Behind the Footprint: Reporting Jeanie Childs’ Story

Summary

Truer Crime – "Behind the Footprint: Reporting Jeanie Childs’ Story"

Podcast: Truer Crime
Host: Celisia Stanton
Guest: Jennifer Mayerly, Senior Investigative Reporter at WCCO
Date: November 17, 2025

---

Overview

In this in-depth episode, host Celisia Stanton interviews investigative journalist Jennifer Mayerly about the making of the acclaimed documentary "Footprint to Murder" and the complex reporting behind Jeanie Childs’ case—a brutal 1993 Minneapolis murder that remained unsolved for decades. Together, they explore the intricacies of cold case reporting, the emotional work of building trust with victims' families, advances in investigative techniques like forensic genetic genealogy, the ethics of victim representation, and the unresolved questions in cases like Jeanie's.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Origins and Personal Draw to the Case

• Jennifer Mayerly shares how WCCO covered Jeanie’s murder from the start (02:57). Her personal involvement began following the 2019 arrest, after decades of the family fighting for justice.

  "The moment an arrest was made is when I got involved." – Jennifer Mayerly [02:57]

• She emphasizes that the depth of Jeanie's story, beyond the details in court records, was revealed through relationships with her mother Betty and sister Cindy (04:10).

2. Humanizing the Victim

• Early reports described Jeanie by circumstance—age, profession (sex worker), location—but family painted a fuller picture:

  "She was someone that loved Lionel Richie, that loved dancing, that loved motorcycles, that loved to have fun and was smiling. And yet she was also a troubled person." – Jennifer Mayerly [04:10]

3. Reporting Process: Daily News vs. Documentary

• Initial coverage was as daily news, focusing on court hearings and gathering pieces of the investigation (05:54).

• Documentary work enabled deeper exploration—off-record interviews, building trust, visual storytelling with sensitive choices around what to show (06:55).

• Decision to make the full documentary was prompted, in part, by the family’s readiness to talk after all appeals were exhausted (08:45).

  “We realized we could build something larger and bigger and more in depth, that our audience … could dig into and really listen to and hear a different side that they had never heard before in this case." [09:13]

4. Balancing Compassion and Journalism: Navigating Gruesome Details

• The team took a victim-centered approach, keeping Jeannie at the center while ensuring rigorous coverage of investigative developments (10:48).
• Jennifer describes the decision—guided by the family’s wishes—to show more graphic aspects of the crime scene, in contrast to TV norms:

  "She was stabbed at least 65 times. ... We showed, you know, the comforter that had blood on it...because the family wanted people to know how terrible this was, like, what really happened to her." – Jennifer Mayerly [11:48]

5. Alternative Suspects and Footprint Analysis

• The defense sought to present five alternative suspects. Only Jeanie’s boyfriend at the time, Arthur Gray, was allowed as a plausible alternative—others lacked sufficient evidence (15:59).

• Detailed discussion on the critical role of footprint analysis:

  “That’s the key in this case ... Two experts found that at least one footprint found ... belonged to Jerry Westrom. And that was enough for us to move forward with confidence.” – Jennifer Mayerly [15:59]

  • Footprint analysis is similar, but more challenging than fingerprinting; only Jerry Westrom’s footprint could be conclusively matched (18:14).

  "It’s really rare. ... With our feet, they're covered most places we are. ... Even if they're not covered, it’s still harder to know that there could be a footprint somewhere unless it was left in blood, like in this case." [18:14]

• Defense-hired experts for footprint analysis actually ended up corroborating the prosecution’s findings, which led to a strategic pivot from the defense (19:37).

6. Forensic Genetic Genealogy & Privacy Concerns

• This was Minnesota’s first case solved this way. Jennifer unpacks how police used public DNA databases to build a family tree—zeroing in on Jerry Westrom as the only match (21:17):

  "If you've uploaded your DNA into a genealogy website, ... it potentially could be used to match in a case where a crime was committed. And it might not just be you, it could be a family member." [21:17]

• The family was unaware of the new DNA work until after the arrest (22:33).

• Discussion of privacy concerns:

  “How do you balance that... especially if you were not the person that uploaded your DNA? Because ... a cousin or an uncle or someone uploaded it, how could you potentially be impacted?” [28:39]

  • Jennifer reports most people she spoke to believed that "the right to solve a case outweighs the right to privacy," but acknowledges ongoing debate and legal uncertainty (29:25).

7. Limitations of Forensic Evidence

• DNA is not a timestamp; context is key. In this case, the bloody footprint provided crucial support beyond DNA alone (30:28).

  “DNA does not leave a timestamp... That’s why the footprint, which was, they believe, a timestamp, because you would have had to have been there when the blood was wet to leave a footprint.” [30:28]

8. Impact and Takeaways

• Jennifer hopes listeners remember Jeannie’s humanity, not just the way she died:

  "It's always important to remember, when there's a victim of a crime, that they're a real person, that they have people that care about them, that love them, that miss them desperately." [31:40]

• Acknowledgment of the family's courage and role in telling Jeannie’s fuller story (32:41):

  "Jeannie matters. We couldn't have done it without their vulnerability."

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On building trust:

  "I'd show up to court hearings... and over time we developed a relationship. ...They always said that at some point, when the time was right, they did want to go on camera." – Jennifer Mayerly [04:10]

• On investigative rigor and compassion:

  "We knew that we wanted to center Jeannie... you can do the other part, which is dig into the case, really dive deep..." – Jennifer Mayerly [10:48]

• On privacy and DNA evidence:

  "If you've uploaded your DNA into a genealogy website, ... it potentially could be used... it might not just be you, it could be a family member." – Jennifer Mayerly [21:17]

---

Important Timestamps

• [02:57] – Jennifer Mayerly’s entry into the case
• [04:10] – Human side of Jeannie Childs
• [06:55] – Transition from daily reporting to documentary production
• [10:48] – Discussing balance of compassion and investigative rigor
• [11:48] – Decision to show the crime's graphic reality
• [15:59] – Alternative suspects and importance of footprint evidence
• [18:14] – Footprint analysis explained
• [21:17] – How forensic genetic genealogy led to the arrest
• [28:39] – Privacy implications of genetic genealogy
• [30:28] – Limitations of DNA without context
• [31:40] – Lessons and hopes for Jeannie's legacy
• [32:41] – Acknowledging the family’s pivotal role

---

Tone & Style

Throughout, the conversation is empathetic and reflective, with a strong commitment to both investigative integrity and humanizing crime victims. The episode provides a nuanced inside look at modern true crime reporting, the challenges of justice, advances in forensic technology, and the real people at the heart of these tragedies.

---

Listen Further

• Documentary: "Footprint to Murder" on WCCO/YouTube
• Jennifer Mayerly’s Reporting: wcco.com and CBS News Minnesota

For updates and more in-depth explorations of real-life crime stories, follow Truer Crime on your preferred podcast app or on social media.

---

Transcript

[Jennifer Mayerly]

You're listening to a Tenderfoot TV podcast.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Ready to level up? Chumba Casino is your playbook to fun. It's free to play with no purchase necessary. Enjoy hundreds of online social games like blackjack, slots and Solitaire anytime, anywhere, with fresh releases every week. Whether you're at home or on the go. Let Chumba Casino bring the excitement to you. Plus, get free daily login bonuses and a free welcome bonus. Join now for your chance to redeem some serious prizes. Play Chumba Casino today. No purchase necessary. VGW Group void board prohibited by law 21/TNCs apply.

[Celisia Stanton]

Hi friends, When I started working on Jeannie Childs story, one name kept coming up. Jennifer Mayerly. Jennifer is a senior investigative reporter at WCCO and the journalist behind Footprint to Murder, a a documentary that helped bring Jeannie's story and her family's decade long fight for justice back into the public eye. She joined the case after an arrest was made in 2019, and through that reporting, Jennifer built a really close relationship with Jeannie's mother Betty and her sister Cindy, and spent years following every single twist and turn from the cold case investigation to the trial to the verdict, and of course, all of the aftermath. So today I wanted to share a recent conversation I had with Jennifer. In our chat we talk about what it was like for her to report on a case that's both deeply human and also really complex. We dig into how her documentary came together and the trust she built with Jeannie's family and the delicate balance that she towed between compassion and investigative rigor. We also explore the questions that still linger from the alternative suspects the defense wanted to present to the role of forensic genetic genealogy in solving this case and the privacy concerns that come alongside it. This is a story that stayed with both of us, and in this episode we'll unpack why. I'm Celisia Stanton and you're listening to Truer Crime. I'm so excited Jennifer, to have you on the podcast today to jump in and really dig into the case. As I've learned more about your background. I just was really in awe of all of the amazing reporting you've done and really, you've covered so many of Minnesota's most impactful stories from environment justice to policing reform. So I was curious what kind of initially drew you to Jeannie Childs case in particular.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Thank you for having me on to talk more about this case. You know, I think anytime there is a cold case where there is an arrest made, it gets our interest. But what is so interesting about Jeannie child's case is that WCCO has covered it since the day she was murdered. We were there at the crime scene when her body was discovered, and we learned about her through the decades. And I learned more about her and the love that her family had for her and how they never gave up until an arrest was made, and then it went from there. So the moment an arrest was made is when I got involved.

[Celisia Stanton]

Okay. So obviously, over time, you really get to develop a relationship with the people whose, you know, story that you're reporting on. And in this case, you know, you really did build a relationship with Jeannie's mother, Betty, and with her sister Cindy. But, you know, when you first heard about the case, like you said, when this arrest was made, you obviously that hadn't happened yet. You know, you're just kind of diving in for the first time. So what did you know about Jeannie at that point? And how did you kind of come to understand her and her story differently once you actually started forming those relationships?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

When you're in a court setting, you learn very limited details. You learn maybe what's in a police complaint. So it doesn't give the depth of a person. It gives what their profession was. In this case, Jeannie was a sex worker. It gives some other details about them. Her age, where she lived, where she was found, but it doesn't give who she was as a person. It was through those relationships with her mom, Betty, and her sister Cindy, that I got to know who Jeannie really was. And it took time to get to know them. I'd show up to court hearings, and I would just try to talk with them. And over time, we developed a relationship where they began to trust me. They still didn't want to go on camera for a story as this went on, as a trial went on, as the case went on. But we continued to talk. And they always said that at some point, when the time was right, they did want to go on camera. But I learned from them that Jeannie was loved, that she had a family that never gave up on finding out what happened to her. That even when she was away from home when she was younger and when she was an adult, her family always loved and cared for her. She was someone that loved Lionel Richie, that loved dancing, that loved motorcycles, that loved to have fun and was smiling. And yet she was also a troubled person.

[Celisia Stanton]

I'm curious, was the process of reporting on this story really similar to other stories that you reported on? Because for listeners of true crime, for myself, it's one of those Things where, you know, we. We are interested in hearing these stories, but we don't really think about, like, what is the process of actually, like, uncovering all of these details. And, you know, so I'm just curious about that reporting process and how this may have differed from other stories that you were looking into.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Sure. So when it started, we were doing daily news stories on what was going on in this case. So it was covering court hearings. Sometimes it would be on the news, sometimes it wouldn't be. So it was developing, getting that, gathering information. I would attend the court hearings to get information that maybe wasn't in the court record or at least immediately available in the court record. So we could try to do our own digging into maybe what happened, to look into other avenues of what the defense and the prosecution were looking at. That's something different. And mainly it was because of how fascinating this case was and some of the details that we learned about it, from DNA to investigative genetic genealogy. The process in reporting for a documentary was completely different. And that was uncomfortable. It was interesting. It was layered.

[Celisia Stanton]

Were you doing mostly TV reporting before, like, written pieces? And then obviously this documentary, what does that actually look like? Like, how do you go about making it?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Sure. So, yes, at the beginning, it was TV pieces. So what we call a daily news report. So if there was an event to report on with this case, we would report on it that day. And so we started building a kind of a library of information and of stories for this case. So whether that was a court hearing or part of the trial, we talked with the jury, four person. And so we had a lot of elements and relationships that were built when we came into doing a documentary. But we started looking at what else could we. Who else could we talk to? There were so many pieces of this case that were not publicly available during the court process. And until there was a verdict and a conviction that people that couldn't talk with us, that could maybe only testify on the sand. So when we started looking at making a documentary, we wanted to talk to the people who were intimately involved with this case. So that would be someone in the cold case realm with us with Minneapolis police. Those Minneapolis police counterpart was Chris Bokers with the FBI. And so he knew this case inside and out and worked with Minneapolis police on it. This was Bart Epstein, who was a forensic scientist, retired now with the bca, who was on scene the day that Jeannie was found, that collected evidence and saw the crime scene. So really digging in and talking with people who could give more information than what we're able to gather from court records or even just hear during the trial because that wasn't televised. So we couldn't show people. No one else could hear about that. So these are people talking in their own words for the first time, which to me was fascinating to learn from them.

[Celisia Stanton]

When you're saying that some of these people you couldn't talk to, was that because that they would potentially be witnesses during the trial or what kind of prevented you from being able to connect with some. Some folks, sure.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

When there's an open case, usually people who could testify in a case cannot talk to us until the case is closed. They're generally not able to talk to us unless given specific permission. And we had asked along the way to talk to the FBI or Minneapolis police outside of press conferences, and we weren't able to. So this was really the first time that we were able to hear from these people. Once we had these interviews, we realized that we could build something larger and bigger and more in depth, that our audience at WCCO and we put it on YouTube, the people everywhere interested in true crime could dig into and really listen to and hear a different side that they had never heard before in this case. But the idea really started, I should back up, really started with Jeannie's family, her mother Betty and sister Cindy, and how they told us that at some point they would be willing to talk with us. And they felt the time was right after Jerry Westrom had appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court and his appeal for his case to be heard was denied. And after that they felt they knew that he still had other options, but they felt that that was a time that they would feel comfortable going forward, telling more about Jeannie and who she was and their love for her and their dedication to always finding justice for her. And so we knew we wanted to do a longer story with her family. It was something that was important to them and became important to us along the way of getting to know them. And we realized we had so many different elements. It was not just a two part story or a three part story that were a couple minutes long for tv. We realized we could put this together to let people really sink their teeth into the story.

[Celisia Stanton]

I think it's interesting too, because you obviously, you're building these relationships that are very meaningful with the family, the victim's family, as well as, you know, people who were investigating the case over the years and all of that. So, you know, I'm curious, did you ever feel the tension between trying to make sure that you're Balancing compassion for Jeannie's family with the demands of investigative reporting, of. Of seeking the truth. How do you kind of navigate that?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Absolutely. I feel like we started this as a victim centered approach. We knew that we wanted to center Jeannie in the center of all of this with our reporting. So that's how we approached this project, because we did feel like it was important after getting to know her family and some of how they felt she was portrayed in court hearings. And with that, you can do the other part, which is dig into the case, really dive deep into the investigative portion of it and share the details. And we shared with her family along the way what was going to be shared in our documentary. We wanted them to be prepared. They also felt strongly about us really showing what happened to her. What we showed in the documentary was a little more graphic than what we would typically show on tv.

[Celisia Stanton]

Can you talk a little bit to that? Like, when you're saying a little bit more graphic, what. What details are you kind of referring to?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Yeah, this was. This was a brutal crime scene. I mean, it was. It was gruesome. There was a lot of blood. Bart Epstein, who responded to the crime scene that day, said, this is one of the bloodiest crime scenes he's seen at that time in his career. And so there are images that were taken, you know, pictures that were taken of the crime scene that we used in our documentary. And we used different pictures in what we did in the documentary versus what we showed on tv. Part of why we did that was a request from the family to say, we really want people to know how terrible this was. Like, what really happened to her? She was stabbed at least 65 times. I mean, that's a hard detail to swallow and to think about. And so we showed some of that. We didn't. We definitely had limits, and we knew where we wanted those limits to be. But we showed, you know, the comforter that had blood on it. We showed, you know, other portions of the bathroom where, you know, they appeared that there was movement in the bathroom, maybe there was a struggle in there where there was blood on the walls. And so we showed those pieces.

[Celisia Stanton]

Yeah, I think that that's always a really hard balance to strike of, like, how much information do you want to give to make sure that the listener or viewer is informed and has, you know, the correct information while also trying to be sensitive? I think that's something that I'm always trying to navigate on true crime and definitely was thinking about a lot in creating the true crime episodes on this story. Because like you mentioned there is just so many gruesome details. So I think it is interesting to hear that perspective from the family of like yeah we do want this to be heard because you know this is what happened and that to maybe minimize it or act like it wasn't as big of a deal or to take tension away from it could be painful for people who love Jeannie and are like wow, how she was taken was truly horrific.

[Various Advertisers]

At Designer Shoe Warehouse we believe that shoes are an important part of, well.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Everything from first steps to first dates, from all nighters to all time personal.

[Various Advertisers]

Bests, from building pillow forts to building a life.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

For all the big and small moments that make up your whole world. DSW is there and we've got just the shoes. Find a shoe for every you from.

[Celisia Stanton]

Brands you love at brag worthy prices.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

At your DSW store or dsw.com Think.

[Various Advertisers]

Advertising on TikTok isn't for your business, think again.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

With TikTok ads we went from 250,000.

[Celisia Stanton]

Downloads to over a million downloads in less than a year.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

I'm Eve, I'm Anam and we're the.

[Celisia Stanton]

Co founders of Alinea. Alinea Invest is an investing app for Gen z.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

We run 50 new ads per week with three variations thanks to TikTok Smart plus campaigns.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

If you're not advertising on TikTok, you're missing out.

[Various Advertisers]

Drive more app downloads only on TikTok. Head over to get started.TikTok.com TikTokads your.

[Celisia Stanton]

Perfect style is more than a fit, it's a feeling. When you step into Maurices, our stylists are dedicated to helping you find the perfect outfit. Shop in store or Maurices dollar for new items arriving daily and holiday flash deals. Maurice's that styled feeling. One of the other things I was trying to navigate in telling the story was these potential alternative suspects. Obviously, as you know, the defense presented a number of people that they wanted to bring up to the jury as alternatives to try to take some heat off of the Jerry Westrom. One of the people who kind of stood out most to me was James Luther Carlton, who was already serving a life sentence for killing another Minneapolis woman, Jody Dover, in a case very similar to Gene Child's. It was another brutal stabbing. There were some bloody footprints left at that crime scene. We had read that he had even admitted to being in Jeannie's apartment previously at some time and that at one point his DNA couldn't have been excluded from one of the samples. So I'm curious to hear your thoughts on him as a suspect or any of the other potential suspects. Like, do you still have any question marks on those people? How do you resolve that?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

That's a good question. Because the defense did want to bring up five alternative suspects. And I was in court the day that they did this, and they had the hearing with it before the judge, before the trial started. So part of pretrial hearings, and basically what the judge said was, you don't have enough evidence to bring any of these forward, except for one, and that was Arthur Gray, Jeannie's boyfriend at the time, who she lived with, who was also described as her pimp at the time. But these other people, you know, I trust in the court process and what the judge ruled on. We did look into some of these other cases ourselves early on in our reporting, but they said there isn't enough evidence for you to present them as an alternative suspect. So here's what you're allowed to do. And on that, we decided to move forward with our reporting going forward on only the two that were allowed to be talked about at trial. So one of the things that I'm sure you talk about in your podcast is the bloody footprint. I mean, that's the key in this case is the footprint that was left at the crime scene. They did get footprints from several other people to look at to see if they could be potential suspects. They were found to be inconclusive, meaning that they could not come up with a friction rich skin the way that they do this to try to match the footprints to the footprints left at the crime scene. And the only person that could be found to be conclusive was Jerry Westrom's. And when you have a conclusive footprint, they say it's similar to a fingerprint, although it's a bigger and harder matrix to follow that is conclusive. And two experts found that at least one footprint found in that apartment, one bloody footprint, belonged to Jerry Westrom. And that was enough for us to move forward with confidence.

[Celisia Stanton]

Yeah. So what can you tell me about footprint analysis and how it compares to fingerprint analysis? I know that one of the experts who had found this to be a match had experience mostly in fingerprint analysis. So, you know. But I understand there's some transferable skills there, of course. But I'd love to hear a little bit about what you learned about that throughout the process of reporting.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Yeah, we learned that it is similar to fingerprints when you're looking at footprints. However, because it is a larger area, it is harder and can take longer to develop a match. And so you have to look for certain pieces and they get really intricate about how they do it. But you have to look for certain things to defined. They call about this recurve and. And these. This friction ridge skin on the foot. It takes time and it's very intricate to get this done. But when you find a match and when you can find a part on the footprint I guess that you can follow, they tell me that that's how you can then find a match which is similar to a fingerprint, but again in a larger area. This is hard work and it's not done very often. So that's the biggest thing I think that we learned from this is that it's really rare. And the reason why it's most rare is, you know, we think about our hands. We're leaving our fingerprints so many different places that we touch when we go. And usually with our feet, they're covered most places that we are. And so even if they're not covered, it's still harder to know that there could be a footprint somewhere unless it was left in blood. Like in this case when you were.

[Celisia Stanton]

Getting the opportunity to talk to all these experts about the different evidence and you know, obviously there's the genetic evidence too, which I want to get into in just a bit. Were there any tensions or did you get the sense that there was any disagreement amongst folks about where the evidence pointed?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

The people that the prosecution had testify and that we interviewed all felt that the evidence pointed directly at Jerry Westrom. You know, there was another footprint expert that was hired by the defense to look at the footprints and that's the person that found the analysis that matched what Mark Ulrich found from Minneapolis police. And when that expert found that, that's when the defense dropped that expert. So I do think that that was an interesting part of the case is that someone hired by the defense ended up finding information that could help the prosecution. They did try to bring in other experts that would dismiss what they found with the footprints, but otherwise they always felt that whoever left those bloody footprints would most likely be the killer. And then everything else I feel like built up to that.

[Celisia Stanton]

Yeah. And I think it's interesting that there's this defense witness who ends up being a prosecution witness. Did the defense ever end up putting on a different person who said, oh, these footprints don't match?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Not that I recall. I know that they wanted to. They had a witness that they wanted to bring that did a different type of analysis on footprints that wouldn't match the kind that was done by these other experts. And it ended up not being allowed.

[Celisia Stanton]

So, you know, I want to talk a little bit more about forensic genetic genealogy. Obviously, that was a huge part of what helped solve this case and being able to find Jerry Restroom. And this was Minnesota's first case solved using this method. What did you learn about how that process works behind the scenes?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

This was fascinating to us because without forensic investigative genetic genealogy, they never could have gotten even to trying to match that footprint to Jerry Westrom. What I learned about it is that the first thing I think is for the community to understand is that if you've uploaded your DNA into a genealogy website, that it potentially could be used to match in a case where a crime was committed. And it might not just be you, it could be a family member. In this case, they looked at a couple different websites and ended up being called myheritage.com where they found a familial match who ended up being their suspect and were able to create a family tree from that. In this case, what was interesting is that they could be so detailed. They got down to two brothers and they said, but this one has brown eyes. And that's how they developed Jerry Westrom. He was the brother with brown eyes.

[Celisia Stanton]

Could they tell just from like the DNA profile, like some basic facts about the person, like eye color and things like that? And so they had that information before going in.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

That is the information that they received from their expert who was doing this forensic genetic genealogy for them.

[Celisia Stanton]

And Jeannie's family wasn't aware that any of this was happening behind the scenes until the arrest was made. Did they even know that the case was being re looked at?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

They were unaware. Betty never gave up. She checked in. She wanted to know what was happening on this case. But she told us that until they called her and said, an arrest has been made, and they told her, we got your guy. She was unaware that they were doing all this work behind the scenes. Grateful she said that they were doing it, but it was unaware.

[Celisia Stanton]

Is that something that you got the sense that they, you know, wish they would have known about, or do you think that they feel like we found out when we needed to find out? I know that sometimes some families feel like they're left out of the investigative process or that they wish they had more information. And some families maybe have a good relationship with investigators.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

They always felt like they were, you know, had a good relationship with the cold case detectives. And so when they checked in, they gave her answers. And so I think they felt okay that this was the time that they learned because you know you can get your hopes up in a situation like this. And I feel like for so long they just hoped and wished and prayed for this answer. And so when it came, they even questioned it and said, do you really have the right person? Are you really telling me that this is it after all these years? And so to me it felt like they they were okay with when they learned about it.

[Various Advertisers]

Avoiding your unfinished home projects because you're not sure where to start. Thumbtack knows homes, so you don't have to don't know the difference between matte paint, finish and satin or what that clunking sound from your dryer is. With Thumbtack, you don't have to be a home pro, you just have to hire one. You can hire top rated pros, see price estimates and read reviews all on the app. Download Today.

[Rakuten Advertiser]

This episode is brought to you by Rakuten. The holidays are here and that means it's the most wonderful time of the year to see Save with Rakuten. Use Rakuten to stack cash back at your favorite stores on top of holiday sales. That's savings on savings. With Rakuten, you can get cash back on gifts for everyone on your list, from toys for the kids to kitchen gear for the person who loves to cook to electronics for everyone. You can even save on something for yourself. Cash back is automatically added to your account as you shop and you can get paid with gift cards, PayPal or check. Or eligible American Express card members can choose to earn membership rewards points, join for free today and get a new member bonus after minimum qualifying purchases. Just go to rakuten.com, download the app or install the browser extension. Terms and conditions apply.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Starting a business can seem like a daunting task unless you have a partner like Shopify. They have the tools you need to start and grow your business. From designing a website to marketing to selling and beyond, Shopify can help with everything you need. There's a reason millions of companies like Mattel, Heinz and Allbirds continue to trust and use them. With Shopify on your side, turn your big business idea into Sign up for your $1 per month [e-mail] specialoffer.

[Celisia Stanton]

So that fear you're talking about of like, okay, well like, you know, we don't want to get our hopes too high. Hopefully they've pinned it down to the correct person, the correct suspect. When do you feel like that shifted for them? Where they felt like, yeah, this is the right person and we want him to be brought to justice.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

So for the family, they hoped that right away it was it, because they said, are you sure you have this? Are you sure you have the right guy? And they said, betty, we've got the right guy. But I think they didn't fully believe it until they started hearing some of the evidence in the case. Jerry Westerman done an interrogation with police. He was questioned by police when he was. After he was arrested. And they said they felt like that was pretty telling for them. They felt like he acted nervous and that he wasn't giving right answers. But it really wasn't until the very end that they. That they believed that it absolutely, without a doubt was Jerry Westrom. And that's the. From the family.

[Celisia Stanton]

Yeah.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Now, investigators have a different answer there. So we talk you through how after they got the name of a suspect, they needed to get his DNA, right. And so they felt like they had the right person. But until they followed him and tracked him to the hockey arena in Wisconsin, fished his, you know, a napkin that he had thrown away into the garbage can, fished it out and got that DNA tested, that's when they felt like that it matched up, that they definitely had the right person.

[Celisia Stanton]

I'm glad you mentioned that, because I think that brings up what was kind of one of the tension points for me as I was pulling together the episodes, which is, you know, they're. They're tracking him down, they're following him to these games. He's with his family, he's at his daughter's hockey game, all of that. And kind of what you were talking about earlier of like, you know, people needing to understand that if you're uploading your information to one of these genetic genealogy websites that potentially could be used in an investigation. And so that was one of the things that I was thinking a lot about, like, this sort of balance between privacy and justice when it comes to using this method. Obviously, a very new method was used to capture the Golden State Killer, to find him, which is amazing. I think it amazing for those victims, families who have really, really wanted answers. But then also, you know, I've used ancestry DNA. There's a little bit more conversation happening about it now, but I think most people aren't really aware that it can be used in this way. Obviously, every website has different protocols and all of that, but it could change at any time. I'm. I want to know, from you, from your perspective, what do you kind of think of those concerns that it brings up for people?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

I think everyone's going to have their own opinion on this. Obviously, investigators want to be able to use this because they feel like it can help solve crimes, especially crimes that have gone unsolved for years and even decades. Right, right. So it's an investigative tool that was never available before. And they think it's critical to solving crimes, you know, for public safety. People want crimes solved. But how do you balance that with. You're right. With privacy, especially if it's. You were not the person that uploaded your DNA.

[Celisia Stanton]

Right.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Because someone in your family or a cousin or an uncle or someone uploaded it. How could you potentially be impacted? What I have heard from people as I talked through this is they're okay now. This is not everyone. This is, you know, a limited amount of people that I, that I talk to about this. But he said if someone has committed a crime and it's solved through this, they don't have as much of a right to privacy. For me, it's still a, you know, it's a fine line of what is, what are people's rights and what are the rights to, you know, to investigators. But most of the people I talked to in this case, about this case specifically, who wanted to weigh in, said, you know, that the right to solve a case outweighs the right to privacy. Now that will probably be debated.

[Celisia Stanton]

Yeah.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Maybe even the courts. And it has been in another case in Minnesota. And so I think that will continue to happen and that could shift over time about if this will be allowed.

[Celisia Stanton]

Yeah. I think, you know, for me, what brings up too is like, obviously if it is true, if someone committed a heinous murder. Right. And we knew with certainty that that was the case, then I think a lot of people would agree, well, yeah, you deserve to be held accountable for that. I think where hesitation maybe has come in for me, maybe for some of our listeners, is from the perspective of like, well, you know, the courts don't always get it right. Not 100% of the time. And, you know, I actually reported on a case in season one of True or Crime about Josiah Sutton, who's this young man who was convicted for rape. He as a teenager. He ended up serving prison term in an adult prison and he was convicted on DNA evidence that ended up being faulty. There was issues with the crime lab. A number of different things went wrong. And just in that process, I kind of learned a lot of ways that DNA analysis isn't just cut and dry.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Yeah, well, let me address that about the DNA, because DNA, the one thing we learned is it does not leave a timestamp. DNA can be left, but we don't know when it was left. And so in this case, they didn't just rely on the DNA, they had other evidence, which. Namely the footprint, which was the key thing, because that was, they believe, a timestamp because you would have had to have been there when the blood was wet to leave a footprint. In the Golden State Killer case, I believe they had other evidence that they collected past the DNA. And so I think in this, using the forensic genetic genealogy, you can't just rely. I mean, I think people believe you can't just rely on that DNA, or you hope that investigators do more work beyond the DNA that's collected to then build a case. That's the first step. But then build the case around it, because we do know that DNA, while a great tool for investigators, you're right, isn't always exact.

[Celisia Stanton]

So obviously you spent a lot of time reporting on this story, doing all of those different reporting pieces, this full documentary. What do you hope that people take away from Jeannie's story? What do you hope that people are going to remember about her beyond just the crime and what happened to her?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

It's always important to remember when there's a victim of a crime, that they're a real person, that they have people that care about them, that love them, that miss them desperately. And with Jeannie, there was so many things that were talked about in court that didn't paint her in the best picture. But I think what's so important to remember is that she was a person that deserved to live, that loved and was loved, and that she had people that care about her and still do, and that never stopped fighting for her. I think that's really powerful to know that, you know, a family's love, a mother's love, it never ends.

[Celisia Stanton]

Yeah. And I think when you build these relationships and connections with the families, it really does have such a profound impact and really just makes you realize, you know, the fragility of life, the importance of everybody's stories. If Betty or Cindy were listening to this now, what would you want them to kind of know about the impact that their openness had on your work?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

They matter. Jeannie matters. We couldn't have done it without their vulnerability. We couldn't have shared Jeannie's story, who she was and what happened to her without their blessing. And I'm grateful to them to. To have allowed us to share more about her and who she was with everyone and not just what happened to her.

[Celisia Stanton]

That's a great place to end. I really appreciate your time, Jennifer, and your hard work in reporting on this case. The documentary was so wonderfully done and was a really critical piece in us being able to put together the true or crime episode. So I really appreciate it.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Thank you so much.

[Celisia Stanton]

Where can people find you if they want to continue to follow your work and what you have going on next?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Sure, you can find me on WCCO and streaming on CBS News Minnesota. I'm not on every day like I used to be because investigations take time, but you can always find my work on wcco.com amazing.

[Celisia Stanton]

Thank you.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Thank you.

[Celisia Stanton]

That was my conversation with WCCO investigative reporter Jennifer Mayerly. I am so grateful to her for the care that she brought in telling Jeannie's story and and for sharing what it was like to navigate the emotional, ethical and investigative layers behind a case like this. If you haven't already watched the WCCO documentary Footprint to Murder, you can find it on YouTube [e-mail] it's an incredible companion to the two part series we released here on Truer Crime. And of course, as always, you can keep up with True or Crime on Instagram, X Threads and bluesky Recrimepod or by signing up for our newsletter@the truercrime.substack.com if you want to follow along with me personally, I'm on Instagram and TikTok. Alicia Stanton and I also write a weekly newsletter called Sincerely Salisia where I share my favorite recommendations and unfiltered thoughts on politics, culture and life. You can read and subscribe at Sincerely.

[Various Advertisers]

Limu Emu and Doug Here we have the Limu Emu in its natural habitat, helping people customize their car insurance and save hundreds with Liberty Mutual. Fascinating. It's accompanied by his natural ally, Doug.

[Celisia Stanton]

Uh, Limu is that guy with the binoculars watching us.

[Various Advertisers]

Cut the camera. They see us. Only pay for what you [e-mail] Liberty Liberty Liberty Liberty Savings Ferry Unwritten by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and affiliates Excludes Massachusetts. I'm Jake Halpern, host of Deep Cover, a show about people who lead double lives. We're presenting a special series from Australia. It's all about a family who was conned by a charming American. When you marry someone, you feel like you really know them.

[Jennifer Mayerly]

I was just gobsmacked as to what's going on here.

[Celisia Stanton]

Does the name Leslie Manookee mean anything to you?

[Jennifer Mayerly]

Oh, you bet. Never forget her.

[Various Advertisers]

Listen to Deep Cover presents Snowball Wherever you get your podcasts.