scene as you see, and the way that it was covered up, up, and the mental kind of acuity needed to execute it. Is there an age in mind in which you said there's no way a child, what's a child, an 8 year old could do this, a 10 year old, a 12? Is there anything like that in terms of your profile of who we're looking at someone who's much older or could it be anywhere along the spectrum in terms of age, maturity, who could carry out something like this?

[Julia Cowley]

You know, I would say age is so complicated because I know you've talked about John Douglas and he's absolutely right. When you say you have chronological age, you have emotional age. I agree with John Douglas. This is probably somebody older. That would be my initial assessment because I do not believe they were mutilated by the killer. I think they were bludgeoned, but I think the majority of the injuries came from animals and aquatic life. And so you have someone extremely comfortable with violence, has engaged in violence before, has the wherewithal all to know. I need to take their clothes off, I need to tie them up, I need to make sure they stay underwater for a period of time. I need to make sure their clothes stay underwater for a period of time so that I can keep people away from here, keep people away from putting, you know, two and two together. That I was out here or that I was, you know, with the boys or the last scene with the boys. I need to put time and distance as far as possible. Again, I don't want to say too sophisticated because people start to say sophisticated and you think, oh, they're just, you know, la dee da. That's not the kind of sophistication that I mean. So it's like somebody with a pipe and a bourbon sophistication. Not that kind, but, you know, this person was thinking on their feet after engaging and like just the brutality and then like, this is what I got to do. And they do it and they do it quickly and they do it well. That is their sophistication. There's a maturity to that. That's my assessment. It was, I think it was misread early on because of not having Seen this kind of a case before and so you know, they may have just missed some things. The one thing I don't think ever I never believed that it was a satanic ritual. That's just not what happened. Whether we, you know, debate injuries being caused by animals or knives, it, this is not a satanic ritual. This is most likely a personal cause homicide. It could be sexually motivated as well. It's one of those two, but it's not satanic.

[Alice]

I have three questions. So the first one you talk about age. So we talk, when we talked about John Douglas's profile, Damian fits it so perfectly except for age. Age is the one place where you know he's got the violent history, he's got the broken home, he's got the mental problems, he's got the reputation, he's got all that stuff. But age is a problem. He was 18 years old. But how strongly is that, like is.

[Julia Cowley]

It, it's not, I would never, yeah, I would never say it's not him because he's 18. That's too young. Not. I would never say that a profile is just an assessment. I would never testify to that. Right, you don't testify to profiles. It's a way to help focus investigators. This is what you're looking for that is it really. So I would never say it can't be somebody who's 18 years old. I would never say it couldn't be someone who's 15. What you're dealing with though is you are dealing with somebody who can engage in something and this doesn't bother them. Going back to Terry, if you know Terry did this, he's not going to grief counseling. Like he wouldn't. There's, there's no grief in this offender. None. I don't see the only concern this offender likely has is that he would get caught, not that he feels bad. You don't do that to three 8 year old boys and have a conscience.

[Brett]

So not having grief, continuing this profile, would you expect the person or the perpetrator to be someone who would continue to be violent whether caught or not? Or would they have if they were caught, would they have the self control, I guess to not demonstrate any violent tendencies after that? Or is this a one time thing in other words? Or is this a pattern that you would expect to see this perpetrator have?

[Julia Cowley]

I would expect to see further violence in either their criminal history or their personal history. And what I mean is like they could do something and they just don't get arrested for it. I would expect to see that now there are always cases where I just did a show on DNA ID and we did one and done cases where you see, and these were more sexually motivated homicides, but you see very deviant behavior, you see at one time, and then years later DNA solves the case and the person never did anything again, at least not criminally. But then you look at their past and their personal history and you see, okay, there were, there were things they did. But yes, I would expect to see that this person acted out violently because whatever they probably they felt they had the right to do this. There's no guilt associated with this.

[Alice]

So I want to ask you about Mr. Bojangles. So is the kind of person who would do this also the kind of person who would stumble into a woman's bathroom covered in mud and blood, collapse on the toilet, and then stumble off into the darkness? Because that's always been the thing about Mr. Bojangles. Like, did you really just commit these three crimes in the sophisticated way you're describing and then do that? What do you think about that?

[Julia Cowley]

It's such a odd thing to happen that I would say he probably did do it. But because I mean to have that happen right at the time you've had this brutal murder, I would say throw the profile out the window. This guy, go get his blood. This guy probably did it. It's. I'm wrong, but yeah, that would be surprising to me. This was a person who was thinking pretty carefully and probably ended up somewhere where he could be alone, clean up. And maybe that was the women's bathroom. That's very possible. But I just don't think that this person, with the amount of effort they went to hide the bodies, would just go into a public, public rest area and clean up like that. But if he did, he got away with it. So that was pretty smart.

[Alice]

And then like I said, I don't keep you forever. But going back to John Douglas and his profile, he talks about personal cause homicide. And I think a lot of people, they hear that and they think, oh, so it has to be someone who's related to the victim or knows the victim. Is that an accurate definition of that?

[Julia Cowley]

That's some people's definition. And kind of like I think old school thinking is there's a personal relationship and something goes wrong and either out of anger or revenge, maybe another motive, eliminate obstacle of some sort, you know, one person kills another. That would be kind of old school thought about personal cause homicide. Now I don't think there necessarily has to be a personal relationship prior to the murder. It could be you have an argument with somebody, you kill them and out of anger. And that's personal cause in my opinion. Really personal cause is kind of a catch all when it's not sexually motivated and when there's not a financial motivation. So you go personal cause and that kind of catches everything else. Now with this case, in my opinion, it's either a personal cause or sexually motivated. I don't think it's sexually motivated because you have the extreme injuries to the back of the head, but it's hard to tell because they were put in water. We don't know if instead of being sexually motivated what I think if there is a sexual component, which I don't rule out because they obviously were found unclothed. But it could be what we would call a rape murder where the, the whole point isn't to kill them. A sexually motivated homicide is something the point is to ultimately kill. And that's the ultimate gratification where you have rape murder, where it's not ultimately to kill, but you are covering up the fact that you've sexually assaulted somebody so you murder them, that is a rape murder. And that you have to distinguish the two of them. Sometimes they're very difficult to distinguish. So this could be the fact somebody was sexually assaulted and to cover that up, witness elimination, destroy evidence, whatever, then they're murdered. That would be considered a rape murder. So I, I think I'm going to distinguish that. I think this is either a personal cause or possibly a rape murder.

[Alice]

So it's not Mr. Bojangles. If it's not the West Memphis Three, if it's not Terry Hobbs and it's not John Mark bars and it's not a trucker who did it, you reveal it to the world.

[Julia Cowley]

I don't rule out any of them really. I would say I would probably deprioritize. Terry Hobbs, Bojangles. That's tough to get around. It's tough when you have muddy and blood in that. So that one's hard for me to get around. With the West Memphis three. I don't think it was three people. I think I'm going to defer to statistics. Stick right now, right now, today on this date, I'm going to stick with. I think it's a single offender. But if I really had to go back that day, I would really focus on the surrounding neighborhood, the apartments and any homes that viewed the woods. That's what I would do. That would. How I'd be prioritizing things, prioritize that prioritize parents and kind of expand out from there. Prioritize. Okay, who's in these woods? Who walks through these woods? Those are kind of the. You start close by and you move your way out. So probably should put family first and then go to the neighborhood. But in this case, I would be like, let's go look around this neighborhood based on the situation here. These little boys were out riding their bikes. Parents were out looking for them. Let's look at the neighbors here.

[Brett]

So that's really helpful in terms of how what you would have focused on for the investigation, as we've talked about, a lot of what you would have looked at immediately is probably now lost forever. Anything's possible, but that type of memory has probably slipped most people's minds. So with the case record that we have, the evidence that we have, the faulty memories now that we have many, many years later, is there a possibility of finding out more truth of that night? Whether it was the three who were convicted who did it or that they didn't do it? Is there hope for knowing what it is? And obviously, one thing that a lot of people have been talking about is.

[Jessi Pere]

Just test the DNA.

[Brett]

As we know, DNA is not always the kind of silver bullet or whatever to get you. It can rule things out, it can rule things in, but oftentimes it is not exactly the silver bullet people want it to be. So do you think there are certain things that. That are still knowable that can help us get closer to understanding if the convicted are the right people or the. The wrong people or whoever did this?

[Julia Cowley]

I think there's always a possibility. I mean, some people believe they know the answer. I mean, there's, you know, you had three people convicted of it, and they took an Alford plea. So. But with the DNA. Let's talk about that really quick. Because if you have a family member's DNA on them that doesn't tell you that they killed them, unless the source is something like semen, then that's. And even, even that I've seen, we covered a case on our show. Oh, my gosh. So even that wouldn't say definitively, but something like that would be a little more suspicious. But family DNA, a hair or something, as I know Terry Hobbs hair might possibly be there. You know, that does not give you the answer. I do think if one of the three, Jesse Damian or Jason's DNA were on there, that would be compelling to me. That would answer the questions. Were they involved or were one of them involved? Or all three of them involved. But at least if they had one, then that would answer the question because their. Their DNA should not be on them. Or if you had other DNA from, let's say, somebody who lived in the Mayfair apartments, then that's questionable. Like, okay, why is that there and what's the source of it? So, yeah, I think there could be some answers with the DNA, but I don't think we can hold our breath and be certain. But I, you know, the. I would think that there would be, at least at this point, I don't know how the evidence has been preserved. But, you know, tying up using those shoelaces, that's a lot of friction there. So there is very likely DNA, skin cells from the friction of tying and pulling the shoelaces out, there's a lot of friction. Taking the clothes off the kids, that's always pot. Now, of course, it was in the water, so. And how it's been stored, we don't know, but those would be good sources to test.

[Alice]

Well, I think that's going to happen. At least it looks like it.

[Julia Cowley]

I hope so. I hope so. And I hope, you know, it gives the answers. Now, if you have a parent's DNA, like, on more than one shoel, that, then that becomes a little more compelling. But, like, one hair that's tied up, that. To me, it certainly doesn't prove anything.

[Alice]

Yeah. Well, look, we've been here for an hour and a half, and once again, we started this off talking about how generous you are with your time, and you have proven it once again. And I think this should be obvious, but I'll say it anyway. If you're not listening to the consult, you need to. They just did something on Brian Kohberger. If you're curious about what was going through his mind, I think you're much more likely to know it from what Julia says than any future interviews he does. So you guys need to be checking.

[Julia Cowley]

I would agree with that. I don't ever see somebody like that just really telling the truth about who he is. He's too arrogant to do that.

[Alice]

Right.

[Julia Cowley]

So we'll do it for him.

[Alice]

Yeah, there you go.

[Julia Cowley]

We'll tell you who he is.

[Alice]

Y' all need to be listening. This is honestly the worst part about the West Memphis Three is I feel like people used to think we were one of the best podcasts, but then we put Joseph Scott Morgan on, and then we put Julia on, and everybody's like, why are we listening to these jokers? We just need to watch that.

[Brett]

We're trying to get us out of our own Job. That's the whole point.

[Julia Cowley]

Oh, you guys. You do. I think you do a great job. The reason I ever reached out to you, Brett, was because you were knocking behavioral analysis. I'm like, that's what you do. You and Alice do that.

[Brett]

That, like, it's like, in my defense, I never knocked it.

[Julia Cowley]

He's like, yeah, he was. And I just. I. On a whim, I just sent a message together. He'll probably just, you know, he'll never answer back. Why don't you come on the show and tell me about it? But, oh, I, you know, I think you guys do a fantastic job, and I love your legal analysis. And that's just an area that I don't know very well. I. I kind of know the law. Just. Just as an FBI agent, you kind of have to know some of it. But I love your show. But I do have to say your show with Joseph Scott Morgan, I just loved it. And I think I was telling you before we recorded Cheryl Mac McCollum and Joseph Scott Morgan, two podcasters that go way back in their experience in forensics. And they're like, of my vintage. And I feel a real kinship with them because they started a little bit before I did, but it's like they're old school and they. They know where we started and how far we've come. And I love listening to both of them and their knowledge in forensics. And the one thing Joseph Scott Morgan said which really resonated with me is like, this is 93. We knew what we were doing. We knew how to process crime scenes. He's absolutely right. When I started, we knew how to do scenes the right way. So to say, oh, it's 93, or, oh, it's like the late 80s. There was really no excuse for not processing a crime scene. Well, even back then. I mean, obviously technology has advanced, but the rules still were in place back then of what to do and what not to do. So when I see high profile cases now where mistakes are made, it's just like, why are we still doing this? You know, we all know better. But anyway, I loved that show too. But I love you guys.

[Brett]

You are welcome on the show anytime. I think the number of people who are who were going crazy and so excited to see to hear tonight's episode, it was so informative. Julia, thank you for giving us your time and also your expertise. I think it's incredibly valuable, not just for diving into an old case, but truly informing people about how investigations are run, how you do conduct these interviews and what we should be looking for.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah, you're welcome. Thank you for asking me to participate. It was an honor, really. Thank you.

[Alice]

Well, it's not the first time and it won't be the last. I can guarantee that. All right, well, I know you guys enjoyed this. You probably have thoughts. Shoot us an email prosecutors pod gmail.com prosecutors pod for all your social media. Join the gallery. Join unsubs, which is the consult Facebook page, if you want to discuss the cases that are going on there. And definitely give the consult a listen, if you haven't already. Well, we are, I think, based on when this is going to come out, next week we're doing theories. So if you.

[Julia Cowley]

You.

[Alice]

If you want to know what we think, you're going to find out in a week. So hope you're all looking forward to that. I'm still trying to figure out what I'm going to say.

[Brett]

I was going to say I'm going to have to figure out what I.

[Alice]

Think changes after every episode.

[Julia Cowley]

I was going to say, have you done. Because I'm not caught up. Have you done your theories episode? We have not.

[Brett]

And I will tell you, your episode, us talking right now, has changed my mind multiple times throughout the hour and a half conversation.

[Alice]

Yeah, it's the same. So I just. I don't know. Seems like it happens every time.

[Julia Cowley]

It's not easy. It's not easy. I. I have had cases where I'm like, did I get that right? And I talk with my colleagues and other people, and it's very. It's hard. It's really hard. There's a reason why this case has been so controversial.

[Alice]

Yeah. Well, when we say it's Israel Keys, I don't want you to be.

[Brett]

We'll lose all credibility.

[Julia Cowley]

Oh, the evil genius.

[Alice]

Was he in Arkansas in 1993?

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah.

[Alice]

Who knows?

[Julia Cowley]

The one thing I will say with certainty is that this was not a satanic ritual. I will say that 100 was not. So let's throw that out.

[Alice]

Okay, good on that as well. So don't worry. We won't be. We will not be coming down on the satanic.

[Brett]

We've yet to. Not with Delphi. Not with.

[Alice]

That's gonna be.

[Brett]

That's gonna be a thing. It was aliens. It wasn't a satanic ritual. That's the new shirt.

[Alice]

Might have been dogs, but not a satanic ritual.

[Julia Cowley]

Yeah.

[Alice]

All right. Well, thank you again so much. We will be back next week with what may very well be the conclusion of our coverage of the West Memphis Three. But until then Brett.

[Jessi Pere]

And I'm Alice.

[Julia Cowley]

And I'm Julia and we are the prosecutors.

[Brett]

The reason that that happened that I had to cancel was this marks the one week point where our air conditioning has been out and it's been 100 degrees. I think Britney was throwing up because she got herself so worked up because it was so hot. But we didn't know it was breaking that night. So I didn't put two and two together. And then that night when I went up to clean up her throw up, I was like, oh my gosh, the air conditioning's not working. So it's supposed to come on Wednesday. The problem is when it's 100 degrees, everyone's air conditioning breaks at the same time. So I'm so sorry, you guys are catching us halfway, but we were supposed to do this. Sam.

[Julia Cowley]

I'm so sorry. I had done it before. It wasn't a big deal. You are on your show, so you.

[Alice]

Should always do it.

[Julia Cowley]

Oh, no.

[Alice]

Just pointing out that there the reason was not. It wasn't that I didn't want you in there.

[Julia Cowley]

Oh, no, I just thought. Oh, I. I misunderstood you never. You never miss.

[Brett]

You have a permanent slot in our sign off. Sam.

[Jessi Pere]

Hi, I'm Jesse Perry. And I'm Andy Cassette. Welcome to Love Murder, where we unravel the darkest tales of romance turned deadly. Our episodes are long form, narrative driven and deeply researched. Perfect for the true crime aficionados seeking stories beyond the headlines. Like the chilling case of Blanche Taylor.

[Brett]

Moore, the so called black widow who.

[Jessi Pere]

Left a trail of poisoned lovers. Or the shocking murders of Chad Shelton and Dwayne Johnson, where family ties masked a sinister plot. Subscribe to Love Murder on Apple podcasts.

[Brett]

Spotify or wherever you listen.