Loading summary
Transcript149 lines
- [00:00]
Pacific Life Announcer
Confidence. It's listening to your gut. It's moving forward even when the path ahead is unclear. For nearly 160 years, Pacific Life has helped people keep their promises, building confidence for generations. Whether you're confident in your financial future or just beginning to envision it, we're here to help. Ask a financial professional how Pacific Life, the Power of a Promise Pacific Life Insurance Company, Omaha, Nebraska. And in New York, Pacific Life and Annuity, Phoenix, Arizona.
- [00:30]
Ryan Reynolds
Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile. Now, I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of unlimited Premium Wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills, but it turns out that's very illegal. So there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment
- [00:52]
Pacific Life Announcer
of $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for a 12 month plan. Required $15 per month equivalent taxes and fees. Extra initial plan term only greater than 50gb. Me slow when network is busy. See terms.
- [01:01]
Captain
Sam.
- [01:54]
Nick
Well, it should come as no surprise to everybody reviewing this kit case that Chester Weger was found guilty when he was taken to trial in 1968. Now, is that a good thing or a bad thing? Well, it depends on which camp you are in because there are many people out there who believe that he is innocent. There are many people out there that believe he is absolutely responsible for the heinous, brutal murder of three innocent women. This case is so interesting to me because of the mystery that still surrounds it. Even though we have this case that's been technically adjudicated and a person found guilty, we have all of these questions that remain. So why does this case that is over 60 years old and adjudicated still lead to so much discussion and debate all of these decades later? Well, for many reasons. And we are hoping that we can address as many of those as possible with other suspicions, speculation and things that may or may not point toward Chester Weger being a good guy, bad guy, or guilty of this crime here in this episode.
- [03:08]
Captain
Well, and like we said before, he confesses to the crime. Then he later says, well, that confession is a bunch of horseshit and go back to 1960.
- [03:20]
Nick
Captain, 1961, you're going to have a jury of 12 of his peers who ultimately convict them. And we got to remember how difficult it's going to be in 1961 for a jury to hear that he confessed. Not only written confession, signed statements, I did this. I killed Three people. But now you also have me on
- [03:42]
Captain
camera reenacting the crime.
- [03:45]
Nick
Reenacting the crimes. And as I pointed out in episode two to me, that the. The look on his face, his movements, his behaviors, his mannerisms were very convincing to me. I wish. I really wish that I would not have seen that because I think that it has swayed my opinion of Chester Weger a little more than it should. In this particular case, Chester Weger, other than that confession, has maintained his innocence all of these years. And when I say all of these years, I mean to date, Chester Weger is still alive. Chester Weger is no longer in prison. In fact, he was given parole not too long ago, 2021. And because he's maintained his innocence, and because some people say that the confession is not factual, cannot be true, there are those that believe that he is innocent, and then there are those who put him away and maintain that he is guilty of these murders, as well as the families of the victims. They believe that he's responsible as well as, frankly, the parole board. Right, because it's not like he's just up for parole 60 years later and they say, yep, let him out. No, he was up for parole time and time again. He had appeals time and time again. Those charges, convictions were upheld, and the parole board kept his ass in prison for all of those decades. Yeah, Captain, this thing went all the way to the Illinois Supreme Court. They upheld this conviction. Now, let's go back to the trial real quick, though, because one interesting aspect, amongst others, he does take the stand at trial. His attorney, McNamara, who I've heard many people that I respect and people that I think are very intelligent, smart individuals have said that they believe that McNamara did a great job with what he was handed. I tend to think that some of the problems with the case that many people have pointed out that believe that he's innocent, I kind of feel like, well, if. If that was such a big deal, if this is such a red flag that this dude is innocent, then why didn't his attorney pick up that in 1961 and presented at trial? Because the log not being a murder weapon is one that's pointed out. The confession being incorrect is pointed out time and time again. Yet at his trial, all we are told is that he recants the confession, that it's false, that. That he felt forced by the strategic maneuvers of law enforcement to give a confession. He only did it because he was under the threat of being sent to the electric chair, that it was a way of saving his life. But the Log not being a murder weapon, which there's a lot of reason to suggest that it wasn't. That's not brought up at trial. That's his, his attorney's job. One thing that I really don't like in this case is something that we talked about recently on off the record, the Colonial Parkway murders. Here we have an individual that all these years later we are told is a serial killer, is responsible for three murders, two murders in the series of the Colonial Parkway murders. We are told that he was once a suspect, the prime suspect in those homicides, but he was cleared because he passed a polygraph. In the case against Chester Weiger, we have the complete opposite. We have been told that he took polygraph time and time and time and time again passed him past him, past him. Yet he's never cleared. They never moved on, never wavered from their suspicion of guilt of Chester Weger.
- [07:29]
Captain
This case is so frustrating to me because also the prosecution, we later find out that the prosecutor himself thinks, well, I think that Chester's guilty, but I think somebody else was involved or maybe more than one person. And then the jury says, well, we think that Chester's guilty, but we definitely think that there's somebody else involved. So there's all these people that think if he is guilty, he didn't act alone.
- [08:00]
Nick
And I think that. I like the way that you said that, Captain, because I think that that is a little more spot on than the way that some of this information is been, has been reported over the years. So he, Chester Weger, threatened with the electric chair. We know that their intent was to convict him and sentence him to death. The jury finds him guilty and then comes back and says our recommended punishment is life imprisonment. We don't, we don't see death penalty here in this case. Now if they're. Forget about whether you're pro or against the death penalty. I think that it's. Most of us would agree that if there ever were a reason for the death penalty would be for an individual who committed a triple homicide. But the way that it's been reported over the years is that the, the jury changing it to life imprisonment was a clear indicator that they questioned the guilt of Chester Weger. Yes, we think he's guilty, but you can't sentence this man to die. Remind you it's 1960. They executed people a lot faster back then than they do today. If he truly is guilty and you execute this guy, then that's it, that's all. He's yesterday's news. If he's Innocent and you kill this guy. Well, he never gets a chance. We never get a chance to get it right. He will not have the chance to prove that we were wrong, that this trial was wrong, and that he shouldn't be executed by the state. So it's always been reported that it was the jury that took it upon themselves to decide, well, this is our fail safe. If we got this wrong, it can be corrected at some point as long as Illinois does not execute this man.
- [09:58]
Captain
Yeah, and Chester gets lucky though too, because what we find out and what you hear, which is actually pretty, I think, sad and shocking, once all your appeals are gone, they normally destroy evidence, just get rid of the evidence. He was lucky in his case that they didn't get rid of all the evidence. But again, the way I think this investigation was mishandled, I think the way they were questioning individuals was mishandled. I understand that you need to find somebody guilty of these crimes, but even as the prosecutor, you go, well, we think it's more likely that there was two people involved, but, well, we have one, so we'll try him. What happens if they would have found the other one? And so I. And then you find out later too that the evidence was mishandled. I mean, they had items placed in the same bags as bloody clothes.
- [11:02]
Nick
Oh yeah, the evidence in this case, after he was convicted, after these appeals were upheld, this. All these items became almost like souvenirs. Right. There were children that had, on field trips that had examined, touched some of the items, some of the evidence. The. It's been reported that the jacket was worn by persons for photographs. After. Afterwards, the log that is supposed to be one of the murder weapons was shellacked and, and, or lacquered, rather lacquered. And then placed on the mantle of one of the investigators as a, a souvenir of his achievement of finding the starved Rock murderer. I mean, we have a hard time wrapping our heads around it not being from the state of Illinois and not being of a certain age.
- [12:05]
Sponsor Voice
Age.
- [12:06]
Nick
But this was again reported as crime of the century, trial of the century. This was big news, nationwide News in the 60s and was for many, many years. And we have David Racuglia, the documentarian who put together the three part docu series on hbo. Max, his father, one of the prosecutors, Anthony Racuglia, he opens up the docu series by saying, look where I live. It's been a town divided. Half the people here, he's from the area, obviously think that Chester Weaker's innocent. The other half think that he's guilty. And this has sparked arguments for decades. I misspoke earlier. Captain Chester Weger was actually paroled by a vote of 9 to 4 in November of 2019 and then released in February of 2020. So as you see in the docu series, he's released and then about a month later, COVID lockdowns happen. So this, this man, innocent or guilty, is locked down once again just now in a halfway house, I believe on the outside.
- [13:29]
Captain
Well, and, and look, we, we see this in movies a lot. A guy claims he's innocent, so therefore why would he show any remorse? He's innocent. So the pro, the parole board is not going to parole him because he's not showing any remorse. This just seems so stupid to me because it, it seems like they only let him out because there's basically nobody left. The judge isn't alive, the prosecutor's not alive anymore. Most of the jury members are not alive anymore. So there's, there's nobody alive anymore from this case. So it seems like that's why they let him out. I mean, and obviously his age, I mean you can make an argument because of his age, he's not a threat to society. But you have to remember he's charged with three vicious murders. He basically destroyed these victims heads. And then on top of that, you have, you have robbery charges, you have the rape charge, you have all these things stacked up against him. And I just don't see with them not coming forward with new information. I think the only reason why they ever let him out, like I said, is just because there was nobody else around to argue other than the family members of the victims to say, don't let him out.
- [15:00]
Nick
Well, and that's why the, and I'm glad that it aggravates you because I, I believe him being paroled should aggravate everyone. Because regardless of which side of the argument you fall on or find yourself innocent or guilty, wrongfully convicted, what have you, if in fact he killed three people, he deserves to still be locked up, he deserves to die in prison. If he didn't, then it's a grave injustice, travesty that he was even in prison at all, let alone for six decades.
- [15:35]
Captain
Right.
- [15:36]
Nick
And so you could not get it more wrong. It's, you know, and I, I know it's, it's a difficult situation, so I'm kind of walking a tightrope here, but it's like I, I just don't know. You know, paroling him all these years later doesn't clean any of this up. They never have to reconvict them because you have all these appeals that. That he tries for and fails. The thing here, though, too, is the reporting on some of this. It's very hard in this case to get down to brass tacks. It's very difficult to get to the fact of the matter and the facts of this case because you cannot. It's very difficult for people to review this information, review the case, and not take a stance, not have an opinion, and not maybe allow their opinion to sway or. Or posture their presentation of this case. Now, one thing that I found incredibly interesting is we are told through several sources that, oh, well, the. The jury was worried about the evidence, was worried about if they may get it wrong, if the prosecutors were wrong. And so they spared his life and convicted him to life imprisonment instead of death. Well, that is believable and that that may be true. I'm not saying that that is not true, but I throw this into the ring too, that there's another source that I found that said that they interviewed some of the jury members, and the jury members didn't say that they convicted him and sentenced him to life imprisonment. For those reasons, they sentenced him to life imprisonment. One, because some of the people were uncomfortable with the death penalty for any case, not just this case, any case.
- [17:33]
Captain
Right.
- [17:33]
Nick
And some of the jurors also believed that the life imprisonment was a heftier sentence, was because Chester Weger was so young at the time, 21, 22 years old, that living the rest of his life in prison, never getting out of prison, never leaving those walls, was of greater consequence to him than killing him. So when you hear that, it's like, okay, well, not all 12 of these people thought that there is a chance they got it wrong. Let's face the facts, really, at. At trial, all they are presenting is the confession. They're presenting a handful of witnesses that worked at the Starved Rock Lodge that are saying that the day after the murders, Chester came in and he had cuts or bruises or scratches or something on his face. Now, what's interesting is Chester Weger does not deny that there was some kind of damage to his face because he would say, oh, I cut myself shaving. And then in 2003, remember, his alibi back in 60 and 61 was that he was in the basement of the lodge writing a letter to a girl. Well, in 2003, his alibi changes. He says, no, I was out with my friend Stanley Tucker. Now, mind you, we went through some of the suspects early on in this investigation. Stanley Tucker was in that short list. He says, oh, I was with Stanley Tucker. We went to nearby Oglesby and I got a haircut at the band at the Ben Franklin Barbershop. Did I have a cut on my face? Yes, I did. The. The barber cut my face.
- [19:24]
Captain
Yeah, that's one of the problems if you're. Again, I think if you watch this documentary, if you dive into a lot of these different pieces of evidence. The problem with old Chester is it's almost like he can't keep his own story straight. And he has an explanation. Because they go, well, why didn't you tell them initially that you weren't writing this letter? Why didn't you tell him you're getting this haircut? He's like, well, see, what happened was I did tell him that, but then my buddy lied and said, no, we didn't go, I didn't take him to get his hair cut. I wasn't with him. And then what you then ultimately find out is you go, okay, well was his friend lying? Did the police threaten him as well? But in the initial reports, the first time he's ever questioned, for a very short period of time, his alibi is he was in the basement of the lodge writing a letter to a girl.
- [20:37]
Nick
And then there's, there's a little too much back and forth on that, right? Like he's saying, no, that's what I told him originally, that I went and got my haircut with my buddy. And then David Ra goes back to the. The first police report of the time, of the first time that they interviewed Chester Weger. And in that report, remember, he's not even a suspect at this point. They're just collecting information. In that very first report, they've already stated, in that report, he says he's writing a letter. So the what is of record doesn't ever say anywhere that he said that he was getting his haircut.
- [21:15]
Captain
Right. And in defense, if. Look, if you're going Chester is innocent, then you can go, well, he's been in prison for a very long time. Maybe he got confused. Maybe he's misremembering. Maybe he is just coming up with alternative stories to try to save himself. And let's make this clear. You can be a liar and not a serial killer. You can be a liar and not have committed these horrible crimes.
- [21:52]
Nick
The other thing too that makes it dicey is that the other crimes that we discuss, the rape of the 17 or 18 year old girl in the Mathiason park, the robbery of her boyfriend, that's tying him up and. And robbing him, threatening him while he is discussed, while this is talked about with investigators, while they threatened to charge him with this, and while they make him stand in a lineup and say that both the boy and the girl picked you out amongst five other and, you know, four other individuals. Technically, he's never charged with that case.
- [22:37]
Captain
Right.
- [22:38]
Nick
And as far as the triple homicide goes for Starved Rock, he's actually only charged with one of the. The murders. And that was a strategy that the prosecutors decided on. They realized that their case, other than the confession, was largely circumstantial. Right. You had the confession. You have circumstantial evidence. It was very, very loose. Yeah, he worked there. He was in the area. That's not in question. But the other part of that is the scratches and people saying, oh, he came to work and he had scratches and cuts on his face. He says it was one scratch or one cut. The thing is, what we do know all these years later is that Anthony Racuglia, the prosecutor, did not believe the confession. And so if you're going into it of the mind of this, that this guy's guilty, the only part of the confession that I believe is where he says, I killed those three ladies. Well, you then are responsible to convict this individual based off of that.
- [23:47]
Captain
Right.
- [23:47]
Nick
Even if you don't believe the rest of the confession. Now, if you don't believe the rest of the confession, you now know going into that trial, your case is not a strong one. And you are going to strategize and you are going to prepare your case knowing that it's not a strong one. So you charge him with one murder. If for some reason you don't get the conviction, you can now go back in later and charge him with the other murders. And this is presented in the Chester Weiger case like this is some crazy novel idea. It's not. This happens a lot, right? This happens. You look at a lot of serial killer cases. They take their strongest case and they. They take that one to trial and they hope to get a conviction. And if they do, they may proceed with other convictions, attempts or. Or they may just. Look, if he were. Were to have been sentenced to the electric chair, there would be no reason to charge and go to trial with the other two murders. And the one thing that I thought was really interesting was Racuglia, he said this, and I believe it was in the early aughts. So like 2003, 2005, he said, look, part of my strategy being a new trial attorney, being a new Prosecutor, he was like 26 years old when he's trying Chester Weger for this most infamous case in, in Illinois history. Right. Remember, Richard Speck had not killed those nurses yet. Nobody knew who John Wayne Gacy was in Illinois. Those crimes had not been committed yet. So here he is, this, this very green young guy trying. It was one of his first trial experiences, first murder trial. And it's going to be one of the most infamous crimes in state history and considered the crime of the century nationwide. And so he says, this was so smart in this interview that I read, he goes, you know what? I wanted to see how the jury reacted to that confession, the confession that he gave that I didn't fully believe, but believed he was guilty. And what their take was on it. Was it good? Was it a good strategy to present it or bad strategy to present it? Because guess what? If it's a bad one, I'm going to leave that part out when I go charge this guy with these other murders.
- [26:15]
Sponsor Voice
Yeah.
- [26:15]
Captain
The second time around, we're going to
- [26:16]
Nick
build our case differently against this guy. And I do want to say something here, and this is just gut feeling. This is just something from my heart. You know, we can point fingers all we want. Even if you think that Chester Weger is innocent, look, if he spent six decades in prison, that is horrible. Horrible should never happen to anybody ever, especially in this, the greatest of countries on this planet. But the thing here is I don't believe for a second that the individuals that are responsible for putting him in life imprisonment, I, I do believe they all thought he was guilty, that they all believe that he had a hand in this, that he was responsible. I actually believe, and I'm basing this off of some of the statements. I can't say this with 100% certainty, Captain, but I actually believe that the investigators and the prosecutors believed that Chester Weger and another individual did this. The problem was they couldn't build the case against that other individual.
- [27:23]
Sponsor Voice 2
Yeah.
- [27:24]
Captain
And I don't think they could get Chester to move on that. And look, there's also evidence that is shown in the documentary where early on in this case, Chester writes a note to his father, basically saying, look, I know what happened. I'm just not the one responsible for the murders. And again, he has excuses. Well, I never wrote that. I never said that. And we know that he's lying about certain things, and we know that he changes the story to make himself look better.
- [28:05]
Nick
December 13, 1960. Chester Weger, according to records, wrote a letter to his father from the county jail while he was awaiting trial. And the captain's right, there are many statements in that letter that imply that either he was a part of something that resulted in the murders of these three women, or that he knows who did.
- [28:35]
Pacific Life Announcer
Confidence. It's listening to your gut. It's moving forward even when the path ahead is unclear. For nearly 160 years, Pacific Life has helped people keep their promises, building confidence for generations. Whether you're confident in your financial future or just beginning to envision it, we're here to help. Ask a financial professional how Pacific Life the Power of a Promise Pacific Life Insurance Company Omaha, Nebraska and in New York, Pacific Life and Annuity, Phoenix, Arizona
- [29:05]
Sponsor Voice 2
this show is sponsored by BetterHelp. Have you ever avoided a difficult conversation? Or minimized how you felt? Or just waited too long to talk to somebody? When life gets heavy, the stigma is real. It's something I'm trying to change. It needs to be commonplace to talk about our mental health. Even in 2026, stigma can get in the way of a lot of things, like getting support for your mental health. Maybe you've encouraged friends to consider therapy while you're avoiding taking the first steps yourself because you're busy, worried about what other people will think, or telling yourself you should handle it alone. But therapy with BetterHelp, the world's largest online therapy platform, can be a space to slow down and talk through what's been building before it feels unmanageable. Just take a short questionnaire to identify your needs and Preferences and BetterHelp will handle the initial therapist matching work for you. Their industry leading match fulfillment rate means BetterHelp typically gets it right the first time. Feel confident knowing BetterHelp therapists work according to strict code of conduct and are fully licensed in the US don't let stigma stand in the way of support. Start therapy with BetterHelp. Sign up and get 10% off@betterhelp.com Garage that's better. H E L P.com Garage this show is proudly sponsored by BetterHelp.
- [30:38]
Nick
IXL keeps it fresh all summer long. Without regular practice, kids can lose momentum over summer break. IXL helps students stay sharp and confident so they're ready for the next school year. IXL is an award winning online learning platform that helps kids truly understand what they're learning, whether they're building math confidence, strengthening reading and writing skills, or reviewing science concepts. IXL is used in 96 of the top 100 school districts in the US and studies show kids who use IXL score higher on test, proven in all 50 states. I have friends and family that use and love ixl.
- [31:27]
Sponsor Voice
Why?
- [31:27]
Nick
Because it matters and they see a big difference. With ixl, you get instant feedback with clear explanations. Everything's organized by grade level and skill level. Plus it's easy to track your child's progress and they have flexible summer schedules. They work around your kids summer schedule and in fact summer might be one of the best times of year to use ixl make an impact on your child's learning. Get IXL now and True Crime Garage listeners can get an exclusive 20% off IXL membership when they sign up today at ixl.com garage. Visit ixl.com garage to get the most effective learning program out there at the best price.
- [32:18]
Sponsor Voice
Chime is banking built for you, not the 1%. They have thousands of fee free ATMs because why pay to get your own money? Plus, with a chime card, get travel perks like airport lounge access and 5% cash back on things like gas or groceries. Upgrade to America's number one choice for banking with a Chime checking account. Chime is not just smarter banking. It's the most rewarding way to bank. Join the millions who are already banking fee free today. Head to chime.comgarage that is chime.comgarage. it only takes a few minutes to sign up. Chime is a fintech, not a bank. Banking services for Chime card provided by Chime's bank Partners. Optional products and services may have fees or charges. Stated cash back for Chime prime only. No minimum balance required. Checking account ranking based on a J.D. power survey published October 20, 2025. For more information on travel perks, go to Chime.com disclosures.
- [33:47]
Captain
All right, we are back. Cheers mates. Two one parters in a row and then all of a sudden, boom. Three parter.
- [33:57]
Nick
Well, you. You let the evidence lead your investigation, right? And we allow the information and the true crime story to lead us in the length in which we end up presenting these cases.
- [34:11]
Captain
Right?
- [34:11]
Nick
And a lot of times you don't know what you're getting involved in until you're eyeballs deep in this murder mystery. And I say mystery because I got to tell you, Captain, spending three weeks having reviewed everything I could find on this case, I don't know that I 100% know exactly what happened here. I have some very strong suspicions. I have some strong feelings. But I look up to the sky and say thank you for not putting me on that jury in 1961. Thank you for not putting me on that parole board all of these years to Decide if this man should walk or stay within those prison walls.
- [34:55]
Captain
Well, and I. I look above and say thank you for not making me an investigator on this case. I. I don't think. I don't think somebody could investigate that crime scene and walk away without some trauma.
- [35:11]
Nick
Well, that's a good segue here. We. We couldn't plan that any better, could we? So if not Chester Weger, if he's not responsible, then who is?
- [35:20]
Captain
Right?
- [35:21]
Nick
Who murdered these women and got away with it? Well, we talked about some of the other suspects that police had in their sights. At one point, we had Stanley Tucker, who worked at the lodge. There are people that are presented in that docu series that seem to have some pretty strong suspicions about Stanley Tucker. The interesting thing about him, Captain, is he's the guy that. He says that Chester Weger says, I was with him. He took me to get my haircut at Ben Franklin Barbershop. Stanley Tucker says. Says, no, I. If, in fact, he told police that, we know, regardless, he did tell police that in 2003. We can't say that Chester Weger absolutely said that to police prior to 2003.
- [36:04]
State Farm Announcer
Right.
- [36:05]
Nick
But let's say he did. What we do know did happen is Stanley Tucker does not put himself with Chester Weger that afternoon. And that's really interesting. And that could be the fork in the road here for this case, because what if you're building your case and you say, all right, we got this Chester weaker guy. Yeah, we suspect him. And we have reason to suspect Stanley Tucker as well, because there were some people that claim that they had seen two individuals that somewhat matched Stanley Tucker and Chester Weiger's description and loosely matched the description of Stanley Tucker's vehicle, a black Cadillac, down near the canyon the afternoon where the women are killed. And there's at least one statement that says that two men matching that description in that vehicle, matching that description were talking to the three ladies that afternoon.
- [36:58]
Captain
Well, and they both worked at the lodge, so they would both have access to the twine that was used to bound the victims.
- [37:07]
Nick
Chester Weger says, me and Stanley Tucker, he's my good friend. He's a good guy. He's a great guy. Well, what if you're police and you have, let's say Chester Weger is telling the truth. And he says, well, I was with Tucker or I was writing a letter, whatever. Let's. Whatever explanation he's giving at the time, you talk to Stanley Tucker and you go, you know, we got to put these two guys together. We like both of them for this. And we actually think both of them did this.
- [37:37]
Pacific Life Announcer
Right.
- [37:38]
Nick
Stanley Tucker never confesses. That's the difference between him and Chester Weger. And according to everything we've reviewed, never puts himself with Chester Weger that afternoon. If you had so little against Chester Weger to convict him, now cross examine that with what you got against Stanley Tucker, which is nothing. Nothing. And if you think in your heart of hearts that these two committed this crime together, you at least go forward against Chester Weger, hoping that if. And he never turns on Stanley Tucker. He never says that Stanley Tucker did it. Other than offering up the alibi that they were together that afternoon.
- [38:16]
Captain
And Stanley Tucker never turns against Chester, Really? I mean, other than. Okay, well, we have. If Chester's telling the truth about his alibi, well, then, yeah, okay, so then he goes against him there. But he's not stating to police or to the public, hey, I believe Chester is responsible for these three murders.
- [38:37]
Nick
Well, and remember, we were talking about persons from a youth camp nearby. Youth camp for troubled teens. Troubled adolescents that described several ways juvenile offenders were involved in the search for the three women. In fact, it was a group of boys from this troubled teens camp that. That were the ones that first found the women. And there are some people that point out, well, that's a little strange. You're searching this large area, rough terrain, and it only took 90 minutes to find them. I don't mind squashing that a little bit.
- [39:15]
Sponsor Voice
No.
- [39:17]
Nick
If I'm 15, 16, 17 years old, it's taking me, even in the snow, 15 minutes to walk a mile. They were located a mile from where they were last seen. So I don't find that to be incredibly difficult. They had 90 minutes that passed between finding them.
- [39:33]
Captain
Well, and they're also found at a place that is a destination in that park.
- [39:39]
Sponsor Voice 2
So.
- [39:40]
Nick
Correct.
- [39:41]
Captain
If I'm looking for an individual that's missing, I'm going. Let's go to the major areas that everybody goes to. I mean, again, we bring up the deli case a lot, but why weren't the girls found right away? Well, because they weren't in an area that was. Was a main attraction to that park, A main area that everybody goes to.
- [40:08]
Nick
One potential suspect that's not discussed very often is a man. He was a boy at the time, but a man by the name of Jerry Nemke. What's interesting about him is he was in that group of boys that located and found the three women having been beat to death in starved rock in St. Louis Canyon. Well, why would he be of interest, it's because, well, just a couple months later he beat a girl to death. So this is from the Tuesday, May 3, 1960, Daily Telegram newspaper charging this guy, Jerry Nemke, age 17 at the time, with murder. The headline is Chicago Youth admits beating girl to death. The sword brutal account of a date, a bottle of wine. Then the rape and fatal beating of a 16 year old girl was told Monday night by a young fugitive from a correctional camp. Jerry Nemke, age 17, gave the account after police seized him in a stolen car and took him into custody on a warrant charging him with the murder of Marilyn Duncan. I'm not going to read this entire, entire article because it's rather lengthy and there are more than just one article on this guy because this was a horrible, brutal murder of a 16 year old girl. But the short of it, Captain, is that he was out on a date. They went together to pick up and purchased a bottle of wine. They went to a park like area where they consumed some of the wine and he made advances, sexual advances on the 16 year old girl, which she was not up for.
- [42:00]
Sponsor Voice 2
Right.
- [42:00]
Nick
Didn't, didn't like Jerry Nemke that much. And his reaction was to pick up a brick and strike her in the head and face with it. And then he raped her and left her for dead. And unfortunately she never regained consciousness after the attack. She was transported to the hospital, but either died upon arrival or on the way there. There's no question as to his guilt because he, once he's picked up, he, he admits this and he tells us exactly how he killed her. He says he used his fist, he used a brick and he kicked her as well. He stripped off her clothing, raped her and took her money. Took money from her purse. And he's part, he's one of the guys that finds these women. And you, you referenced this earlier. It's hard to believe that somebody wouldn't be scarred terribly by the trauma of having found them. And now you sit here. Go. Chicken or the egg, right?
- [43:06]
Captain
Yeah.
- [43:06]
Nick
Was this guy capable of murdering this poor girl before he saw those bodies in the way that they're found? And oddly enough found in a manner that's so similar to his victim. Her clothing was stripped off, she was beaten the head in the face. These victims beaten the head in the face and they're partially ripped off.
- [43:25]
Captain
Yeah.
- [43:26]
Nick
And so it's chicken or the egg. Is he responsible? Did he have a hand in this and this is just who he is, or was he always capable of it? Never had anything to do with Starved Rock and then killed this girl or did this plant some kind of horrible, sick, disgusting seed in his head. So he's an individual that. That didn't come up in the docu series. And I'm. I'm a little surprised he's not talked about a little bit more because.
- [43:55]
Captain
Yeah, it's so similar again, too. It's. It's. It's the instrumentation that's used to commit the crime. Well, my fist. I kicked her. I used this brick. Okay, well, if we are correct on what the killer used to kill these three individuals. Camera, binoculars, stick. They're all items that would have been found local to the crime, items that
- [44:26]
Nick
the killer would have found with them, you know, at the crime scene, right in the process of the attack.
- [44:32]
Captain
Yeah, whatever is closest I can grab and use as a weapon. And very similar again. And he. I think he makes a very good suspect. They were able to go back and look at some of the evidence and test it. And we do know that one of the hair samples matched a boy from that area. I. I believe there was four boys in the family, and it matches one of them. And it makes you wonder because they haven't named this individual, or at least I couldn't find the name of the individual.
- [45:04]
Nick
Is.
- [45:05]
Captain
Is it this guy's hair sample?
- [45:08]
Nick
Yeah. So it's. It's not. The. The person's not named. And. And I have my suspicions as to why.
- [45:14]
Sponsor Voice
And.
- [45:14]
Nick
And we'll get back to that in a minute. But one person that is discussed, is openly discussed and has been for a long time as a potential suspect is George Spyros. And we mentioned him along the way before. He is the son of the owner of the Starved Rock Lodge. Yeah, he is. He's an interesting cat.
- [45:40]
Captain
Simply, he's a weirdo.
- [45:42]
Nick
Well, yeah, I. I don't know. I don't know him well enough to say that he's a weirdo.
- [45:48]
Captain
But look, when. When people that worked at the camp would say that, he would. They'd turn around and he'd be staring at him through a window, and he would terrorize a lot of the women by having these dogs that everybody was afraid of. And he'd have the dogs surrounding the building while he'd say, I like watching you bend over while you clean. Look, that's. That's a creepo.
- [46:12]
Nick
Yes, if. If I were to believe that that happened and went down the way that she describes it, then yes, very weird creep. 100%. I. I'm fully on board with that. I just look at the Company that she keeps. And it's a short drive to crazy town, my friend. It's a short drive to crazy town. So I'm not saying that she's wrong. I'm not saying that she's lying. I have no reason to doubt her. But, you know, there's two sides to every story, I guess. And look, here's the thing that, that does give me pause with. With her information, because her other suspicion is with the dogs, right? That he would use these dogs to kind of trap people. And she saw in the pictures in the crime scene photos what she says are dog tracks. And that made her wonder, could George Spyros have brought his dogs and used them to corner the women and then attack them? And one thing that's interesting, too, regarding George is that we did talk about red fibers that were found, and a lot has been made of these red fibers. We do know that they. They collected red fibers from George. And I'm not talking about recently. I'm talking about back in 1960.
- [47:35]
Captain
Right.
- [47:36]
Nick
He had a red and black coat and two red jackets. One thing that. That I'm a little concerned about is the evidence that I reviewed says that he submitted samples of red fibers from the red and black jacket in one of the red jackets. The way that it reads implies that he gave samples from all three jackets. But then it. Then the statement finishes by saying that one of the jackets is located in another city. So it's unclear if they ever collected any fibers from that other jacket.
- [48:08]
Captain
Well, and because he also worked at the lodge, he would have had access to the twine. He would have had knowledge of that. These ladies were there. I also find it. I do find it a little strange, too, that, you know, he was sent away just a couple months after the murders. And I don't know if he was. You know, maybe that was ple. You know, maybe that was planned even before the murders. But when your name is coming up in conversation during the investigation and you leave town, that comes off as pretty suspicious.
- [48:47]
Nick
It does. And I'm with you. I don't like that. Anytime I see that, I'm always very curious. But there are people to say, look, his family was from Greece. He went to Greece. It was a planned trip. It's not uncommon for wealthy individuals to send their children abroad after high school or once they're coming of age. And this was a very wealthy family, and that could certainly be the case. Or he killed three women or was involved in this murders.
- [49:21]
Sponsor Voice
And.
- [49:22]
Nick
And mom and dad seem to know about it or have their Suspicions and sent him away. I want to be clear here. I don't think that saying sent away is a great presentation of information that we hold.
- [49:36]
Captain
Yeah, I agree.
- [49:36]
Nick
It could simply be planned. It was already arranged or came about afterward. I would imagine that the plan wasn't for. The plan may not have been for George to just, you know, be a custodian at the lodge or be a busboy at the lodge. There may have been plans for him to go on to other things, other endeavors with an education and such. But the thing that I want to hone in on is I thought I was very curious about that when she said the dog tracks and here's the dogs and here's why, it made me suspicious of him. And he's a weird guy. Right away, I was, like, fascinated by that thought. And then very quickly it hit me. Well, now we're assuming that those are dog tracks. This is out in the state park, right. It snowed. Those could be animal tracks of any kind. It's never been presented or proven by anybody that those are, in fact, dog tracks. And in fact, those tracks in the snow, they are there. I've seen them in the pictures. So she is right to bring that up, but it's never been stated by anybody that I could find other than her that those are dog tracks. So raccoon, we know that there were hunters in the area because we know that from people they questioned. So this could have been any kind of animal or track. Doesn't have to be dogs at all.
- [51:04]
Captain
What happened to George, do we know?
- [51:08]
Nick
Well, that's where a lot of people say that is. Another clue in this case, is that. So in 2005, George kills himself. A lot of people say that the time period when he does this is suggestive of guilt. And why would that be suggestive of guilt? Well, because in 2005, there is an attorney who is seeking clemency for Chester Weiger. Chester Weger still locked up in 2005.
- [51:41]
Sponsor Voice 2
Right.
- [51:41]
Nick
Seeking clemency. And part of that clemency hearing brings up the idea that George Spyros might make a good suspect in this case. I have the details of that, of that suicide, if you would like for me to go through that.
- [51:57]
Captain
Yeah, I. I think it. I think. I think it's important as far as when it goes to suspects.
- [52:06]
Nick
So there are police reports that are. Can be found if you do enough digging here. And I had mentioned earlier, I did not know exactly the age of George because his birthday and age are redacted from any records that I could Find not to say that if I had more time, I couldn't figure out his exact age. But I mean, if you watch the docu series, you can see that he's about Chester weiger's age in 1960 and probably a year or two younger. I feel dumb throwing out these warnings because it's a true crime show. But I know that different people have different triggers. And so I apologize in retrospect for anything that I've said. But I also will warn you that this, this may be too graphic for some individuals. So. May 3, 2005, the police arrived at the home of George Spyros. This is because they were notified that they, they should check on this individual there. There's multiple page reports in front of me here from the LA County Sheriff's Office. I'm going to sum it up a little bit to, to save us some time here, Captain, but the, when the police, so they pull up, the sheriff's department deputies pull up and they sound their siren and honk their horn multiple times, hoping that somebody would just, you know, emerge from the home and say, hey, what's going on, officers? That doesn't happen. So then they go up and they knock on the door. Nobody answers. Ring the doorbell. Nobody answers. They check the door. It's unlocked. So now we're going to go in and we're going to announce ourselves. Well, the home is a, it's a very large home. Like I said, these are wealth. This is a wealthy family.
- [53:56]
Pacific Life Announcer
Right.
- [53:56]
Nick
One strange thing is that they, they find groceries right at the, at the front door on the outside of the home. Like, it looks like somebody walked up, set their grocery bags down and then entered the home and left the front door unlocked.
- [54:12]
Ryan Reynolds
Yeah.
- [54:12]
Nick
There is a pair of men's pants, which we would later determine is. They are George's pants that are on the floor right next to the front entrance to the home. So now police are in the home. They're, they're calling out, george, it's the police. It's a sheriff's department welfare check. They hear nothing. Silence, pin drop. After they search the home. The short of it is in a room, and I believe it's an upstairs bedroom that is being used as an office. And I think there was four, four or five bedrooms in this home. The, the description of the home's fascinating to me. I know this isn't a real estate show, but Captain, I'm telling you, the, there's like a, a sauna and a steam room and, and hot tub and exercise room down in the, in the basement area. But this one bedroom, I believe, is being used as, like, an office type setting. And what they find in this office is very disturbing. So George is in the office chair, positioned to be looking at the computer screen. There are large amounts of cash on the desk that's holding the computer. And George has passed away. There's a gunshot wound to his head. There is a gun on the desk.
- [55:36]
Pacific Life Announcer
Right.
- [55:36]
Nick
But it does not appear that he shot himself in the head and set the gun down on the desk. Because they find another handgun on the floor next to his right hand, where his right hand is kind of draped down over the arm of the chair that he's sitting in. One strange thing amongst others is that he is wearing a green shirt but no pants. The large amounts of cash on the desk are completely bizarre, too. And then his small black dog has been shot and killed as well.
- [56:07]
Captain
So a lot of people think that because of this lawyer coming and getting involved and doing a new investigation and presenting a different, basically narrative of what happened, that she then gave some suspects and some information to law enforcement. And because he knew of this, that's why he took his life, other people then would argue, well, he was diagnosed with cancer and he didn't want to go through that ordeal, so he ended up taking his own life because of that scenario.
- [56:42]
Nick
Well, and as you know, captain, your boy did a little more cracking than just that. So it's actually a little more complicated than just being diagnosed with cancer. So he was diagnosed a second time with cancer. So he had throat cancer, which, look, there's no. There's no easy cancers. There's no good cancers, obviously. But there are some that you hear from others, like, oh, that's particularly painful in comparison to some other diseases one could get. But I've heard that throat cancer is very. And I don't want to get into too much personal stuff, but. And we can talk about this off microphone sometime. What George did in his ailment is not unlike a good someone close to me. Exact same situation, minus the dog and the pants off. But the way that. The way that I understand the story from persons that know George or knew George, I should say, is that he had been battling cancer for a long period of time. He even went through some kind of experimental treatment and experimental surgery, and all of these efforts were for naught. And he was given the diagnosis that there's nothing left that we can do for you. You are going to be in a lot of pain and you are going to pass away soon. There are several statements by People that spoke to him in the days leading up to this terrible event that he was. There was no optimism and no hope in his words. Right. And not only that, like, people were saying, like, well, I hope you feel better soon. Take care of yourself, and I'll talk to you in a couple days. And he's. He's telling friends and people that care about him, I'm not going to be here in a couple days.
- [58:38]
Pacific Life Announcer
Right.
- [58:39]
Nick
He. He hinted at this. Now people go, well, why are his groceries out front? Why is his pants off? Why is there a large amount of cash? Why did he shoot the dog? I don't know the answer to any of those questions, but none of us. I can tell you this. None of us sitting in the garage here have experienced anything that's been described to me that George was experiencing when he chose this. And I. And I. I hesitate to even say that he chose this. It doesn't sound like there was a whole lot of choice involved.
- [59:10]
Captain
Right.
- [59:10]
Nick
I. I don't know what that would do to me mentally, emotionally, or. Or how I would handle the situation. I hope and pray that I never have to. So while that doesn't mean that he wasn't involved in the murders, it. I don't particularly think that his death suggests that he was involved, as others would say. Because, look, even if I have no illness at all, if I'm sitting here in my very nice house and have lived my pretty nice life and something that I did that maybe I was nervous about 1960, a little less nervous in 1961 when they locked the guy up.
- [59:50]
Captain
Yeah.
- [59:51]
Nick
A little less nervous after he had been in prison for 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, 40 years, 50 years, 60 years, and the guy's still in prison. He's in prison 44 years later and some lady has a clemency hearing and brings up my name.
- [60:07]
Captain
Well, she doesn't even. And she doesn't even bring up that name publicly. She just gives that name to law enforcement. We don't know if law enforcement even contacted him or if they started looking into him. We have no clue about that.
- [60:19]
Nick
Let me get out my. Let me get out my Scrabble game and show you exactly how many Fs I give about the situation. Had my name been brought up 43 years after a man was still sitting in prison for what I'm supposed to be nervous about.
- [60:34]
Captain
Yeah, and let's be very clear about that. It's not like she brought up this narrative and they went, okay, well, open up the doors and let him out and we got to look for the new killer, we got to arrest him real quickly. If your name comes up, even if it's publicly, who cares? Your name has been coming up for years. Your name has been coming up in conversation since 1960. Who cares? He's still in jail, he's still responsible for the murders. As far as in the law's eyes, you have nothing to worry about. So I don't think it's evidence of anything again. Now, if you think Chester is innocent or even if you think he's guilty, but he didn't act alone, George, because he worked there, is somebody that you would look at similar age range. They could have been friends, he had access to the twine, but I don't know, I think they would have found more evidence.
- [61:35]
Nick
Yeah, I think what's intriguing about George is his statements to police back in 1960 and so as like anybody that worked there. We should be clear here too. He didn't just work at Starved Rock because his father owned the lodge. He practically lived on the grounds of starving. According to George, on the afternoon of the 14th he was coming and going to remember. That's how Chester Weger and Stanley Tucker became under suspicion too. They were coming and going about that time as well. Around the time that it's believed that the women were killed. Chester Weger goes to the top of the stack because he has a criminal past. There is. We don't have time to go through this part of the story, but the. There's police record out there that when he was 12 years old he may have raped an 8 year old girl. I. Can I be frank with you here, Captain? I've been Nick for so long. Can I just be frank?
- [62:38]
Captain
I prefer when you're Nick, but go ahead.
- [62:41]
Nick
I have reviewed several documents and the docu series and a YouTube video as well as the book and several podcasts and I can't make heads or tails of if he was 100% guilty of that juvenile crime. And I think part of the problem is that it was a juvenile case and some of that information may be sealed or completely lost. Seeing how it would have been 1930 something. Right, right, 19. No, 1940 something. So there's plenty of information out there to suggest that, that he was guilty of juvenile rape and there's, there's his version of the story was that no, he was not right. So I apologize for not getting to the bottom of that one. But again, him being 100% guilty in that crime does not mean that he's 100% guilty in the Starved Rock murders. But the thing about George is he's interviewed, he gives statements to police. He is one of the persons that gives them information that potentially he's. He's not implicating Chester Weaver, let's say, but he's saying in at least one of his interviews that I think that I might have seen Chester Weaver and Stanley Tucker out together in Stanley Tucker's black vehicle that afternoon. He says he was leaving Starved Rock, and he. There was two vehicles that were parked on the. On the side of the road. And one of them, the black vehicle, was halfway in the road. And the reason why he remembers it is because he had to swerve to avoid it when he was leaving Starved Rock. And he said, I'm not 100% certain, but the people that I saw, the guys I saw, look like Stanley Tucker and Chester Weger, and the vehicle looked like Stanley Tucker's vehicle.
- [64:39]
Captain
Well, didn't he also claim that he saw them talking to the. The three victims?
- [64:45]
Nick
Yes. So in that story, there's another vehicle that's present and there are. The three women would have been either a part of the story or not. But what he's doing is he's placing that vehicle and those two individuals, possibly those two individuals. He says it looks like them. He can't say with that. It's absolutely them. But this would have been near the entrance to St. Louis Canyon, which, if you're going to review Stanley Story and Chester, we are story, neither of those two ever put themselves anywhere near the canyon. So if they were there and they're lying that they were there, then you can go, well, it's not a short. It's not a big leap to think that maybe they're responsible. That he gives another version of the same story at a later date where he says, I think I saw five guys and three women. And again, he says, not 100% positive that it was those three women, but it could have been. And not 100% positive that Chester Weiger and Stanley Tucker were part of the five guys that I saw, but it could have been them. So it's this weird thing of where, like, let's. Let's go down the rabbit hole of pretending George is guilty and lying and having something to hide. He does kind of throw these guys names into the. Into the realm of possibility for investigators with these interviews. But at the same time, he's never saying 100%. That's those guys. That's who I saw. He's just saying, look, you asked me if I could remember Anything from that day after the fact. And as time goes on I've been thinking harder and harder and this is what I think I remember. But he does, he is very clear at the end of his second interview where he says he has the opportunity to implicate Chester Weger further and does not. So the he's. These are direct questions and answers. Here we go. From the, from the police record, you don't know anything about any scratches or bruises on Chester Weiger's face? George's answer, no, except what I heard. So he's saying I didn't witness any bruises or scratches or cuts on Weyer's face. But I heard from others he may have had that. Question, do you know whether anyone ever used a straight razor to shave with? Answer I don't know. Question I think that is about everything. Well they're wrapping up the. They, they're confirming with him. Do you have anything else to tell us? And he's, he's saying as far as I'm concerned that is. That is everything. You know what's interesting though here Captain? I wish that, that they would had gone down this road a little bit further because when I hear this question or read this question about do you ever. Have you ever heard of anyone using a straight razor to shave with
- [67:48]
Captain
it?
- [67:48]
Nick
That to me leans to the idea that Chester Weger told them I cut myself myself shaving. Right. Because wouldn't you think that a co worker, if you were to know anybody shaving habits, wouldn't you think that you would know? Maybe, maybe I'm going nowhere with this. But for some reason it seems to make more sense that what they are implying. The question that they're trying to ask without using weaker's name is do you know of anybody that shaves with a straight razor?
- [68:19]
Captain
Right. But again. So straight razor would be used by a barber.
- [68:24]
Nick
Yeah. Back. Back to that same interview. What did you see? Answer Two cars, five men and three women. Question One of the cars was Stanley Tucker's Cadillac. Answer that is right question. You saw Stanley there?
- [68:40]
Sponsor Voice
Yes.
- [68:42]
Nick
You thought you may have seen Chester Weger? Maybe. Why do you think that? What do you mean? Why aren't you sure it was Chester? I didn't remember it when I should have instead later. And the other reason he was sitting next to the driver and he had his head turned toward the three women who were standing outside of the car. I only got a profile and the back of his head. One thing I'm a little curious of. They ask if the vehicle was a convertible and he Says, no, I don't think so. But I. What we don't get from any of the information, everything that I could try to find is a great description of Tucker's Cadillac, other than it was a black Cadillac.
- [69:31]
Captain
I mean, this case is just so complex because I think you can make an argument for a lot of these suspects to be involved if you think that there was more than one killer.
- [69:40]
Nick
I think that the. The physical evidence of the hair tells me that, yes, it. What I am of the belief that it was absolutely two persons that were there that assaulted and killed these women.
- [69:51]
Captain
Yeah.
- [69:52]
Nick
What was their intent? What was their motive?
- [69:54]
Captain
I don't know, because we still don't have answers. We kind of have this idea that we think that this hair matches this individual that lived in the area, but we don't have the answers to the other test of the other hair that was found in a different victim's because that hair doesn't match. It's not the same hair. So therefore there has to be at least two killers.
- [70:21]
Nick
Yeah. And so herein lies the. There's a couple problems because you have attorneys for Chester Weiger, who. They want the conviction vacated, and they are the ones that went to the great efforts to get a judge's approval to test some of the evidence that has survived all of these decades. They brought nine items that they wanted to get tested. The judge gave them permission to get eight of the items tested. What we do know is In August of 2022, the results from hair evidence tested from the Star of Rock murders that was received from a laboratory. It came back. The results came back. One of several of the hairs found on a glove worn by one of the victims, Francis Murphy. It was a man's hair. And the DNA was retrieved and the hair was found not to. This hair was found not to belong to Uyghur. Now, what's. What's really interesting, Captain, is I found information from the 60s that said that when they tested the hair. And we know this from the docu series, because the docu series says the hairs were dissimilar. They were the hair that was found at the crime scene, the murder scene was compared to Chester Weiger's. And the. The analyst said dissimilar. Now, to be clear, if anybody's out there getting ready to conduct their first investigation, you don't take hair from suspect and hair that's found at the murder scene where put them into a computer. And the computer says, absolutely yes, this is a match, or absolutely no, this is not a match. This is Skilled, trained individuals that are reviewing these under microscopes and saying whether or not they are similar or dissimilar. So dissimilar does not mean that 100% that hair did not match or belong to Chester Weiger.
- [72:21]
Captain
Right.
- [72:22]
Nick
What it means is if you call me and ask me to skip work one day and come into your courtroom and ask my opinion, I'm going to tell you they're dissimilar. Would I say this hair came from Chester Weger? I would say no, it did not. But what's interesting, now we have the DNA. You pull the DNA. We have Chester Weger's DNA. That's why this case, it. Here's the other thing. If he's innocent, and if they got this completely wrong, my God, can you imagine if they would have killed him in the electric chair? This would have all went away. This whole mess would have gone away a long time ago. If he would have died in prison, if he wouldn't have lived into his 80s. This all would have went away eventually. But because he's still alive and now because he's out, we will probably. Well, not probably. We are getting more answers in this case. And. And the answer that we get is that this hair that was found on the glove of one of the victims, that I believe I would. Ding, ding, ding. Let's wager a Franklin that that hair in that woman's hands, she ripped that out of the scalp of the individual that was attacking and beating her to death. Yeah, that hair. The DNA, the follicles on that hair, the DNA with found within that follicles, do not match Chester Weger. That was not his hair. So why don't we get clemency? There was another victim that had ripped hair from the individual that was beating her to death. And that hair is different than the hair that was found in the other victim's hands. Brown hair compared to blonde hair. Both hairs were compared to Chester Weger's hair via microscope in 1960. Both of them compared to dissimilar. Unfortunately, from my understanding, Captain, the other hair and the other victim's hands, it's not really going to be very helpful to our case in 2024, because I don't think they found any follicles. So therefore, there's no DNA with current technology to take from that hair to check against Chester Uyghurs. They did go the extra mile with the DNA that they did find on the other hair and attempt to cross check it via databases to find a match. Now, I've seen some sources that Say that they've never found a match. You brought up boys. I think we should be clear here. I. I've never seen the statement boys. I think maybe you had boys on the mind because we were talking about Jerry Nemke, who was only 17.
- [75:03]
Captain
Right.
- [75:04]
Nick
The information I found out. I'm not saying that, that you're wrong. It could be boys. Who knows? The. Jerry Nemke could have been involved, or it could have been another teenager or a group of teenagers. But the information I found was saying that, that it's believed that they found that this hair would match one of four brothers. Does that sound right to you? That's the information I found, yes.
- [75:34]
Captain
Yes.
- [75:34]
Nick
Four brothers that grew up or had lived in the area at some point.
- [75:39]
Captain
Yes.
- [75:40]
Nick
Now, the reason why I think that they are not willing to name anybody, and I don't know this for certain, maybe they do know which of the four brothers it belonged to. There's a good chance that none of those brothers are alive and that they can't. We can't go out all deceased. Yeah. We can't go out and do the boots on the ground detective work and go out and try to collect your DNA somewhere, brothers, and then pull it in and can and 100% connect it today. It may have only the DNA. It may have only led you that far in the family tree where you can go, well, it matches. It will match one of these four brothers. But we, we don't have enough evidence to know which of the four brothers. What would be interesting is, let's find out who had four brothers in that area. Did Stanley Tucker have four brothers in that area? Because if he did, if he had three brothers in that area, because I still am living in a world where I think it's possible that him, that Uyghur and Tucker may have done this together. There are other people that say maybe Tucker and George Spyros did this together or all three. And then there are people that we didn't even get to yet in here that have fallen under suspicion. Smokey Rona, who was muscle for the mob. His name has been bandied about in this case for decades and probably for good cause.
- [77:09]
Captain
Yeah. Claimed he got paid $25,000 for it.
- [77:12]
Nick
One thing that is shameful is you want to talk about getting paid. The. Some of the investigators got paid. There was $35,000 reward money. 30,000 of it was put up by the employees or, sorry, employers of the victim's husbands. 10,000 each and adding up to 30. And then the owner, George Spyros, father, Put up an additional 5,000. So $35,000 was parsed out and given to the investigators in this case, which is stupid. It's. It goes against everything that we should stand for. And, and, and frankly, you do something like that, that's a breeding ground for corruption. So I was very upset to, to learn of that.
- [78:06]
Captain
Well, that's, again, it goes back to the whole thing. If the investigation is mishandled, if the interrogations are mishandled, if the trial is mishandled, if there's just so much that you can make an argument in the court of law, this case, at least one of the murders is solved still to this day, and they're trying to get him cleared. But just, I think 16 hours ago, prosecutor came forward and said, hey, we're, we're. We're set in a motion, a motion to get this whole case dismissed. So as, as of right now, Chester is responsible in the court of law, is responsible for at least one of these murders. But I think you can make a very strong argument for and against almost every suspect. And I think what makes it so complicated is we don't even know how many killers there are. Is there one? Is there two? Did George see these five guys or these five guys that were seen talking to these three, Three women? Are they responsible?
- [79:22]
Nick
Well, the gentleman, Jansen, who went on to work for the FBI and strikes me as a very brilliant investigator, he was brought in to give a fresh set of eyes to this case after it lingered for a couple months before they arrested Chester Weger. And he said, look, after I reviewed the case, he's convinced that somebody gave a ride to the ladies, that whether they asked for the ride or whether they were offered a ride or we can't believe forced to take the ride because we see pictures of them smiling and having a good time after they arrived at the canyon. But his review of the case says to him that somebody gave them a ride to that canyon. And he thinks that because that person or persons has never come forward saying, look, I gave the ladies a ride that day, that they probably then followed them into the canyon and were the person or persons responsible for these horrific murders. I think that's a brilliant analysis of the crime and the way that it potentially went down. We didn't even get into the Paul Palmer Tier Brothers, who are other persons that have been mentioned as suspects, potential suspects in this case. Smokey Rona, we touched on him a little bit. But this case, it's. It's interesting, it's fascinating, and I'm glad that we are getting some answers. I'm hopeful and I like that there's finally some real, true science getting involved in this case. And I would like to see that science eventually name names because this mystery has got me all confused and backwards here as to who could be responsible. Uyghur comes off at times as a victim and other times he comes off as just some potentially evil human being. And I, I don't know how to sort that out. But look, there's a lot of great source material out there. We've referenced a lot of it throughout our coverage of this case. Again, I think the best thorough and most impartial source material is chicago mag.com the amazing article by top notch writer and true journalist Jake Mallooly. He did a masterful long form story titled Unmaking a Murderer. There's also a book called the Starved Rock Murders by local author and historian Steve Stout that was published by Utica house Publishing in 1982. There's the docu series on Max that we've talked about that was done by David Raglia. And take, if you haven't seen it yet, take note of the fancy house and office that David Racuglia has. And that's all due to hard work and success. He's actually the founder of American Crew. The Brand American Crew.
- [82:19]
Captain
Yeah.
- [82:19]
Nick
And then you also have a podcast that is called the Starved Rock Murders with Andy Hale. So I will throw out a little caveat here, a little Buyer beware. The Starved Rock Murders book by Steve Stout. While it's great and I find Steve Stout to be very brilliant, he is absolutely convinced that Chester Weger is guilty. And it rings loud and clear throughout the book. The docu series presents everything in a very good manner on Max, where it gives a lot of both sides of the story. And then if you review the star of Draft Murders podcast with Andy Hale. That is full on chesty. Chester Weger is completely innocent and probably framed, which makes sense because who is Andy Hale? Andy Hale is one of the attorneys representing Chester Weger. So that all makes sense. But regardless, Andy Hale, David Racuglia, Steve Stout and Jake Mallooly, all great, fantastic work by all of them. And Captain, great work by you. And thanks to all the listeners for tuning in and joining us on this wild ride this week.
- [83:45]
Captain
Want to thank everybody for joining us here in the garage. Same bat time, same bat channel. Colonel, do we have any records? Recommended reading for the beautiful listeners.
- [83:55]
Nick
Yeah, open up your eyeballs a little. Recommended viewing. In December of 2021, HBO Max released a three part docu series that you've heard us reference several times in our coverage of this very intriguing case. The docu series is called the Murders of Starved Rock. The series focuses on the investigation into the murders and and Uyghurs incarceration with the idea that maybe he is innocent. The series was produced by Mark Wahlberg and of course focuses on David Racuglia, the son of Anthony racuglia, who was one of two prosecuting attorneys in this case back in 1961. We both recommend this DOCU series. Give it two thumbs up, five bottle caps. You will enjoy watching this one again. It's called the Murders of Starved Rock and you will find that on the
- [84:51]
Captain
Max app until next week.
- [84:54]
Nick
Be good, be kind, and don't litter.
- [85:35]
State Farm Announcer
Finding ways to be financially savvy is a smart move, and knowing you could be saving money for the things you really want, like that dream home or new ride is a great feeling. That's why the State Farm Personal Price Plan can help you save when you choose to bundle home in auto bundling. Just another way to save with a personal price plan. Head to statefarm.com to get a quote. Prices are based on rating plans that vary by state. Coverage options are selected by the customer, availability, amount of discounts, and savings and eligibility vary by state.