The Captain (5:05)

For the documentary Amber, the girl behind the alert, is very powerful to watch on many levels. Like we said, there was a news crew that was following around the family and following around Amber and Amber's mother about her. Her living situation and getting her life on track, basically. Well, once Amber goes missing, they decide, hey, we're going to get involved. We're going to share some of this footage. We're going to share pictures and video, and we're going to basically make an advertisement, if you will. Hey, here's a missing girl. We need to find her. So they're filming all this stuff in real time. And I, I believe it was the FBI had a consultant that worked with the family. So when there was information or there was updates on what was going on with Amber's case, that she was informing the family. So we have this girl found. Is it Amber? And you can see it in real time. You get to see the family. They see the news clip is this Amber. And then you have this consultant. I guess the best way to what you'd call her, but she is waiting on word to let me know when to tell the family if this is Amber or not Amber. So it's a very tragic story. I also think it's important to see because sometimes we don't humanize these stories as much as they should be humanized. And to see a family in the moments, you know, when they hear the news report, I'm sure most of them thought it's most likely her, but you have to keep a positive outlook until, you know, until, you know, you don't know. And I. I don't know if you. What you felt about that, that scene in the documentary, but to me, I thought that was just that gut wrenching and, and what a horrible situation for a family to be in.

Nick (7:20)

Yes, of course, I shared all of those emotions trying to take the emotion out of it. One thing that I did find insightful about the documentary was this is a case that I've read about for many years. It's an old case and as far as I can see, it looks like a cold case at this point, unfortunately. But as much as I've read about this case over the years, I had never seen the images, whether it be a picture or film of this creek because everything I've ever read about this case, Captain, always refers to this as a creek or a stream. But because of the heavy downpour of rain and downfall of rain that they had leading up to finding her, that video footage shows what is called a creek or a stream. It looks like a white water rafting type of situation to me. Like this was. This water was much more significant than I had expected. It was larger than I had expected. And the water waters at the time were quite rough. And you hear there's. So the way that this 911 call goes down is this guy, he goes out, he's walking his dog in the early morning hours. The dog kind of leads him down to like almost alert him to the body the way that he describes it. So he comes back home. He lives in this apartment complex. He goes back to his apartment and he notifies, I believe it's a girlfriend or wife, says, Call 911. I think I found that girl that's missing.

The Captain (8:59)

Yeah.

Nick (9:00)

And he goes, I'm going back down there because the creek, the water is powerful. It's moving, man. And he doesn't want, he doesn't want that to get carried downstream. Okay. And so he goes back down there one to point out the area to personnel when they start to arrive, but also too, to make sure that she's not carried away. And so now you have the person that he lives with phoning 911 calling from, looking out the window and explaining like, no, he. Yes, he's going to stay with the body and he's not leaving. Per what he told me, he rushed back down there. Please hurry, please hurry. We think we found that, that missing girl. And so to see the water was. Was pretty insightful to me because you look at these things and trying to take the emotion out of it. You want to learn more about the crime scene. And we've, we've told the listeners this over the years in this situation. We have a lot of crime scenes, right? We know that we have one crime scene is the abduction site between the laundromat and the old grocery store, the old Winn Dixie in that parking lot which is about three miles away mind you, not terribly far away. Another crime scene is the abductors truck that he transport, that he used to transport Amber Hagerman in his vehicle.

The Captain (10:21)

Yeah.

Nick (10:21)

The next crime scene is wherever she was killed because she wasn't killed in this creek, in the stream of water.

The Captain (10:28)

She was placed dumping ground. Yeah. This, this shit bag monster dumps this nine year old that he murdered naked.

Nick (10:40)

She's wearing but one sock when she's found.

The Captain (10:44)

These are the, these are the people that when they get caught and something bad happens to them, whether it's in prison or by law enforcement or whatever, you don't feel too bad for them.

Nick (10:58)

Of course, absolutely not. And so this person, whoever discarded of this little girl, you saw the way that it plays out in the documentary. This isn't like this creek, this stream is not right outside the doors of this apartment complex. And when I say apartment complex we're not the first ones to describe it as a very large apartment complex. You can see they had multiple buildings. And even the detectives describe it as. This is a very large apartment complex which has both positive and negative values to your investigation. As an investigator you're hoping one could it be as simple as we find a truck that matches that vague description sitting in this parking lot somewhere in this large apartment complex parking lot. And we can tie truck owner who happens to live in this apartment complex to where we found her body. Do you have the opportunity where maybe if the person doesn't live at that apartment complex who committed this horrible crime, Is there a chance that somebody living there saw the individual transporting the body to this location?

The Captain (12:11)

Well this is to me more suggestive evidence we have. Yes, it's on a main road, but the, the side of this abandoned grocery store. It's not something you'd think somebody passing through town would spot an individual. And then we have eyewitness saying well the kidnapper went back into town. And then so the kidnapping site isn't that far from the grandparents house. He went onto a main road. And then like you were stating earlier, this dump site isn't that far from the grandparents house. So to me this is all suggestive that the individual, this murderous piece of person that should burn in hell most likely probably lives in that town.

Nick (13:08)

Oh Yeah, I agree 100% with the, with the thought that this person lives in the area. Lives in the area, 100%. Now I will, I'll agree and disagree with you in some regard. The place where she was taken from, I would describe that and Others have described it as far from an isolated area. Meaning that I do think that there's a good chance that somebody just driving by, did a snatch and grab and took off with this little girl.

The Captain (13:39)

Yeah.

Nick (13:39)

Where she's. Where I will agree with you 1000%, man, is where she was dumped. No, where. Where she was placed. Whoever placed her body in that water, knew about that water prior to. They didn't just drive around looking for a creek somewhere. They had some prior knowledge of that spot.

The Captain (13:58)

Well, question for you, because like you said, it's not just this creek that's just water, is just stagnant. Is the dumping spot the apartment complex, or is it possibly further down? And this is just where she ended up and this is where somebody found her.

Nick (14:17)

That's interesting to ponder because of a couple of reasons. And, and, and the, the reasons being that we are relying on other persons that we've not spoke to with their opinions on the case. People that were there, that were there and have reviewed this crime scene. And the general thought, it seems like the general consensus is that she was either a. Found exactly where she was placed or be found very close to where she was placed into the water. Meaning she could have been upstream a little bit of ways. But they, the way that they describe the turns of this body of water, of this stream, which, keep in mind it's proper to describe it as a stream or creek because it had simply swelled from all of this, this downfall of water. But the turns and the debris and rocks and sticks and branches and trees that have fallen into this space, they. They believe the people that were at the crime scene believe that she was either placed very close to where she was found or if she was placed upstream, it wasn't very far from where she was eventually located. But this to me goes back to something that we were talking about before and even talking about something off Mike, and I'll let you, if you let me go through my thought first. One thing we had talked about off Mike was, and I agree with you 100%, everything at the abduction site, and based off of what the eyewitness statements are, it's suggestive and indicative of a stranger abduction. Now, that doesn't mean that 1000% it is a stranger abduction. That's. That's something we talked about off Mike. But what I'm kind of doubling down here on with my thoughts of it is a stranger abduction is the abduction site. The eyewitness statements are suggestive that it is a stranger abduction. And then when you compound that with what we later learn about where she is placed and, and the statements of, well, she was found very close to where she was placed. That if, if the water carrying the victim away or concealing the victim, you would do it in another manner than simply placing her and water. This to me looked like we have a snatch and grab abduction. Very quickly, boom, boom, boom, get out of there. And same thing with the. Getting rid of her is just simply. I just need to. I cannot be caught with her. With Amber in my possession, in my home, in my vehicle. Where can I go? Where can I go? Oh, I'll place her there. I don't really care if the stream takes her away. I don't really care to spend extra time and effort to try to bury her somewhere.

The Captain (17:21)

It's more important for the kidnapper not to be seen.

Nick (17:24)

Yes.

The Captain (17:25)

Than for her body to be washed away.

Nick (17:28)

Right. Because in the killer's mind during this whole time, he's only concerned. His major concern is don't be seen with her. My only connection to her right now would be for me to be seen with Amber dead or alive.

The Captain (17:45)

Right.

Nick (17:45)

But the things that make this so from an investigator standpoint, the, the things that make this case difficult to review beyond the emotional stressors that come with reviewing a case that's this horrific and this scary to talk about is the. We have this kind of weird confluence of information about the evidence. Right. That it's all over the shop on her injuries and her, let's say, degree of sexual assault, which is a sentence that I had hoped I would never have to ever put together, but unfortunately we just did.

The Captain (18:23)

It's our fault. We chose to do a true crime podcast. So I blame, I blame us for this one.

Nick (18:29)

Yes, it is on our shoulders, my friend. The. Amber had been killed elsewhere, as we said. The. She died from several cut wounds to her neck. The thing that's troubling about that is that there's not great detail on that information which I don't know that we would be comfortable delivering anyway to the listeners. But, but it, it doesn't give us any level, to me anyway, any level of understanding about the, the killer themselves. And then the, the reports that made their way to the papers and to the Internet eventually on this case would be that she was sexually assaulted repeatedly. Some statements are. Some statements is she was sexually assaulted repeatedly. That just stops short of intercourse. And then in the documentary, nobody, it seems like they're. They're a little cagey about having a definitive opinion on the sexual assault or rape of the victim. Because what what they're telling us, and they being the current detectives working the case, or detectives that are second generation detectives, let's say, persons that inherited the case a couple years after, what they're all kind of saying is that they, they're not convinced that an actual, maybe true to definition, sexual assault or rape took place, but that there was certainly a sexual component to the abduction and murder.

The Captain (20:01)

Yeah, I wonder if there was some kind of like, you know, digital molestation. It's hard to say. I think all the evidence points to this idea that it's a stranger and that the person's local. But I think where the cops did a good job and it's so frustrating. This case, it's one of those cases where you go, oh, well, yeah, Amber, she's the reason why we have the Amber Alert. It's like you've heard of this case for so many years and then to dive into the research. There's so many fascinating points, and I think one of the fascinating points is, why the hell is it a cold case? Because I think law enforcement did a good job. Instead of putting blinders on and going, look, the evidence is telling us it's most likely a stranger and most likely a local. That didn't stop law enforcement from interviewing and questioning and looking and having some suspicious eyes when it came to family members and friends and even looking at possible outside of the city suspects. I think they did a good job of trying to uncover, you know, lift up every stone and, and look in every direction and dive down every rabbit hole.

Nick (21:26)

You're exactly right. I think they did the best job that they could. But, you know, we say, why is this a cold case? And I think that to go to the negative of something, right. We were talking earlier about this large apartment complex where she's found near. There's positive for your investigation and there's a negative to it. The negative is that if those two positives don't pan out for you, right. Remember, maybe we find the guy's truck here, that it's as simple as the guy lives here. Or if we can't get the suspect having been in this area, living in this area at the time of the crime, maybe we can find somebody that saw him coming or going from this area. Now we have a second or third or fourth eyewitness. That's your positive. That's your what you're hoping for. When you figure out, oh, we found this poor girl and this is where we found her, and there's a larger. This large apartment complex. The negative for Your investigation is. Now you're stuck there canvassing this area because you have to. It would be irresponsible and frankly, just downright dumb not to. But if either of those positives don't pan out for your investigation, now you've spent all this time in this compressed area, right, and not out chasing down other leads.

The Captain (22:42)

Can, can you give me this answer? I don't know. I don't know it off the top of my head. She's kidnapped on a Saturday. What day is her body found?

Nick (22:53)

So she's kidnapped on what would be Saturday, the 13th. And I'm so glad that you circled back to this, my friend. She's found four days later on the 17th. Now, we have a situation here where the medical examiner comes out and says, these are the wounds. There's some kind of sexual assault here. And some reports state that she was beaten as well. And. But there are other reports that state that, that there was no bruising that was found from postmortem from when she was in the water. So those bruises, they have determined they came prior to her death. So we had. We're armed with that information. But the medical examiner comes out, says, found on the 17th. We believe she was kept for a couple of days. So she would have been killed sometime on the 15th, maybe even on the 16th. And we believe that she was in that water for 12 to about 24 hours. Why is that important? That is important because of this. We started off the show talking about important dates, important days, days of the week, dates, where it falls on the calendar. And if you look at the calendar for 1996, she's abducted on a Saturday afternoon, approximately 3pm if the medical examiner is right, and we have no reason to believe that they are not, that she was kept alive for a couple of days before she was killed on the 15th or 16th, and then placed in the water. Well, the 14th is a Sunday. The 15th is a holiday, a national holiday for most people. At most occupations, that's Martin Luther King Jr. Day, MLK Day. Some people have jobs where they don't go to work on MLK Day. And when you look at that timeline, I look at at it as simple as this. If this killer had the ability to keep her somewhere, that means he very likely either lives alone or has a space to himself for a period of time.

The Captain (25:06)

Yeah, no, and I. Look, I'm going to go.

Nick (25:09)

I think, unfortunately, I think he killed her because he had to go back to work and couldn't keep her while he couldn't supervise and oversee the situation.

The Captain (25:17)

Yeah, I'm going to throw this out there, serial killer, because what have we seen in so many of these serial killers? This, this is a family man, I believe, truck. It was a newer truck. It was clean. And we've seen this so many times where these serial killers, they go, oh, well, my wife and kids are going to go visit her family. I'll come up with an excuse of why I can't go and then I can I commit whatever crime and, and whether it's a basement or it's a shed or some place that if somebody does come back, I can hide her in this facility, this kill zone facility, if you will, until I can then dispose of her. And that would make a lot of sense. Wife and kids go out of town for the weekend. They're going to come back on Monday night or Tuesday morning, and I'm going to have to go to work. So I'm going to have to get this all done within this time frame.

Nick (26:17)

We got a lot more to get to right after this quick beer break.

The Captain (26:32)

Well, it's officially too cold to do anything. The upside, you can cocoon yourself in a soft and cozy Bomba's socks, slippers, and underwear all winter long. The secret is in their fabrics. We're talking about the good stuff, like merino wool, which feels as cozy as a ski lodge. But if you want to brave the cold on the slopes or on a snowy run, Bombas has athletic socks built for that too. It doesn't matter which Bombas you get because every Bombas item gives back. For every item you purchase, Bombas will donate another item to somebody facing homelessness for this is why we love Bombas. I get to treat myself and also treat somebody else in the process. It's a win. Win. I've been telling you for years, Bombas has the best socks, period. But now I'm proud to say that Bombas has the best slippers I have ever owned. So why not this winter feel nice and cozy? Treat yourself. So try Bombas. Now head over to bombas.com garage and you use code GARAGE to get 20% off your first purchase. That's B A S.com garage code GARAGE at checkout. Treat yourself with Bombas. All right, we are back. Thanks for telling your mother. Thanks for telling your brother. Tall cans in the air. Cheers to the people in the back. Cheers to you, Colonel.

Nick (28:12)

Cheers to the people upstairs. How did they get there? We don't know. All right, cheers to you.

The Captain (28:18)

That's a very small ladder. These cases that go decades where it seems like law enforcement has done a good job. One of the things that is involved in so many of these cases that we don't have answers for is victims that are found in water.

Nick (28:36)

Well, it's troubling, I be because here's the problem. There are a lot of victims out there that are buried, that are never recovered.

The Captain (28:44)

True.

Nick (28:45)

And then you have a situation like this where, look, we're looking for the killer. There's other problems with your investigation. There's, there's killers of your investigation. Time is a killer in your investigation. And here the water is the killer of your evidence. And I think that that is why we get such an inconclusive statement, so many inconclusive statements and almost confusing statements regarding sexual assault with the victim here. Because I think that the water in the situation, remember I described it as a white water rafting type of situation. I think that that rushing water did a lot to destroy evidence. And maybe some of that evidence is gone forever. I hope and pray not. Technology gets better every single day. And so I think that that is something that has worked in the favor of the killer. And then we don't have anybody at that apartment complex saying that they saw this person come in and place the body or we don't have a better description of the vehicle. And not just a. I'm not faulting our eyewitness for not giving us a better description of the vehicle. What I, what I mean by that is we don't have another person coming forward with the same description of the vehicle saying, I saw this vehicle here and this is what the person driving it looked like. We would want to know the movements of that vehicle. Look, I'm just, I'm just a guy in a garage here. But if I don't care how many little ladder, I don't care how many black pickup trucks are out there in the area. I think this guy could still be very local. And I also think that it could be just as simple as he parked the truck in the garage, in his garage for a period of time that he had this poor victim. And you can drive around all day and night. We know that they've done that in plenty of cases. There's a case from Virginia, a case from Pennsylvan that we've talked about where they, they had a great eyewitness descriptions of the vehicle, the suspect vehicle that they were looking for, vehicles that had body damage to him, which makes them unique. But they couldn't find them. They never found him because every time that they were driving in the neighborhood of the killer that they later identified and arrested and convicted. We learned that simply he parked it in his garage. It wasn't parked on the street or in the driveway during the time that they were out in masses looking for that vehicle. Now we talked off mic here, Captain, about how, how much this case disturbs us. But equally there, even with as little information as there is out there, because there's just. We just don't have additional witnesses. We just don't have additional evidence. There's something about this case and I can't put my finger on it but, but it's a powerful case and it's one, it's a gripping case. It's one that has gotten a hold of me and I know it's gotten a hold of you recently too. And it's like we're just trying to find a roadmap to more information and to lead us to something. Now I will say there were good suspects that they did investigate over their years. And the police, as you pointed out, APD put together a task force and did a good job in a thorough job and continue to work this case very diligently to this very day. The task force, for my understanding, disbanded in 1999. So it was together for a good deal of time. And during that time they looked at other offenders and they did the old pervert roundup early on in the investigation, as they should. It would be strange not to. I wanted to seek out the experience from experts, persons that had worked similar cases. So people that not are not necessarily talking specifically about Amber Hagerman's case, but are talking about cases that have a lot of similarities. Here is what I was able to come up with here, Captain and this is from Ken Lanning. Ken Lanning, who is he? He is a individual that worked with a lot of the first generation M hunters for the FBI. The captain reference an FBI personnel coming into this investigation early on and one person in particular working almost hand in hand with the family over the course of, of several days, if not weeks. And one thing we do know based off because we had that eyewitness statement of this being an abduction and the description that was provided by the eyewitness of that abduction, Texas called in the FBI serial killer child abduction unit. They were brought in and spent many days in Arlington, Texas working this case. So I wanted to seek out some experts opinions on similar cases. And Ken Lanning, we recommended his book a while back. It is. I'm going to get this wrong. I should have put it in my notes. It Was.

The Captain (33:55)

Well, it's one of the get things wrong.

Nick (33:57)

I, man, I tell you, the, the title of the book is Love Bombs and Child Molesters. And I know that that seems like that's a very strange title, but it's a very good book.

The Captain (34:12)

Yeah, but the problem with a title like that, that's not a book that you want to pick up at the bookstore and take it to the checkout. No, and that's my only problem with the title.

Nick (34:23)

The thing is, I don't think that Ken Lanning, his goal was to. I don't think his goal was to sell any books. And I don't think that he was trying to set up a situation where he wouldn't sell any books. But if you read the book, you understand right away why it is called that. Because it's. He, he's a former FBI agent who worked a lot of child molester, child abduction cases and he worked a lot of bombing cases. And he's a man who very much loves his wife and loves his children and his grandchildren. So the book is about the three things that he knows the most about. And so Ken Lanning, he describes the four phases of abduction for the offender, for a similar type offender. And he says those four phases are one, build up to abduction, three, post abduction, and for the recovery, slash, release phase. In the buildup, the subject engages in fantasy that creates some need for sexual activity. Although it may not start out child oriented. He validates and rationalizes his fantasy by talking to others who share or encourage it, or by looking at pornographic material that fuels it. There could be a precipitating stressor that prompts the subject to act on his fantasies and then either an opportunity presents itself or the offender plans and creates one. When the subject is ready to carry out the abduction, victim selection becomes key. So those are the four phases according to an expert, Ken Lanning. And then let's take that a step further here. I was looking at some of Douglas's cases, John Douglas's cases. He's mentioned this in several cases and I found it to be intriguing because it really mirrors some of the little known details that we have in Amber's case. And Douglas says when we see this type of crime, so what he's talking about is a crime where a snatch and grab abduction, stranger abduction, stranger abduction in broad daylight in an area that people would not refer to as isolated, where there could be eyewitnesses. Douglas says when we see this type of crime, the first thing we think of is a somewhat younger, unsophisticated perhaps disorganized offender with a highly developed sexual fantasy that he is increasingly desperate to act out. When we see a high risk crime, we expect the victim to be kept alive for a relatively longer period of time. Meaning, unfortunately, in most cases where a woman is abducted, raped and murdered, it all happens relatively quickly. It happens within 45 minutes, an hour, two hours, three hours. It doesn't take a lot of time for those horrific, nightmare situations to play out. Amber's situation, and we know this based off of the medical examiner, she's abducted in broad daylight. It's a high, high risk factor. And the ME Says that she was kept alive for a couple of days. This doesn't tell us. This doesn't tell. These things don't tell us who the killer is. But, but these things tell us who the killer about. Tell us some things about the killer.

The Captain (38:09)

And there was some individuals close to the family and members of the family that law enforcement had to look into. Obviously you have this separation of the parents, so you have to then go, well, where was the dad? What was his involvement? They, they figured out his whereabouts, so he wouldn't have been even in the area. Then you have to start looking at maybe friends of his, because we do have a separation. We don't have him with any set of custody set up through the courts. So you have to look at that angle. There are some people that maybe looks wise, and I don't think you should judge every book by its coverage, but there are a bunch of individuals that were close to the family that law enforcement looked into. I don't know if they ruled them out publicly. I believe they did with the father because he had a pretty solid alibi. But I, but I also think even if you're a person that law enforcement looked at, you could understand why they're not going to rule out some individuals publicly.

Nick (39:27)

Well, some of the people that they did, they've actually, the task force have ruled out. I, I don't know if I would say a considerable number of people over the years, but we do know that they have ruled out some very bad people, but they've also ruled out some people that were not very bad people close to the investigation. Okay, so with the father situation, you're exactly right, Captain. It's my understanding that he was either at work or with several other people at the time of the abduction. And also, this is not a location that was particularly close to the site of the abduction. So it would be, even if those persons are off by 30 minutes or an hour on their Time frame. He couldn't have made it there in time to do what he did. The other thing that complicates things, too, is your suspect changes after you find your body. Why? Because in most abductions, the sexual assault and murder take place very quickly. Here, that's not the situation the medical examiner tells you within 24 hours or so of finding the body that she was alive for. For days into the abduction. Days after the abduction. So dad, who is sitting with mom and consoling her and crying on camera during those days that Amber was alive doesn't make for a good suspect now that you found the body. His friend or family members or, sorry, friends that were close to family members also being present during the time searching for Amber do not make for good suspects. Now, because of what we know, somebody had the ability to keep her, and unfortunately, they. Damn it. I hate saying these things out loud. She wasn't just kept in a cellar somewhere.

The Captain (41:19)

Yeah.

Nick (41:20)

In the dark. Somebody was doing stuff to her during the course of that time. Somebody had to be physically present with her during that time period. And the people that were helping look for her and the people that especially were on camera consoling the family and being there for the family, aren't good suspects because their whereabouts, even if they're not accounted for for the eight minutes when she disappeared, their whereabouts are accounted for for those two days that somebody, Some monster kept her for.

The Captain (41:48)

Yeah, but the. The monster wouldn't have to be present the whole time, but.

Nick (41:52)

But again, the whole time. But it gets. But he can't harm her when he's not there.

The Captain (41:56)

Exactly. He can't live out whatever sick fantasy he has. And that. And that's what's weird. I. The more cases we do, especially when the victim is a child, it's like, I don't. I don't always think eye for an eye is the right way to look at things in life. But for some reason, when it comes to cases where the victim is a child, I don't even just want an eye for an eye. I want, like, oh, eye for every piece of your body. Because you deserve. Whatever you did to the victim, it should be done to you ten times over. Especially when it comes to children. This case is so frustrating because we do have a. Like you said, a solid eyewitness. But could you imagine being a close family friend and you show up to just help. Amber's gone. Somebody took her. Okay, I'm. I'm on my way. And then you get there and they say, oh, well, we have eyewitness and got a good look at the guy, didn't get a license plate, but he had a single cab, small bed, black truck. And you're, you're the family friend with a single cab, small bed, black truck. That would be a little bit of an uncomfortable situation to be in.

Nick (43:17)

And he did allow law enforcement to process his truck. We should point out that one thing that is missing from the eyewitness account when we look at this family friend's vehicle, he drove his truck for work. And so on the side of his truck, I'm sure you noticed this during the documentary. They showed his truck.

The Captain (43:41)

Yeah.

Nick (43:42)

On camera. On the side of his truck. What was on the side of his truck? A big advertisement for his company. Right. And what we don't have in the eyewitness statement is, oh yeah, I saw a company name plastered on the side of the, of the truck.

The Captain (43:56)

Well, like you said, I think the eyewitness got a good look at the side of the truck. Here's what I always wondered, because if it is a stranger on stranger crime, if the kidnapper, if this monster of a person is local, is it possible that this vehicle was a work vehicle and not a daily driver for them? Meaning, like I said, this guy maybe has a family, maybe they're out for the holiday weekend to visit other, other family members and he comes up with a, a ruse of why he has to stay back, but that his family and other individuals never suspected him. When people hear a single cab, small bed, black truck, they're not put in two and two together because this is not a daily vehicle for that individual.

Nick (44:50)

Well, with this case, you know, I already referenced some information from John Douglas and from Ken Lanning, two of the top cops, two of the top experts in this field, and, and what we're talking about here today, but really that was reviewing information that they've given out and thoughts and opinions from their experience on cases that are very similar to the Amber Hagerman case, not her case specifically. So I took that a step further, Captain. What I did was I reached out to Jeffrey Reineck, former FBI agent who has, was involved in solving several big, high profile cases. In fact, he's put away at least one serial killer, a couple that, that we're aware of. And he unfortunately, and I say this because I know that it has had a very big impact on him emotionally and as a person, that he had the unfortunate task of working a lot of child abduction and child murder cases. And so he's seen both a lot of stranger abduction cases and also cases where the victim knew the perpetrator. And so I reached out to him and I said look, I just want to get some of your opinions on this case and let. I'll go through some of our correspondence here regarding Amber's case. And I, I described the crime to him and I said Amber was out riding her bike with her little brother. She was nine, her brother was just five. Of course they rode off to a spot where they were not supposed to go, but not too far from the route they typically were allowed to travel, which is basically a big circle back to grandma and grandpa's house. The boy decided to go home instead of playing longer at the parking lot that they adventured off to. It was a large parking lot with three freestanding businesses. An auto shop, a laundromat and a grocery store that had been closed and out of business. Amber was riding up and down the ramp that went into the back of the grocery store. This area was visible to some homes that the lots backed up to Amber's grandparents, neighbors, Hood. A man in a dark pickup truck pulled in and took the little girl, leaving the bike behind. She was found four days later in a large creek near a very large apartment complex. Her throat was cut. The apartment complex was in north Arlington. The abduction site was east Arlington, distance about three miles. The medical examiner said that she was kept alive for a couple of days. I was curious if you would offer up any insights about the offender based on the general information about this crime. She was only gone from the house for eight minutes. The kids and their mother were visiting the grandparents house. This to me suggests a stranger abduction. It occurred during broad daylight and was witnessed by an old man in the neighborhood who called 91 1. He reported an abduction because she screamed. She was grabbed, not lured into the truck. The auto shop, the laundry mat, Both had customers that day. I think the time of day, the short distance between the abduction site and the creek, along with the seemingly randomness of the vulnerable little victim, could tell us a lot about the killer. To which Mr. Reineck responded that he was going to take some time to look into some of the logistics in the post mortem about the case. And I had told him that I was reaching out to him because the case was bothering me more than normal. And so he asked me, can you tell me what bothers you about the case and any theory or conclusions you are hoping to address. To which my response here, Captain, is It's difficult to put into words, but the seemingly randomness and impulsivity of the abduction is what is nagging at me. Compounded with her being kept and the disposed of where and when she was. She was grabbed in the early afternoon in broad daylight in a location that was far from isolated. The perpetrator may not have even had a weapon. It just keeps running through my mind that some guy was driving home from the bar, sees the girl and acts. The desirability due to her age may not have been there for him, but rather the vulnerability of the young victim alone that encourages him to strike. But the risk level is significant. So much so that he is spotted in the act. He keeps her for a couple of days, must live alone, and then places her in the creek at a spot where he feels comfortable that he will not be seen disposing her of. He already knows that he was seen once. He can't risk it again. It's not a quick walk. You've seen it, Captain. It's not a quick walk from the parking lot to the creek. It's not as simple as just backing up your truck. I've seen it suggested. This is the insightful part here. I've seen it suggested that the knife, slash, throat cut may be indicative of a lack of control or panic. The thinking is that suffocation or strangulation would exhibit more control over the victim. But I told Mr. Reineck, I said, could he have simply killed the victim due to his lifestyle? She was taken on the 13th, Saturday the 13th. And I go on to tell Mr. Reinek, I looked up MLK Day for 1996. It's Monday the 15th. It's believed that her death was approximate. Her approximate death was sometime on January 15. He couldn't keep her any longer as he had to go back to work. She's found on the 17th, so they could be somewhat off on the time of death. So then if that's the case, the knife, the use of the knife and cutting her throat is not a lack of control. I said, I figure it's a younger man, mid-20s, with a job that does. That does not require a lot of interaction with others, but afforded him a day off on Martin Luther King day, who lived or worked at the apartment complex at one time, but not at the time of the murder, as they were looking for a black truck, although of course a lot of trucks are in Texas. He likely works with his hands, probably carries a knife or box cutter at work. He lived alone at the time and had a small social circle. Probably did not grow up in Arlington and likely moved after when things settled down and when things were convenient. But not In a rush, this would be months afterwards words. Without taking up too much more of your time, Am I way off of base here? To which Mr. Reineck tells us he thinks that the way that the injuries with her having several injuries to the neck as described from the information he reviewed, Keep in mind, he's not reviewed the body, he's not reviewed the actual autopsy. This is information that is available to all of us.

The Captain (51:56)

Right.

Nick (51:56)

But again, he is an expert in this very dark world that we're talking about. He's saying that he believes that the injuries are suggestive, that it's not a first time offender. And I want to be clear on what he's saying here.

The Captain (52:17)

He's.

Nick (52:18)

Without going through his entire email, he's telling me, Captain, that he doesn't believe that this. He's not saying that this is not the first time that this guy has murdered. Right. He's not saying this is the second murder or third murder. He's saying he believes that this person has offended before, meaning sexually assaulted a child, raped a woman, abducted a kid, something of that nature prior to this murder, but has never murdered before. And he's saying that he believes that Amber was murdered because this guy has. He's either on the radar or has been scared to the point where he thought he would be arrested for prior crimes or was actually arrested for a prior crime that did not involve murder. So it's, it's interesting to hear somebody with that level of expertise say that because it's a fine line of what Mr. Reineck is saying, that the murder was done to cover up the crimes of abduction and sexual assault. He didn't want to leave a witness alive. He didn't want to leave the victim alive because the victim could potentially identify him. He's saying that the, the way that the wounds are described in the newspapers and on the Internet show that he may not have done this before. That being the murder part, which that gives us. If that is true, then now you've really shrunk your suspect pool. You're looking for somebody that has committed similar crimes without a murder, that they've either either been caught for or not caught. But I would be looking for somebody that was interviewed, questioned, suspected of, and they carried out the murder to cover up the crimes. All right, Captain, let me read directly from some of Mr. Reineck's statements. To me, he says, quote, I believe this is not a first time offender, because many times a first time offender will not murder, murder the victim, who is also the best witness. Additionally, I believe from experience that if the wounds were the cause of death, they were not efficient and the offender might not have been certain if he affected death, which could indicate a lack of experience in causing death. He goes on to say that it's unfortunate that we don't have better information about these wounds and he is hoping that this information was shared in detail with the task force members at the time. He wants to be clear that he is. He says, I would have to conclude that anything I offer has no value other than general suggestions such as I offer in this email, because he's not seeing this information for himself. He's not working the case himself. But he goes on to say, I was saddened to see an offender has not been identified or suspected in considering the progress of forensic science, I hope this makes sense. I can understand why this would bother you because it bothers me and reminds me of my experiences. So I want to make sure that we thank Mr. Reineck for taking the time to answer some of my questions on this case and allowing me to disrupt his daily life with a couple of out of the blue questions about a very haunting and a very sad case. This is one of those cases, Captain, that has remained in the news. It's a big case for all of Texas. It really is. You could tell watching the documentary, you can tell that the. With the sad reminder of the anniversary that comes up every year of when this little girl was abducted, when she was later found. And they've still not resolved this case. But it does lead to the creation of the Amber Alert, which has been a tool. It's been a, a warning, it's been a way to try to bring kids home, to get kids returned safely and to even beyond that, identify the suspect or perpetrator of the actual abduction and, and take them to. I will say this. I did review at least one article and I won't name the authors of that article that they went on this long report of how it's not ever truly been proven that the Amber Alert has. Is directly responsible for saving lives or that the Amber Alert is directly responsible for bringing kids home or identifying abductors. I don't want to say their names because look, understanding crime statistics, understanding crime trends is very important to communities and it's necessary for keeping people safe. So them discussing the outcome of this. Fine. I think it's in very poor taste though. Who gives a. Why even question it? There is no way to prove. There's no numbers. You can't prove because there's truth in what they're saying. Here, Captain, because in Atlanta, Amber Alert went out throughout the community. Oh, it scared the perpetrator, and he decided not to kill the victim and let him go. Right. I'm sure that if you dig deep enough, you can find a perpetrator that was later arrested that ends up telling police. Yeah, I got scared. I heard the Amber Alert go off. I. It was on the news. I got scared. I decided I got to get rid of this victim that. That. That I've taken. I got to let him or her go. I'm sure that if you dig deep enough, you could actually find someone. So maybe shame on them for not finding that particular case, because we're not talking about 10 cases. We're not talking about a hundred cases. We're talking about thousands of cases. So it'd be difficult to research for your article. But I say, who gives a shit? Because can you. Can we really prove that a tornado warning has saved a life? One single life? We can't. There's. No. It's very difficult to prove that. So. So what? Should we get rid of tornado warnings because we can't prove that it saved a life. No, you don't. Same with the Amber Alert. You don't get rid of it because you can't prove that it brought a child home. You can't prove with an absolute that it saved a child's life. That doesn't mean you get rid of it. They weren't saying to get rid of it. But I say, why even question it? This is another tool. This is another. It's a warning, man. It's. It's what we have. And. And I say this to everybody out there, that if. If you're like the authors that question the impact of the Amber Alert, then I say this to you. If your child went missing, wouldn't you want them to do everything in their power that they possibly could to find your child? The answer is going to be yes every single time. So this is important. This case is important. And unfortunately for Amber and for the persons closest to her, and I hope that this case gets solved and solved very, very soon. I think that there's reason to stay positive about this case. The light is still on. There's still a chance that they solve this case. From everything I've seen, they're working this case very hard. And regardless if it gets solved or doesn't get solved, this is a big, powerful, impactful case. And that's why. And because of her mother and because of the efforts of the people that knew this little girl and knew the family and were a part of that family that we have this powerful tool to this day, the Amber Alert. And in my opinion, it absolutely has saved lives.

The Captain (60:53)

Foreign thank everybody for joining us here in the garage each and every week. Thanks for telling your friends. Colonel, do we have any recommended reading for the beautiful listeners?

Nick (61:14)

Of course, Captain, we have to be recommending Jeffrey Reineck's book In the Name of the Children and FBI Agents Relentless Pursuit of Of the Nation's Worst Predators. We were lucky enough to have Mr. Reineck on as a guest years ago to talk about some of the cases that he worked over his career as an FBI agent. This is a FBI special agent who had a gift for getting child predators to confess to their crimes. To do that, he had to share a piece of his soul. And I told you earlier about the emotional toll that this took on him. And how could it not? He's a human being. This just telling these stories, just listening to these stories does take a bit of a toll on you and all of us. But this guy has done some incredible work. The book is one of the best true crime books that I've ever read. And he's someone that I would, I would hope someday that his name will be up there with the Roy Hazelwoods, with the Robert Wrestlers, the John Douglases, the An Burgess, because he is of that elk. He has worked these cases and his experience is something that we can all learn from and that I think that law enforcement agencies out there around the country could learn a lot from. So make sure you check out if you haven't already, because this is not the first time we've recommended Mr. Reick's book, I believe it's time number three, but it is one of the best true crime books out there. In the Name of the Children and FBI Agents Relentless Pursuit of the Nation's Worst Predators by Jeffrey Reineck. You can find that Great Suggestion, which is available Kindle audiobook and paperback. You can find that suggestion as well as many other recommendations on our recommended page@TrueCrimeGarage.com until next week. Be good, be kind, and don't litter.

The Captain (63:36)

Sat.