C (3:11)

Monday, June 10, 1912. It's just before sunrise in the tight knit community of Villisca, Iowa. Mary Peckham has just begun her day and walks outside to hang laundry. After a few moments, she notices the absence of her neighbors. The often boisterous Moore Family. Josiah B. Moore, who also went by jb, his wife Sarah, and their four children would normally be awake at this hour feeding their animals and getting the children ready for school. By 7am Mary becomes increasingly worried. She walks over to the Morris house and knocks on the door. There's no answer. Mary attempts to look through the windows, but all the curtains are shut. She tries to open both the front and back doors, but they are locked. Around 8:15, Mary makes contact with JB's brother Ross, who arrives with a key to the house. Ross enters the home and peeks into one of the rooms downstairs. He notices a sheet covering what appears to be someone asleep in bed. Suddenly, Ross is overcome by a strong stench of blood and copper. He glances down to the side of the bed and sees what appears to be the lifeless hand of a child protruding from the sheet. Ross runs out of the house, yelling at Mary Peckham to call the town marshal. Hank hort. Sometime before 9am Marshall Horton, along with curious members of the community arrive at the Moore residence. The unimaginable scene they would discover inside the home sends shockwaves throughout and beyond the small community, instantly taking over the front pages of newspapers across the country.

D (5:32)

From Tenderfoot TV in Atlanta, I'm Payne Lindsey.

A (5:35)

And I'm Maggie Freeling, and you're listening.

D (5:37)

To up and Vanished weekly.

A (5:43)

Today, the town of Villisca has only about 1,000 residents. In 1912 it was a few hundred more, but the population has steadily declined as the industrial railroad boom in late 1800s lost steam. In 1903, 43 year old Josiah B. Moore purchased the house at 508 East Second street and moved in with his wife Sarah and their four kids. The home was typical of the time, modest, about 600 square feet with two bedrooms, a master and the children's. There was a parlor, a sewing room, a kitchen, an outhouse and a barn. The Moore family spent Sunday night at the New Presbyterian Church in town, and afterwards two of the children's friends came to stay over and slept in the downstairs sewing room. Here's more about what authorities found during the initial investigation.

C (6:45)

At 9am the county coroner, Dr. Lindquist, arrived at the Moore residence. He was appalled to find members of the community freely inspecting the crime scene. He met with Marshall Horton as well as the sheriff, Orrin Jackson, and pressed them to call in the National Guard to secure the scene. The Guard, whose armory was located in Villisca, was activated and in place around the home by 10:30am the scene itself was nothing short of horrific. In the downstairs room, were the bodies of the visiting Stillinger girls. In one of the upstairs bedrooms were the bodies of the four more children. And in an adjacent upstairs bedroom were the bodies of Sarah and JB. Downstairs, authorities found what appeared to be JB's coal axe leaning against a wall. All eight of the victims appeared to have been bludgeoned to death with the blunt end of the weapon. After conducting autopsies, it was concluded that all victims died of severe head trauma. Before leaving the scene, the suspect covered all of the mirrors in the home, placed sheets over the victims bodies and covered each window, hanging clothing over those without curtains. Initial estimates suggested the murders occurred sometime between midnight and 2am Burglary was ruled out quickly as JB's wallet was recovered with cash still inside. In the family barn. Investigators discovered an imprint in a pile of hay leading them to believe the killer observed the family from afar before moving in. Inside the attic of the home, two spent cigarettes were found suggesting the killer moved inside the house and hid once the family left for church. Two other pieces of evidence stood out to investigators. A gas lamp set to emit minimal lighting was found upstairs. And a fragment of keychain not belonging to the moors was found downstairs. But due to the lack of forensic technology available in the early 20th century, authorities were forced to rely on witness testimony and their hunt for this axe wielding murderer.

A (9:12)

Crime scene management and forensics back then were not like they are now. In fact, they were virtually non existent. People were all over the crime scene, touching everything, moving things around. There's even a long standing rumor that dozens of people from town came and took skull fragments from Josiah as souvenirs. Though today we'd recognize a plethora of evidence at the scene, even rudimentary forensics like fingerprint analyzing wasn't widely available. Off the bat, investigators wondered how a killer was able to creep through a creaking farmhouse without waking anyone up. Some speculated perhaps a sedative in evening drinks like milk or hot cocoa. But toxicology was also not a routine part of investigations. An initial inquest held by a coroner's jury uncovered little new information. But over the following days and weeks, and fed mostly by the local rumor mill, authorities were able to comprise a list of names of people they wanted to question.

C (10:26)

Several suspects emerged in the axe murders of the Moore family and Stillinger girls. The first suspect was local businessman Frank Jones. JB had worked for Jones for a number of years before starting his own business. Authorities speculated, leaving Jones company plus rumors of an affair between JB and the daughter in law of Frank Jones led to the hiring of hitman William Mansfield, who was contracted to kill JB and his family. Mansfield was tied to two other axe murders, including the murder of his own family in 1914. He was arrested for the Villisca murders in 1916, but was released after his alibi was backed up by payroll records which placed him out of state at the time of the murders. Reverend George Kelly was also suspected of involvement in the murders. He was a traveling preacher who had attended the church Services on Sunday, June 9, then abruptly left Villisca the morning of the morning murders. Kelly was known as a Peeping Tom and allegedly dropped off a bloody shirt for cleaning a week after the murders. But due to his small stature, 5 foot 2 and 119 pounds, police did not consider him physically capable of committing the murders and he wasn't arrested until 1917. By that time, witnesses had forgotten key details about the murders. Kelly was tried twice. The first trial ended with a hung jury and the second was declared a mistrial. Another theory investigators considered was whether the Villisca axe murders were the result of a serial killer passing through town via railroad. They pointed to other seemingly random axe attacks throughout the Midwest between 1910 and 1919. Despite national media attention and years long investigations by multiple agencies, the identity of the Villiska axe murderer remains a mystery.

A (12:33)

The aftermath of the Villisca ax murders left a town divided and split the church in two. And overall, I think all theories are still on the table, especially because this case is over 100 years old. While recently attending Crimecon, our producer John sat down with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, hosts of the historic true crime show Buried Bones, to discuss their vast experience covering cases from the past like the Villisca axe murders. And when we come back from a break, we'll bring you their conversation.

B (13:12)

Ah, DSW Earth. Place of the humble brag here, the shoes are so good, no one would.

A (13:18)

Ever know how little you paid if.

B (13:19)

You didn't go telling everyone that is. And with never ending options for every.

A (13:23)

Style, mood and occasion, all at really.

B (13:25)

Great prices, they'll definitely give you something to brag about. So go ahead, stock up on fresh sneakers from your favorite brands or try those boots you always secretly knew you could pull off. Find the shoes that get you at prices that get your budget at DSW stores or@dsw.com let us surprise you.

A (13:42)

Just got a new puppy or kitten. Congrats.

B (13:45)

But also, yikes.

A (13:47)

Between crates, beds, toys, treats, and those first few vet visits, you've probably already.

B (13:51)

Dropped a small fortune, which is where Lemonade pet insurance comes in. It helps cover vet costs so you can focus on what's best for your new pet.

A (13:58)

The coverage is customizable, sign up is.

B (14:00)

Quick and easy, and your claims are.

A (14:02)

Handled in as little as three seconds.

B (14:04)

Pro Lemonade offers a package specifically for puppies and kittens. Get a'llemonade.com pet your future self will thank you.

A (14:12)

Your pet won't. They don't know what insurance is. And we're back.

E (14:21)

Kate and Paul, I really appreciate the two of you sitting down with me and taking some time. I know it's been kind of the start to a very busy weekend for the both of you. For anyone who may not know who you are, would you mind just taking a quick minute to introduce yourselves and talk a little bit about your background?

D (14:36)

Sure.

B (14:36)

I'm Kate Winkler Dawson and I am a true crime journalist and historian and author and the co host of Buried Bones with this lovely man over here.

D (14:47)

I'm Paul Holz. I'm co host of Buried Bones. I'm a retired sort of cold case investigator. I was heavily involved in the Golden State Killer case and the team I was with helped solve that case.

E (15:00)

Well, it's good to have you both here and I appreciate it. Kate, I am curious. You know, you've done a lot of work in the true crime space across a lot of different roles. What's that been like for you?

B (15:10)

I mean, it's been great. I. I never thought. When I started writing true crime books, which was about 10 years ago, I. Podcasts just never even entered my mind. I just didn't think that this was a possibility, nor did I listen to podcasts. So to think that this was the very best way to connect to my audience is great. And I love being able to show my personality a little bit more than I could in a book. So it's been interesting to see what stories work really well in books for me and what, you know, would work really well in a podcast. So it's been wonderful.

E (15:45)

And Paul, you've been in your role as an investigator for a very long time. Did you think that you would ever play such a important role in a monumental case?

D (15:53)

No. And you know, I of course wanted to solve the case more than anything, but in terms of how we solved it, you know, we used the genetic genealogy tool for the very first time. And even though it was successful in a case that I had worked on for 24 years, I didn't recognize immediately what an impact that tool would have over the last seven years since Golden State Killer case was solved. It's turned out that genealogy has proved to be revolutionary, and I'm very proud of what my team did in order to actually launch that.

E (16:31)

So obviously we reached out to you because we'd like to just talk a little bit more about your podcast, Buried Bones. If anyone listening is not familiar with the show, how would you kind of explain your approach to the content that you cover?

B (16:44)

My background really is old, old cases, 1800s, early 1900s. Sometimes I whack them with a 1600s case. But I love bringing history back to life so we can see the patterns, you know. And so with Paul, I just thought he would be the perfect person to explore these stories with. Because, you know, what's exciting for me is when I present a story to him and I unravel it like a mystery. Like we're both investigators who just arrive at the scene. And I know a little bit more than he does when he says, oh, this is just like a case I just worked on a couple of years ago because crime is so consistent, you know, over time, why people kill. And so I just really wanted to show that just because, you know, the time periods are different and just because, you know, the weapons might be different, the way you solve cases sometimes is the same here as you would, you know, in. In 1925 or 1825.

E (17:40)

And how did you all cross paths and kind of come up with the idea of doing this podcast together?

D (17:45)

Well, we initially crossed paths. Kate had reached out and she asked if I had a really, really old case that I had worked. And so I said, well, I have a case from 1924. And it turns out it was a case that she actually wrote a chapter about in her book. And so Kate and I got on and she knew so much more about the case than what I did. I had a very limited exposure to it, but we just kind of riffed back and forth. And from my understanding, Kate's listeners really enjoyed our interactions. And so Kate reached out to me and said, hey, what about doing a podcast together? And that's kind of how Buried Bones came to be.

E (18:28)

There's a lot to be said about the chemistry, especially when it's a co hosted show. So how have you kind of helped, you know, protect that and bring your personalities out?

D (18:36)

Well, you know, I think it's just a natural. Either two people have it or they don't. And, you know, the reality is, is that Kate and I have seen each other just a handful of times in person. You know, everything has been online. But even Those moments in person, like we were in London and our hotel caught fire. So we, we went out to a pub, had. I had bourbon, she had cider. But we, we actually just hit it off. It was just a natural, seamless thing. And, you know, within buried bones, we have our lanes. And so that also, I think, just helps the dynamic because Kate is doing her thing, the storytelling. And I'm the investigator, I'm the forensic scientist, I'm the behavioralist that's listening, going, oh, you just said something that I find important, and I want to comment on that.

E (19:27)

So where do you typically source the stories and the cases that you all look into?

B (19:32)

Everywhere. It could be something that I've written about in the past. It could be just something a lot of times I really want to work on. Not so much high profile, but cases people had never heard of but were groundbreaking. Like the case Paul and I did on the first instance of fingerprinting being used in a criminal case, like 1910. Remember that? Yeah. Like fingerprints in a, in a wet windowsill. And then we'll talk about, like, he pretty quickly figured out that I was talking about Miranda rights in the real story about Miranda, and he had not really heard that story, that it was a string of sexual assaults. And so when I presented it, so he's like, oh, I know I've heard of this story, but he didn't know all of the details. And there's so much more to it than just that it led to Miranda rights. So, you know, I, I find these cases, I feel like everywhere, but a lot of them, people email me or they'll message me and say, hey, have you thought about this case? And I just have a database of probably 800 cases.

E (20:30)

What is the most difficult thing of looking at in older case?

D (20:34)

For me, it's the lack of documentation because, you know, I, I'm, I'm very visual. And part of my skill set is, is assessing a crime scene, assessing what the offender did to the victim and starting to develop, you know, the offender's motive, which informs me who the offender might be relative to, to the victim. Is it somebody the offender knows? It's some, you know, the victim knew the. Is this a stranger or are we dealing with a fantasy motivated offender, like a serial predator? And so pictures are always important. And of course, with, with cases that we do on buried bones, probably greater than 50% of the cases, they really don't have that. They, you know, they didn't have photography, you know, crime scenes back in the day. And so now I have to rely upon whatever Kate or our researchers are able to give me. And then I'm more limited in terms of what I can, you know, opine about it, but I can still at least work with something like that.

E (21:31)

So if you don't have that same type of, you know, physical evidence that you might in a, in a more recent case, what is the information that you'd be looking at?

D (21:40)

When Kate first, you know, approached me about doing buried bones, I was going, historic cases. I'm not so sure that's going to resonate. Obviously it did. But what was surprising to me, and we've talked about this, is that when she's telling the story about the case, it's like, well, that's the same type of case that just happened in, you know, 10 years ago. And so it's circumstantial evidence. It's relationships. There's associations, geographic aspects. There's all these other things that as an investigator, I pay attention to, just as if it's a case that happened yesterday.

B (22:19)

Let me add to that, a lot of times we have to rely on the present day, 1827 coroner or, you know, the medical examiner or the doctor for their reflections. And so, you know, Paul and I have dealt with the same pathologist for, what's his name, Spillsbury, for like four different cases in the uk. And so at this point, when Paul, when I say to Paul, okay, we have Bernard Spilsbury, Paul automatically trusts him because he's had it, he's done well by us in the past. You know, I'll say this is what Spillsbury thought and it pretty much tallies with what Paul would think. And so we, we find that we can be, we can rely on certain types of investigators back then. So I think he's learned kind of like, okay, if, if we're in a small town and a lot of people had taken their own lives by standing on the train tracks, probably the coroner in this town knows what it looks like when somebody is trying to make it look like murder by putting somebody on the train track. So it's sort of that instinct of almost like meeting these people and saying, oh, okay, I get it. And you rely on that.

D (23:23)

Well, and I think that that was also surprising is that when you start taking a look back at investigators, scientists, pathologists working these cases back, let's say in the late 1800s, is that some of them were amazing, they were brilliant, they did great work. But just like today, there's also others where you go, nope, that person's wrong. They came to the wrong conclusion. So, you know, that's where as Kate's telling me about a case, you know, I'm assessing the experience of the, the investigators, the experience of the experts that are being brought in on the case. So I can determine for my own purposes how much veracity to put on what they found back in 19.

E (24:08)

Are there any major differences in the types of crimes or like the headlines of, you know, 200 years ago versus today?

B (24:14)

Not really. I mean, they were so sensational back then. I think in some ways even worse back then.

D (24:20)

Everybody thinks, well, true crime has blown up. It's become such a huge genre. No, it's always been that way. You know, cases that Kate will tell me, you have courthouses packed. You have people going to executions. You know the headlines. You know the sensationalistic headlines. I think what's happening today is with the Internet you have persistence of information so when somebody hears about a case, they can go online and learn all about it or listen to a podcast about it. Back in the day, you might watch a news station and hear about a case. Where are you going to turn? You have to go to the public library to see was there a book written about it?

A (25:00)

We'll be back after the break.

B (25:07)

When did making plans get this complicated? It's time to streamline with WhatsApp, the secure messaging app that brings the whole group together. Use polls to settle dinner plans, send event invites and pin messages so no one forgets mom's 60th. And never miss a meme or milestone. All protected with end to end encryption. It's time for WhatsApp message privately with everyone. Learn more at WhatsApp.com Extra value meals.

C (25:34)

Are back for just $5.

D (25:36)

Get a savory and sweet sausage, egg and cheese McGriddles plus hash browns and a coffee only at McDonald's for a limited time only. Prices and participation may vary. Prices may be higher in Hawaii, Alaska and California. And for delivery.

A (25:51)

Here's this week's critical missing case.

C (25:54)

Today's case comes out of Draper, Utah, where police are requesting the public's help in locating 67 year old Lorraine Sundquist. According to the Draper Police Department, Lorraine was last seen by family on Wednesday, October 22 and was reported missing after her cell phone was found in Spanish fork Canyon on October 25th. Lorraine may be traveling with three small black dogs and her vehicle is believed to be A Grand Gray 2024 Nissan Frontier crew Cab. She was last seen wearing a red coat with black fur trim and dark faded blue Levi jeans. She is also Believed to be wearing a white beanie with a fluffy pom pom top. So, listeners, if you have seen Lorraine or have information on her whereabouts, please contact the Draper Police Department Dispatch at 801-840-4000. You can also check out the up and Vanished weekly Instagram page AV Weekly to see a picture of Lorraine and also to share our posts for more visibility. Thanks for your support.

A (27:06)

All right, we're back.

E (27:09)

So, Kate, I know in your book, you know, you talked about it's like a nearly 200 year old case. What is your process to even start looking at a case that old? Where do you first go?

B (27:18)

Well, I mean, I think it's like with any of the stuff that we do with, whether it's a podcast or if I'm looking at a book, you have to see what are your sources and if the sources are reliable enough. You know, like with Barry Bones, there have been probably seven or eight cases where I've told the researchers, this is a great case, and they'll come back to me and go, there's just, there's not enough reliable stuff. It probably would be for other shows, but just not for us. Paul would ask too many questions. He would say, are there photos? I mean, luckily you no longer really ask are there photos? Or DNA would have really helped us in this situation, which is a no shitlock situation. It would have helped us in every.

D (27:55)

Situation, you know, but that's also, you know, Kate coming with the journalistic background, you know, she has a standard that has to be met that that will support the facts that she's presenting me. And that's what I think is important about buried bones is that this is legitimate. You know, the information that is being discussed is going to be based upon, you know, solid data that Kate and the researchers have found. And so that's what's awesome. I'm not just now opining about something that may or may not be factual in the case.

E (28:31)

So what is the end goal when you're looking at these cases? You know, if it's 200 years old, everyone involved in these cases is gonna be, you know, now deceased. So what is, what is kind of the end goal for you reporting on these?

B (28:42)

You know, I think whether it's books or whether it's buried bones or Wicked words or any of the other things I do, I like to think, and I know Paul is very victim forward. And so when we talk about the killer, it is never in these sort of man, this guy was so great. Look how amazing he was. And he, you know, hop from place to place and there's never any kind of fangirling over these people. It's definitely a good analysis that I think we can learn from. You know, just like when the FBI interviewed Kemper and Bundy and all of these other people and you're picking up clues. But I think that my goal has always been pick a story. And I have said to the researchers, if we don't know enough about the victims, then we're going to have to kill the story. Because, because otherwise they're just props and that's not what we want. And too many other things, you know, content creators, I think, really do that. Like, that we really, you know, all you do is hear about the bodies. You don't hear about them as people. And so my whole goal, besides having Paul Solve a 250 year old case, of course, is to, to make, at a minimum, him. But everybody in the audience care about what happens to this woman who finds herself pregnant during the American Revolutionary War, knows she will be executed because she cheated on her husband and so she feels her only option is to kill him. And, and like, how does that, how does that read to us now? Like that feeling of desperation. And so, you know, not that. And none of it is to, you know, absolve somebody like that of anything, but just like, let's take it back, let's take a step back and understand why people do what they do. Victims and the killers.

D (30:27)

My goal is, if it's a solved case and Kate's telling me the story is do I agree with how authorities or the justice system resolve that case? Was there a miscarriage of justice based on the information that I have? And if it's an unsolved case, especially if it's a case in which maybe the evidence still exists, I'm legitimately going, oh, I think there's something that could be done here. I'll reach out to that agency and say, hey, you know what, Let's. I was just told, heard about this case. Let's see what we can do with that.

E (31:00)

So you feel like that's a reality that we could solve with today's technology and advancements. A case that's that old?

D (31:05)

Absolutely. And that's where, like, you know, people talk about Jack the Ripper. Is that a solvable case? No, because they don't have the objective identifying evidence, at least anything that is, that you can say is reliable based off chain of custody and everything else. Versus Zodiac. Yes, because they potentially have DNA evidence in that case. And, and that's where I, I think, you know, at, at some point we will learn who the Zodiac was.

E (31:33)

So this may be a, a more difficult question, but do you each have like, maybe one case that you would really like to see solved?

D (31:41)

I know, like, for me, I have cases I was personally involved with. I went out to the crime scene, I was at the autopsy, I worked physical evidence, I investigated that are still unsolved. And some of these are very passion cases for me. So those always pop into my, my mind, you know. And then of course, if you're talking about a more high profile case, for me it would be Zodiac just because he was a Bay Area. I actually did some work on that case back in the day and I'd like to know, well, who he is.

B (32:10)

I'll say. I think we both would like to know who the killer is in Black Dahlia because the brutality in that case, that is a sick person, whoever did it. And it just, I mean, for this to, for that case to be unsolved for a hundred years is incredible.

E (32:28)

So, you know, the two of you have talked about just the significant advancements we've had in technology and forensics over the last, you know, several decades. Specifically, has there been one thing in particular that you feel like has really kind of like set the bar like really high or like really kind of pushed it over the edge?

D (32:44)

I've gone through the various generations of DNA from almost the very beginning through how the DNA technology improved. And as we talked a little bit earlier, this genealogy tool that really has proven to be revolutionary. So and it, and it is DNA is very robust molecule. So you can have some of these very old cases have success working these old cases because that DNA could potentially have survived over the decades. Now what I'm seeing is you have a company that, that's represented here and I'm actually a part time employee, I'm an investigator for the genealogy company Othram. And what Othram is doing is they're improving that technology and now they're, they're truly, instead of it being like a consumer based technology to do genealogy DNA, they are truly turning it into a technology to be able to work with the most difficult forensic samples and have successful. And so this is just going to kind of snowball. You'll see more and more cases being solved because of the technology with laboratories like Othram and what they're putting out there.

E (33:56)

You'd mentioned earlier how it seems like there's more of a fixation on crime today. It just looks really just a little bit different than it did before. What are maybe some of the dangers of people's fixation on crime? Does anything come to mind?

D (34:11)

You know, even though I very much am in the true crime genre, I come out of real crime. I know what real crime looks like, what it smells like. I've seen the impact on real people. And the fear is, is that in the true crime space, the consumers aren't going to truly appreciate the reality of the story that they are consuming. You know, and that's where being victim focused is always so important. So people recognize, you know, I tell them it's okay to enjoy consuming true crime, but just remember, somebody got hurt, somebody lost their life. You have families that no longer have their loved ones and never glorify the bad guy. It's okay to be fascinated by, okay, why does this, why does this guy commit these types of crimes but don't wear T shirts with his face on it?

A (35:01)

Back after a short break.

B (35:05)

Hi, I'm here to pick up my son, Milo. There's no Milo here. Who picked up my son from school?

D (35:11)

Streaming only on pico.

E (35:15)

I'm gonna need the name of everyone.

D (35:17)

That could have a connection.

B (35:18)

You don't understand. It was just the five of us. So this was all planned.

A (35:22)

What are you gonna do?

B (35:23)

I will do whatever it takes to get my son back.

E (35:26)

I honestly didn't see this coming.

D (35:28)

These nice people killing each other.

C (35:30)

All her fault. A new series streaming November 6th only on Peacock. Sean Bean and Connie Nielsen star in.

D (35:38)

Robin Hood From Sherwood Forest to the.

C (35:41)

Norman Court, a classic tale reborn for today.

D (35:45)

The story continues to unfold. New episodes Sundays on mgm.

E (35:54)

Hey, listeners, if you have a tip or theories about a case you want to share or a case of interest you'd like to recommend to us, then we want to hear from you. Email us casesenderfoot tv DM us on Instagram avweekly or give us a call at 770-545-6411. You can also join the conversation on our discord at discord. GG upandvanished. Now back to the show. Do you anticipate any other major changes in the next decade to forensic technology?

D (36:33)

In terms of forensic technology, there's always research that's happening. So of course everybody thinks DNA. But fingerprints can still solve cases and that technology is constantly improving. You just don't see it in the headlines. Firearms comparisons, that technology just over the course of the last 20 years in terms of being able to search computer databases to link cases together based on the marks that gun leaves on cartridge cases, there's always going to be advances. And then of course, in our time it's high tech. And high tech right now is probably solving as many crimes as any. Cell phones, geolocation, all of that is a massive investigative tool in cases that happen today.

B (37:20)

I know one of the things I've asked Paul about is AI and how AI will fit. And you were talking about how AI will help curate family trees and genetic genealogy. That will just make it so much more efficient, which I think is one of the more important things. Of course.

D (37:36)

Yeah, we recognized during the Golden State killer genealogy, myself and then Steve Kramer, who was the FBI partner on that, we're going, as we're building these family trees, we're like, it seems like this could be automated, you know, and he actually did start pursuing an AI aspect after he left the FBI. And so I do think that we will see AI. The use of computers that are is going to further enhance the actual genealogy side. It's not just getting the DNA result, but actually building the family trees and giving better results to law enforcement to go out and determine is this the person that I'm looking for or not.

E (38:19)

Do you think there will ever be a time where technology will become so advanced that we'll be able to solve essentially every crime?

D (38:25)

No, no. There is no such thing as the perfect crime, but there is such a thing that it's an unsolvable crime. And that's, you know, that's very frustrating. And when, when, when I say something is unsolvable, there's a, there's a wide range of reasons why. But as an example, let's say we have a shooting. Firearms allow the offender to kill from a distance. The offender never gets close to the victim. There's never that transference of trace evidence, DNA evidence, et cetera. You have in essence the bullet, maybe a cartridge case. Many of these, let's say gang related type shootings, these weapons end up like in the Bay Area, in San Francisco Bay, they'll never be found. And so unless you have somebody be a witness and say he is the one that killed that person, and then the DA is going, okay, I've got sufficient evidence to be able to prosecute. You got nothing, you know, so those cases can be very, very difficult.

E (39:28)

Well, again, thank you both so much. For anyone who wants to go follow your work and the podcast, where can they go?

B (39:35)

I think Instagram for both of us. Really, Paul? Holes on Instagram?

D (39:39)

Tell me, my hand, I don't know. I am not a social media guy.

B (39:42)

It's Paul Holes and I'm Kate Winkler Dawson and then we have Barry Bones and stuff, so you can follow us.

E (39:50)

Well, perfect. Thank you both so very much.

B (39:51)

Thanks.

E (39:52)

Greatly appreciate it.

B (39:52)

Yep, thank you.

A (40:00)

It's super interesting to hear Kate and Paul talk about how modern forensic technology is being used today to re examine historic cases. And while it's possible we may never know the identity of the Villisca Axe murderer, we now have the ability to go back and learn from other unsolved crimes from the past. By the start of World War I, many people had left the small town of Villisca for work in big cities, and over the next 90 years the house had 13 different owners and eventually fell into disrepair. Eventually the house at 502 East 2nd was restored and in the 1990s opened to the public as the Villisca Axe Was Murder Museum. And they even offer overnight stays. The J.B. moore home was added to the National Register of historic places in 1998. Y', all, thank you so much for listening to this week's episode of up and Vanish Weekly. Be sure to tune in next week as we dig into another new case. Until next time.

D (41:27)

Up and Vanish Weekly is a production of Tenderfoot TV in association with Odyssey. Your hosts are Maggie Freeling and myself, Payne Lindsay. The show is written by Maggie Freeling, myself and John Street. Executive producers are Donald Albright and myself. Lead producer is John Street. Additional production by Meredith Stedman and Mike Rooney. Research for the series by Jamie Albright, Celicia Stanton and Carolyn Tallmadge. Edit and mix by Dylan Harrington and Sean Nurney. Supervising producer is Tracy Kaplan. Artwork by Byron McCoy. Original music by makeup and vanity set. Special thanks to Oren Rosenbaum and the team at UTA Beck Media and Marketing and the Nord Group. For more podcasts like up and Vanish Weekly, search Tenderfoot TV on your favorite podcast app or visit us@Tenderfoot TV. Thanks for listening.

C (42:33)

Limu Emu and Doug Here we have the Limu Emu in its natural habitat.

D (42:39)

Helping people customize their car insurance and save hundreds with Liberty Mutual. Fascinating.

C (42:47)

It's accompanied by his natural ally, Doug. Uh, Limu is that guy with the binoculars watching us. Cut the camera. They see us.

D (42:54)

Only pay for what you need@libertymutual.com Liberty Liberty Liberty Liberty Savings Ferry Unwritten by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and affiliates. Excludes Massachusetts.