Latest / Murder Files Unsealed / The Thumb Butte Trail Killer: DNA's 36-Year Pursuit

Transcript

The Thumb Butte Trail Killer: DNA's 36-Year Pursuit · Murder Files Unsealed

0:00
Speaker 1: Welcome to today's deep dive. We are setting out on
0:03
a mission today that bridges this massive gap between old school,
0:07
boots on the ground detective work and the absolute bleeding
0:11
edge of modern genetic science.
0:13
Speaker 2: And the contrast at the center of this case is
0:15
just jarring. You know, you have this meticulous patient march
0:20
of scientific progress, but it's layered over a foundation of
0:24
absolute chaotic terror.
0:26
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. So the goal today is to track the
0:29
thirty six year evolution of a single incredibly brutal cold case.
0:33
We're pulling from thousands of pages of case files, forensic reports,
0:36
and genealogical transcripts.
0:39
Speaker 2: Because we really want to understand how the foresight of
0:41
these nineteen eighties investigators who preserved evidence for technology they
0:45
couldn't even conceptualize yet Yea, eventually allowed science to hunt down.
0:48
Speaker 1: A killer, a killer who spoiler alert went to his
0:50
grave thinking he'd entirely beaten the system.
0:53
Speaker 2: He really did. And it's a story that forces us
0:55
to examine not just the mechanics of forensic evolution, but
0:58
also the devastating realities is systemic failure and survivor trauma.
1:02
Speaker 1: Okay, so let's unpack this. We have to start with
1:05
the geography, because the setting is practically a character in
1:08
this story. We are talking about Prescott, Arizona in the
1:12
summer of nineteen eighty seven, right and Yavapaie County is massive.
1:17
You've got over eight thousand square miles of this really
1:20
unique topographical collision. I mean, it's rural farmland, dense urban pockets,
1:25
towering mountains, and arid desert landscapes all mashed together.
1:29
Speaker 2: It's beautiful. It's picturesque, it really is.
1:31
Speaker 1: It's a kind of idyllic community where in the late
1:34
eighties people still left their screen doors unlatched, you know.
1:37
Speaker 2: Yeah. And right in the center of this community is Thumbbute.
1:40
It's this incredibly prominent volcanic plug that just rises over
1:44
the landscape.
1:44
Speaker 1: You literally can't miss it, No, you can't.
1:46
Speaker 2: It is so visually dominant that it's actually stamped onto
1:49
the county seal. You can see it from almost any
1:51
street in town. Wow. And the Thumbute Loop Trail was
1:54
the undisputed heart of the local outdoor culture there. Today
1:58
parts of it are paved, but back then it was
2:01
this rugged network of dirt paths, a real sanctuary for hikers, runners,
2:06
nature enthusiasts.
2:07
Speaker 1: Which brings us to June thirteenth, nineteen eighty seven. We're
2:12
looking at the lice of Kathy Sposito.
2:14
Speaker 2: Yes, Kathy, she was.
2:15
Speaker 1: Twenty three years old, a student at Prescott College. The
2:18
sources we have paint this vivid picture of her. She
2:21
was originally from Brooklyn, raised in the city, but she
2:24
felt this intense magnetic pull to the American West.
2:28
Speaker 2: Moving from Brooklyn to Prescott in the eighties is a
2:31
massive cultural and environmental shift.
2:33
Speaker 1: Oh completely.
2:34
Speaker 2: Her family was actually initially resistant to the idea of
2:37
her going so far away, but you know, she was
2:39
an adult making her own path. She wanted to study
2:42
outdoor studies in ecology. She wanted to immerse herself in nature.
2:46
Speaker 1: She rode her bicycle everywhere, usually with this bright yellow helmet.
2:50
She was fiercely independent, so a Saturday morning hike on
2:53
Thumbbute wasn't out of the ordinary for her at.
2:55
Speaker 2: All, not at all. It was her routine. Right.
2:57
Speaker 1: So it's early morning. She wants to beat the oppressive
3:00
midsummer Arizona heat, which if you've been there you know
3:03
is brutal. She rides her bike from her place on
3:05
Division Street to the base of the trail.
3:08
Speaker 2: She locks up the bike near the parking lot in
3:10
campground area, heads up the dirt path and just vanishes
3:13
into the trees.
3:14
Speaker 1: But she never makes it very far.
3:16
Speaker 2: No, the timeline of the attack is horrifyingly brief. There
3:20
were other hikers on the trail system that morning. People
3:23
are actually heard loud arguing echoing through the trees.
3:26
Speaker 1: That's chilling.
3:27
Speaker 2: They heard a woman's terrified screams for help, and then
3:31
a gunshot.
3:31
Speaker 1: Single gunshot, yes, And.
3:34
Speaker 2: A couple hiking nearby stumbles upon the scene. Shortly after.
3:38
They flag down a passing motorist who has a CBE
3:41
radio to call the police.
3:42
Speaker 1: Because obviously this is nineteen eighty seven, no cell phone exactly.
3:46
Speaker 2: So when the first responding deputies arrive, they're walking into
3:49
an absolute nightmare. One deputy pushes his way up the
3:52
trail and finds her body. Another hiker had actually placed
3:55
a blanket over her out of respect, and when the
3:58
deputy pulls that blanket back, of violence is just beyond comprehension.
4:02
The entire area is saturated with blood smears.
4:05
Speaker 1: It's just so brutal that when you break down the
4:07
medical examiner's report you aren't just looking at a list
4:11
of injuries. You are looking at a behavioral fingerprint of
4:14
the attacker.
4:15
Speaker 2: That's a really good way to put it.
4:16
Speaker 1: The cause of death involves multifaceted catastrophic trauma. I mean
4:21
she suffered massive blunt force trauma to the skull. There
4:24
were cut marks across her forehead.
4:26
Speaker 2: Multiple deep stab wounds too, including one driven specifically into
4:31
a right ear.
4:32
Speaker 1: God, she had a broken nose, a shattered front tooth,
4:35
and she was shot directly in the left eye with
4:37
a point two two caliber weapon.
4:40
Speaker 2: Right and they actually found a spent point two two
4:42
caliber shell casing resting in the dirt about six feet
4:45
away from her.
4:46
Speaker 1: And it wasn't just the gun and the knife.
4:48
Speaker 2: No, they also recovered a heavy metal ratchet wrench nearby,
4:52
alongside several large, blood stained rocks.
4:55
Speaker 1: Which is just I mean, to use four entirely different
4:57
mechanisms of violence, a firearm, a blade weapon, a heavy
5:01
manufactured tool, and then just raw environmental elements like rocks.
5:04
Speaker 2: It requires a profound level of physical exertion and psychological chaos.
5:09
I mean, this is not a calculated hit, This is
5:11
not a mugging gone wrong. No, not at all the
5:13
angle and velocity of the strikes even led the corner
5:17
to suggest the attacker was likely left handed, just swinging
5:20
with unbridled explosive rage.
5:23
Speaker 1: It's the very definition of overkill. But here's the detail
5:27
in the case files that creates an immediate paradox. Right,
5:30
despite this absolute frenzy of violence, Kathy's clothing was entirely intact,
5:36
which is baffling. Right, she was wearing a bikini top,
5:39
red athletic shorts, gray socks, and white shoes. Nothing was
5:43
ripped off. She hadn't been robbed.
5:45
Speaker 2: Her backpack was still right there with.
5:46
Speaker 1: Her exactly and inside was an address book linking her
5:50
to her home on Division Street. Her bicycle remained locked
5:53
at the bottom of the hill.
5:54
Speaker 2: Nothing was taken, And that paradox is exactly what paralyzes
5:58
an investigation wilderness attack on a lone female, investigators look
6:02
for two primary motives, robbery or sexual.
6:05
Speaker 1: Assault, right standard procedure.
6:07
Speaker 2: But when the victim's belongings are untouched and her clothing
6:09
is totally undisturbed, those initial hypotheses just crumble.
6:13
Speaker 1: It's like a tempest hit her, specifically, targeting her physical
6:17
body with unimaginable fury, but left the immediate material context
6:22
around her completely unbothered. It's eerie very if the visual
6:26
markers of a traditional sexual assault or a robbery aren't there.
6:30
The multifaceted nature of the weapons, the gun, the wrench,
6:33
the knife, it points to a completely different state of mind.
6:37
It looks deeply personal.
6:39
Speaker 2: It does. The behavioral analysis suggests the violence itself was
6:42
the primary objective, meaning what exactly well, Either the attacker
6:46
harbored a deep seated pathological hatred, or he attempted an assault,
6:51
met fierce resistance and suffered a catastrophic loss of emotion regulation.
6:56
The escalation from bare hands to rocks, a wrench, a knife,
6:59
and a gun in the case, a desperate need to
7:02
just obliterate the victim, and that psychological profile terrified local detective.
7:07
Speaker 1: Because it meant a highly volcle unpredictable individual was roaming
7:10
their town. Imagine living there and hearing about this exactly so.
7:14
Speaker 2: Investigative protocol in nineteen eighty seven dictates that when a
7:17
murder looks this personal, you start with the inner circle.
7:19
You work from the inside out, right.
7:21
Speaker 1: So they look at an artist she modeled for.
7:23
Speaker 2: Yeah, but he was cleared almost immediately due to a
7:26
rock solid alibi. But there's this interesting psychological footnote.
7:29
Speaker 1: There, oh, right, about why he stopped working with her.
7:33
Speaker 2: Yes, he had actually stopped working with her because she
7:36
was too quote fidgety, she couldn't sit still in his studio.
7:39
Speaker 1: Which really reinforces this image of a young woman who
7:42
is just full of kinetic energy, desperate to be moving
7:45
and out in the world.
7:46
Speaker 2: Absolutely so. Once the artist is cleared, a much more
7:50
sinister figure emerges, an acquaintance of Kathy's who lived in
7:54
the area.
7:54
Speaker 1: Right, So, detectives start cross referencing his timeline with eyewitness accounts,
8:00
and he claims he hadn't seen her in over a.
8:01
Speaker 2: Week, but multiple witnesses place him at Murphy's Bar, which
8:05
is where Kathy worked as a waitress, just the day
8:08
before the murder. Interacting with her and.
8:10
Speaker 1: That lie immediately ellipits him to the prime suspect. They
8:14
bring him in for an interview, subject him to a
8:16
polygraph examination, and he shows deception right.
8:19
Speaker 2: The physiological markers indicate he is lying about his involvement
8:23
or his knowledge of the crime.
8:25
Speaker 1: Based on that, detective secure a search warrant for his
8:27
residence and during that search, they find a craftsman half
8:30
socket wrench.
8:32
Speaker 2: Which seems like the smoking gun. Honestly, a ratchet wrench
8:35
was recovered at the crime scene. You have a suspect
8:37
who lied about his timeline, failed a polygraph, and possesses
8:41
a tool belonging to the exact same family of hardware
8:45
used to crush the victim's skull.
8:47
Speaker 1: But this raises an important question about the vast chasm
8:50
between nineteen eighties forensics and modern science, because today that
8:55
wrench goes straight to a lab one hundred percent, you
8:57
swab it for touch DNA, or you use Microsoft go
9:00
up extriation matching to link the specific imperfections of the
9:03
metal to the wounds.
9:04
Speaker 2: But in nineteen eighty seven, toll mark analysis was severely
9:08
limited by manufacturing realities. Forensics relies on distinguishing class characteristics
9:13
from individual characteristic.
9:14
Speaker 1: Okay, break that down for us, sure.
9:16
Speaker 2: So a class characteristic is something shared by a whole group,
9:18
like the brand, the size, or the shape. An individual
9:21
characteristic is a unique microscopic flaw like a scratch or
9:25
a manufacturing defect that makes a specific tool one of
9:28
a kind. Because craftsmen tools were drop forged and mass
9:31
produced in the millions. They were essentially identical. There was
9:35
no unique striation pattern they could match to the blunt
9:38
force trauma.
9:39
Speaker 1: It was just a wrench.
9:40
Speaker 2: Exactly millions of garages had that exact same tool. They
9:45
couldn't definitively prove his wrench was the missing piece from
9:48
a set that ended up covered in blood on thumbbute.
9:52
Speaker 1: And then the investigation suffers a catastrophic self inflicted wound
9:56
courtesy of the suspect's friend.
9:58
Speaker 2: This part of the file is just infurior.
10:00
Speaker 1: It really is. The suspect's friend happened to be a paramedic,
10:03
specifically one of the first responders on the scene that morning, right, And.
10:08
Speaker 2: When police investigate a high profile murder, they utilize the
10:11
strategy called holdback evidence. They intentionally keep specific gruesome details
10:17
out of the press.
10:17
Speaker 1: Like the specific caliber of the gun, the stab wound
10:20
to the ear, the broken two Yes, they.
10:23
Speaker 2: Hold that back so that if a suspect confesses or
10:26
slips up during an interrogation and mentions those details, investigators
10:30
know for a fact they are talking to the actual killer.
10:33
Speaker 1: But this paramedic friend takes all of that holdback evidence,
10:37
this intimate knowledge of the trauma that only the killer
10:40
and the cops should know, and he leaks it directly
10:43
to the prime suspect.
10:44
Speaker 2: He essentially poisons the evidentiery well completely. The mechanism of
10:48
a police interrogation is completely neutralized at that point. If
10:52
the suspect accidentally mentions the stab wound to the ear
10:55
in a police interview, detectives can no longer use it
10:58
as leverage.
10:59
Speaker 1: Because the suspect can simply claim, Hey, I know that
11:01
because my paramedic buddy told me exactly.
11:04
Speaker 2: It creates insurmountable noise in the investigation. The police are
11:07
left staring at a guy who looks incredibly guilty of murder,
11:11
but who might just be guilty of betting a friend
11:14
who engages in highly unethical gossip.
11:17
Speaker 1: So without the anchor of physical forensic proof, the circumstantial
11:21
evidence collapses. They can't charge him based on a common
11:24
wrench and a contaminated interrogation.
11:27
Speaker 2: The suspect is cleared, the leads dry up, the case
11:30
goes totally cold.
11:31
Speaker 1: You have a community holding its bread waiting for a
11:33
monster to strike again, and the monster just vanishes.
11:36
Speaker 2: And that silence is the most terrifying part for a community.
11:40
Decades pass. But the saving grace of this entire narrative
11:44
is the original medical examiner.
11:46
Speaker 1: Yes, this is where the foresight comes in.
11:48
Speaker 2: During the autopsy in nineteen eighty seven, he noticed that
11:50
while Kathy suffered immense blunt force trauma, her actual mouse
11:54
and her broken front tooth didn't look like they were
11:57
hit with a metal wrench or a rock.
12:00
Speaker 1: You damage suggested a softer impact.
12:02
Speaker 2: A closed fist.
12:03
Speaker 1: Right.
12:03
Speaker 2: Theme theorized that the killer might have cut his knuckles
12:06
on her teeth during the struggle. Now, in nineteen eighty seven,
12:09
law enforcement DNA analysis was virtually non existent. The technology
12:14
to extract a profile from a few skin cells just
12:16
wasn't there.
12:17
Speaker 1: But Theme swab the inside of her mouth anyway, preserved
12:20
the sample and logged it into evidence. He basically banked
12:23
on the future.
12:24
Speaker 2: He absolutely did, And fast forward to twenty thirteen, and
12:27
that future arrives. The Ava Payi County Sheriff's office pulls
12:30
that preserved swab and sends it for advanced extraction, and.
12:33
Speaker 1: They actually managed to isolate a near full profile of
12:36
unknown male DNA.
12:38
Speaker 2: Specifically, they extract ystr DNA. And the science here is
12:41
crucial for people to understand.
12:43
Speaker 1: Yeah, let's get into that. What does that mean?
12:45
Speaker 2: In a violent crime scene swab, you often have a
12:47
massive mixture of the victim's female DNA and the suspects
12:51
male DNA. Standard autosomal testing can get totally overwhelmed by
12:55
the sheer volume of the victim's cellular material.
12:58
Speaker 1: Because it's her mouth, so obviously her DNA is everywhere.
13:00
Speaker 2: Right, But YSTR testing targets short tandem repeats, specifically on
13:05
the Y chromosome, which only males possess.
13:07
Speaker 1: Oh that's smart.
13:08
Speaker 2: It acts like a chemical filter, completely ignoring the female
13:11
DNA and isolating the male genetic lineage, so they.
13:15
Speaker 1: Finally have the biological fingerprint of the killer. They upload
13:19
this YSTR profile into CODIS, the Combined DNA Index System,
13:24
which is the national database containing the DNA of convicted
13:27
offenders and arrestees.
13:29
Speaker 2: They wait for the ping and zero hit. Nothing. The
13:32
database is only as good as its inputs. You know,
13:35
if the killer was never arrested for a qualifying felony
13:38
after DNA collection laws were acted, or if he died
13:41
before he could be swabbed, he won't be in CODIS.
13:44
Speaker 1: The genetic key exists, but the lock is missing.
13:47
Speaker 2: Exactly, but this dead end triggers a brilliant piece of
13:50
analog detective work. A detective named Prichard decides to start
13:55
manually pulling old cold case.
13:57
Speaker 1: Files, which the sources highlight is actually pretty rare. This
14:00
cross jurisdictional pattern based digging used to be uncommon. Police
14:04
departments were notoriously siloed back then. You just work the
14:07
files on your desk.
14:08
Speaker 2: But Pritchard starts looking for geographical and behavioral patterns, and
14:12
he discovers a file from April twenty ten, nineteen ninety, nearly.
14:16
Speaker 1: Three years after Kathy's Sposito was murdered, and the location
14:19
is the exact same Thumbbute trail system.
14:22
Speaker 2: It is put yourself in the shoes of someone living
14:25
in Prescott, discovering that a predator wasn't just passing through,
14:29
but was treating your local hiking trail, the place you
14:31
go to find peace and clarity, as his own private
14:34
hunting ground.
14:35
Speaker 1: It's terrifying. In this nineteen ninety case, another young woman
14:39
is hiking alone. She is attacked and the methodology is
14:42
strikingly similar. She is bludgeoned with the rocks, she is
14:45
sexually assaulted.
14:46
Speaker 2: The attacker physically dominates her and threatens her, demanding her silence.
14:50
Speaker 1: But she fights back, she survives, and she actually manages
14:53
to escape, and crucially, she immediately heads to the base camp,
14:57
contacts authorities, and undergoes a forensic rape kitting examination.
15:00
Speaker 2: Which is huge.
15:01
Speaker 1: But I have to pause on the timeline here we
15:04
have a gap from June nineteen eighty seven to April
15:06
nineteen ninety. If this attacker was acting out of such
15:09
uncontrollable explosive rage in eighty seven, bringing multiple weapons, utilizing overkill,
15:16
how does he just vanish and then perfectly replicate the
15:19
geographical attack three years later?
15:22
Speaker 2: Right, It's a huge question.
15:23
Speaker 1: Is it immense calculated? Patients?
15:26
Speaker 2: Well? The psychology of the cooling off period is heavily
15:28
debated among behavioral analysts. The explosive release of the nineteen
15:32
eighty seven murder may have satiated a deep psychological compulsion temporarily.
15:36
Speaker 1: Or maybe life just gotten away exactly.
15:39
Speaker 2: The mundane realities of life often dictate these gaps. He
15:42
could have moved away for work, he could have been
15:44
incarcerated for an unrelated minor offense, or he could have
15:47
been institutionalized. Okay, that makes sense, But the most chilling
15:51
and statistically likely possibility is that the gap isn't actually empty.
15:57
There may be other victims who were intimidated into silence
16:00
or whose assaults were never formally linked to the thumbbute geography.
16:04
Speaker 1: Ugh, that's a dark thought. But whatever he was doing
16:07
during those three years, his decision to streap again in
16:11
nineteen ninety was his fatal mistake, because the survivor of
16:14
that attack preserved pristine evidence she really did. When modern
16:18
investigators take the unknown male DNA from her nineteen ninety
16:22
rape kit and compare it against the YSTR profile pulled
16:25
from Kathy Sposito's nineteen eighty seven mouth swab and the
16:28
murder weapons, it is a definitive match. The same ghost
16:32
committed both crimes.
16:33
Speaker 2: They establish a concrete serial pattern, but they're still facing
16:37
that code as void. They know what the killer's DNA
16:40
looks like on a molecular level, but they can't tie
16:42
it to a driver's license, a home address, or a face.
16:45
Speaker 1: So they need a way to bypass the criminal database
16:47
entirely and tap into the public's obsession with their own ancestry.
16:51
They need to map the genetics.
16:52
Speaker 2: Which pushes the investigation into twenty twenty.
16:55
Speaker 1: Right Yamapie County secures a SAKI grant a Sex Offender
16:58
kid Investigation grant through neighboring Maricopa County. This funding is
17:02
critical because advanced primate lab analysis is prohibitively expensive for
17:06
a smaller agency, so.
17:07
Speaker 2: They send the genetic extracts to Parabon Nanilapse, who are
17:10
absolute pioneers in the field.
17:12
Speaker 1: The first scientific pivot Parabon makes in April twenty twenty
17:16
is phenotyping.
17:17
Speaker 2: We need understand the mechanism of how this works. Human
17:21
DNA is about ninety nine point nine percent identical across
17:25
all individuals. It's the point one percent variation that makes
17:28
us unique. Parabond doesn't look for relatives here. They analyze
17:32
single nucleotide polymorphisms or SNPs within that point one percent.
17:37
These are tiny genetic variations that dictate physical traits.
17:40
Speaker 1: So by reading the specific alleles associated with melanin production
17:44
and bone structure, algorithms can basically predict physical appearance.
17:47
Speaker 2: Exactly, and Parabon returns a snapshot report predicting the suspect
17:50
had light skin, blue green eyes, and light brown to
17:54
blonde hair. They're essentially reading the blueprint to draw the architect.
17:58
Speaker 1: And the police release this phenotype composite to the public,
18:01
hoping it sparks a memory, hoping a local will call
18:04
in and say, hey, I remember a blonde, blue eyed
18:06
guy lingering around the trailheads back in eighty seven.
18:09
Speaker 2: But the limitation of phenotyping is that it predicts genetic predisposition,
18:14
not environmental reality. It can't account for age, weight, facial hair.
18:18
Speaker 1: Or scars, so the composite generates no actionable leads none.
18:23
Speaker 2: The investigation immediately pivots again just six days later, to
18:26
investigative genetic genealogy or IgG.
18:29
Speaker 1: And what Parabond does next requires immense mathematical patients. They
18:34
upload the killer's genetic profile into ged match.
18:37
Speaker 2: Which is an open source database where people voluntarily upload
18:40
their twenty three and these or ancestry DNA results to
18:42
find relatives.
18:43
Speaker 1: But they don't get a golden ticket right away. They
18:45
don't find a brother, or a first cousin, or even
18:48
a second cousin. The strongest match they get is a
18:51
deeply distant relative sharing only sixty one centi morgans of DNA.
18:55
Speaker 2: And to understand the complexity of a sixty one cent
18:57
a morgan match. You have to look at how genetic
19:00
inheritance works. A cent of morgan is a unit of
19:02
measurement for DNA recombination.
19:04
Speaker 1: Okay, walk us through the math.
19:06
Speaker 2: You share roughly three four hundred centi morgans with a parent,
19:10
because you only inherit half of your DNA from each parent.
19:14
The number of shared cent of organs cuts in half
19:17
with each generation you move backward. Right By the time
19:20
you get down to sixty one cent of morgans, you
19:22
are looking at a third cousin or a fourth cousin
19:25
once removed. You are looking for a common ancestor who
19:28
lived generations ago.
19:30
Speaker 1: It's like finding a single needle in a haystack, but
19:32
instead of sifting through the hay, you are tracking down
19:36
the farmer who planted the grass two hundred years ago.
19:38
Speaker 2: That is exactly it.
19:39
Speaker 1: You are tracing every single bale of hay he ever sold,
19:42
mapping every farm that bought it, and following the lineage
19:45
of every barn built on those farms until you pinpoint
19:48
the exact floorboard where the needle was dropped.
19:50
Speaker 2: And that is exactly the mechanism of descendancy research. The
19:54
genealogists at Paravon take that tiny genetic string and begin
19:58
the arduous process of building family trees backward.
20:01
Speaker 1: Which means sifting through census records, birth certificates, marriage licenses,
20:05
and obituaries.
20:06
Speaker 2: Yes, they construct a sprawling ancestral network backward in time
20:10
until they locate a convergence point, a couple with the
20:13
last name Bennett born the seventeen hundreds, living prior to
20:16
the American Revolution.
20:17
Speaker 1: The seventeen hundreds. That is insane, Yes.
20:20
Speaker 2: And once they identify that ancestral anchor, the hardest work begins.
20:24
They have to trace every single branch of that family
20:27
tree forward through time.
20:29
Speaker 1: They map hundreds of descendants across the eighteen hundreds and
20:32
nineteen hundreds.
20:33
Speaker 2: And along the way they find even smaller DNA matches
20:36
in the database down to seventeen set of morgans that
20:39
confirm they are navigating down the correct branches of the tree.
20:42
Speaker 1: So they are hunting for a very specific intersection of
20:45
biology and geography. They're looking for male descendants of this
20:49
seventeen hundreds Bennett family who were physically living in the
20:52
quad city area of Prescott, Arizona in nineteen eighty seven
20:56
and nineteen ninety and they find them. The descendency matrix
20:59
narrows the entire country down to two brothers, two teenagers
21:02
attending Prescott High School during the timeline of the attacks.
21:06
The investigative net finally closes, replacing an unknown profile with
21:10
a surname, but.
21:11
Speaker 2: Having two brothers creates a new investigative hurdle, which one
21:14
is the monster?
21:15
Speaker 1: Right When detectives pull the files on the Bennett brothers,
21:18
age becomes the first Stark differentiator. In nineteen eighty seven,
21:22
the younger brother was only fourteen years old Brian Bennett,
21:26
the older brother was sixteen or seventeen.
21:28
Speaker 2: And investigators note that while it has highly unusual for
21:31
a sixteen year old to commit a crime involving such
21:34
profound overkill, it is nearly impossible psychologically and physically for
21:40
a fourteen year old to execute that specific crime scene.
21:42
Speaker 1: Plus age isn't the only metric. A dive into the
21:46
local criminal archives reveals that Brian Bennett had a horrifying,
21:50
escalating track record of sexual violence in the area.
21:53
Speaker 2: And this is where we have to examine the agonizing
21:55
near misses of the justice system. It's so frustrating to
21:58
read Brian was named as the primary suspect and a
22:01
sexual assault in nearby Chino Valley. He attended a house party,
22:04
followed a young woman into a bedroom, and violently assaulted her.
22:07
Speaker 1: And the attack was so brazen that her friends actually
22:10
heard the struggle, burst through the bedroom door and physically
22:13
interrupted the assault, and.
22:14
Speaker 2: Brian Bennett escapes by diving headfirst out of the bedroom
22:18
window into the night.
22:19
Speaker 1: The police arrest him, he is formally charged and the
22:22
case proceeds to trial. You have a victim who bravely
22:25
takes the stand, looks at Brian Bennett and accurately identifies
22:29
him under oath as her attacker, but the.
22:31
Speaker 2: Defense relies on the chaotic environment of a dark, crowded
22:34
house party. During the trial, other witnesses take the stand
22:39
and mistakenly identify Brian's younger brother as the person they
22:42
saw fleeing through the window, which is just a mess.
22:46
Misidentification is one of the most persistent flaws in the
22:49
criminal justice system. Human memory is highly malleable, especially under
22:53
the influence of adrenaline and.
22:55
Speaker 1: Poor lighting, so the jury is presented with conflicting eyewitness
22:58
accounts regarding which other jumped out the window that creates
23:02
reasonable doubt.
23:03
Speaker 2: The jury acquits Brian Bennett, the system fails the victim,
23:06
and a predator is released back onto the streets in Prescott.
23:09
Speaker 1: A predator who now feels invincible because shortly after that
23:12
acquittal in June of nineteen ninety three, he escalates again.
23:16
We need to talk about Renaissant Deval.
23:17
Speaker 2: Her story is a masterclass in survival, courage, and tactical
23:21
brilliance under unimaginable terror.
23:23
Speaker 1: Renee's nightmare begins in the most mundane setting imaginable. She
23:27
goes to the local post office in Prescott to run
23:30
an errand Brian Bennett corners her, produces a knife and
23:33
physically forces her into his own vehicle.
23:36
Speaker 2: He kidnaps her in broad daylight and drives her to
23:38
a remote, isolated location.
23:41
Speaker 1: She recalled the sheer terror of sitting in that car,
23:44
Convinced she would never see her children again. He violently
23:47
rapes her, He steals her money, he strips off her
23:51
wedding ring.
23:51
Speaker 2: But during this prolonged assault, he begins to monologue. He
23:55
tells her he is the black sheep of his family,
23:58
and he explicitly tells her quote I hate women.
24:01
Speaker 1: And that phrase I Hate Women is the Rosetta stone
24:04
for understanding the nineteen eighty seven motor of Kathy's posito.
24:07
Speaker 2: It really is. It strips away the confusion of the
24:09
intact clothing and the multiple weapons. It wasn't a robbery.
24:13
It was the explosive physical manifestation of a deep seated
24:17
pathological misogyny. The overkill was the point.
24:20
Speaker 1: After the assault, Bennett realizes Renee has seen his face
24:23
and his vehicle. He tells her she is a liability.
24:26
He forces her back into the car and begins driving
24:29
back through town, heading down Gurley Street.
24:31
Speaker 2: He holds a knife on her and tells her that
24:33
if she makes a single sound, he will murder her.
24:37
The psychological control he thinks he has in that moment.
24:40
Speaker 1: Is absolute, but the unpredictability of the real world intervenes.
24:45
As they are driving down Gurley Street, a Prescott Police
24:47
Department cruiser initiates a routine traffic stop.
24:51
Speaker 2: The officer pulls Bennett's car over to the side of
24:53
the road, completely unaware of the hostage situation inside.
24:57
Speaker 1: The officer approaches the window and instruct Spentet to step
25:00
out of the vehicle, and the absolute millisecond his foot
25:04
hits the pavement while the officer is standing right there.
25:06
Speaker 2: Renee as it's incredible what she does.
25:08
Speaker 1: Next, despite being beaten, traumatized, and held at knife point
25:12
moments prior. She slides over the center console into the
25:15
driver's seat, throws the car in a gear, and floors
25:18
the accelerator.
25:19
Speaker 2: She steals her kidnapper's car right in front of the police.
25:23
She drives frantically to a nearby JB's restaurant parking lot,
25:26
bails out of the vehicle, collapses on the asphalt, and
25:29
immediately starts screaming to the responding officers exactly what has
25:33
just happened.
25:33
Speaker 1: She details the kidnapping, the rape, and the death threats.
25:37
She literally hands them the predator on the silver platter.
25:40
They have his car, they have him pulled over on
25:42
the side of the road.
25:43
Speaker 2: But this is where the investigative narrative takes a turn
25:46
that is almost physically painful to read. Brian Bennett is
25:50
taken into custody, and then he's released.
25:55
Speaker 1: The mechanism of that failure revolves entirely around the misuse
25:58
of polygraph technology. The police asked Renee, a woman who
26:02
had just survived a violent kidnapping and a desperate escape
26:05
to sit down and take a light detector test, and
26:08
the machine indicates deception.
26:09
Speaker 2: The police use that reading to discredit her entire testimony
26:13
and drop the charges.
26:14
Speaker 1: How does law enforcement prioritize a bouncing needle on a
26:17
graph over a victim who fled for her life in
26:19
a stolen car.
26:20
Speaker 2: It reveals a catastrophic misunderstanding of human physiology and trauma.
26:25
A polygraph does not detect lies. It detects autonomic.
26:29
Speaker 1: Arousal, meaning what exactly it.
26:31
Speaker 2: Measures sympathetic nervous system responses, your heart rate, your blood pressure,
26:35
your respiration via numograph tube, and your galvanic skin response,
26:38
which is how much you sweat the fight of flight
26:40
response exactly. The baseline theory of a polygraph assumes the
26:45
subject is calm and that lying will trigger spike in anxiety.
26:49
But if you have just been raped at knife point,
26:51
your sympathetic nervous system is entirely dysregulated.
26:55
Speaker 1: Your baseline is chaos.
26:56
Speaker 2: Yes, every single question the exam and her asks is
27:00
going to trigger massive physiological spikes because your body is
27:04
still fighting for his life.
27:06
Speaker 1: So subjecting a traumatized survivor to a machine that measures stress,
27:10
and interpreting that stress as deceit is a fundamental failure
27:14
of forensic science.
27:16
Speaker 2: They deemed her physiological trauma as unreliability, and they let
27:19
a monster walk out the front door of the police.
27:21
Speaker 1: Station, and Brian Bennett knew exactly how lucky he was.
27:25
During the kidnapping, he had rifled through her purse. He
27:28
looked at her driver's license, He memorized her details and
27:31
taunted her, saying, I know where you live.
27:33
Speaker 2: Because of that failed polygraph, Renee spent decades imprisoned by terror.
27:39
She was afraid to let her daughter play in the
27:40
front yard. She was paralyzed by the thought of running
27:43
into him at the grocery store.
27:44
Speaker 1: She became a relentless advocate for her own safety, constantly
27:47
going back to the police station, warning detectives that he
27:50
was a lethal threat and would strike again.
27:53
Speaker 2: She was acting as the community's alarm bell, desperately trying
27:56
to get someone to listen to the reality of what
27:58
this man was capable of.
28:00
Speaker 1: But when modern detectives finally used genetic genealogy to put
28:03
a name to the nineteen eighty seven in nineteen ninety
28:06
DNA profiles, they uncover a twist that rewrites Renee's decades
28:10
of fear. Brian Bennett wasn't going to strike again. He couldn't.
28:14
Speaker 2: In nineteen ninety four, barely a year after Renee Sandoval
28:17
overpowered him and escaped his vehicle, Brian Bennet committed suicide.
28:22
He died from a self inflicted gunshot. One.
28:24
Speaker 1: When the cold case detectives operating in twenty twenty read
28:27
that death certificate, they said it completely knocked the wind
28:30
out of them. They had spent years hunting this ghost.
28:33
They finally identify him, only to realize he has been
28:36
dead for nearly thirty years.
28:38
Speaker 2: From a public relations standpoint, announcing a dead suspect might
28:41
satisfy the community, but legally and scientifically, the burden of
28:45
proof doesn't disappear just because the suspect is in the ground.
28:49
Speaker 1: Right. You cannot officially close a capital murder file based
28:53
on a GEB match algorithm and a descendency chart.
28:57
Speaker 2: You have to prove definitively and biologically that Brian Bennett's
29:02
DNA matches the crime scenes. You have to navigate the
29:05
extreme legal logistics of proving a dead man's guilt.
29:08
Speaker 1: So they start by seeking biological anchors within his immediate family.
29:12
They locate Brian's a strange.
29:14
Speaker 2: Daughter, and the psychology of that interview is incredibly delicate.
29:18
Detectives have to approach a woman who likely has deeply
29:21
complicated feelings about her deceased father and inform her that
29:24
law enforcement believes he was a serial predator and a murderer.
29:28
Speaker 1: They have to ask her for a buckle swab or
29:30
a cheek swab to help prove it. She is understandably
29:33
hesitant at first processing the shock, but she ultimately cooperates
29:36
and provides her DNA.
29:37
Speaker 2: But a daughter's DNA only provides a familial link. The
29:41
genealogy pointing to a genetic network that included both Brian
29:44
and his younger brother.
29:45
Speaker 1: Right to be scientifically bulletproof, investigators know they have to
29:48
explicitly rule out the younger brother. They have to prove
29:51
his DNA is not the profile found on the murder weapons.
29:54
Speaker 2: The logistics of obtaining that exclusion are intense. The younger
29:58
brother no longer lived in Arizona. He is working on
30:01
a remote, isolated job site in rural Kentucky.
30:05
Speaker 1: But Yavapai County isn't taking any chances. A sergeant and
30:08
a deputy board a flight, coordinate with Kentucky State Police,
30:12
and drive out to this remote area to set up
30:14
a tactical ambush.
30:15
Speaker 2: They wait out there for a day and a half
30:17
for this guy to return to his work seite. When
30:19
his vehicle finally pulls up, law enforcement swarms him.
30:23
Speaker 1: They approach him and state plainly, we are from Yafa
30:25
Paie County, Arizona, and we are here to collect your DNA.
30:29
Speaker 2: His reaction is visceral. He vehemently refuses, deploying every curse
30:34
word imaginable. He has zero intention of cooperating.
30:38
Speaker 1: But the detectives are holding a court authorized search warrant
30:40
signed by a Kentucky judge. They inform him that his
30:43
consent is largely irrelevant.
30:45
Speaker 2: At this point, They tell him he could provide a
30:47
swab willingly in the side of the road, or they
30:49
will transport him to the county jail, strap him into
30:52
a restraint chair, and extract the sample by force.
30:55
Speaker 1: Faced with the reality of the warrant, he submits. The
30:58
sample is sent to the lab, and the results are definitive.
31:02
The younger brother's DNA is unequivocally excluded. He is not
31:06
a match to the nineteen eighty seven or nineteen ninety
31:08
crime scenes.
31:09
Speaker 2: The exclusion of the brother is the final circumstantial puzzle piece.
31:13
It leaves Brian Bennett alone in the center of the
31:16
genetic crosshairs.
31:17
Speaker 1: But circumstantial exclusion isn't enough for the crime lab to
31:21
officially designate Brian Bennett as the killer. They need his
31:24
actual biological material.
31:26
Speaker 2: Which requires the most macabre and technically difficult phase of
31:29
this thirty six year investigation. They have to petition a
31:32
judge for an exhumation order.
31:34
Speaker 1: Digging up a grave is not a decision the court's
31:36
take lightly. It requires an overwhelming preponderance of evidence.
31:40
Speaker 2: But based on the daughter's DNA, the brother's exclusion, the
31:43
nineteen ninety survivor profile, and the genealogical mapping, the judge
31:47
grants the warrant. They serve the paperwork on the cemetery.
31:51
Heavy excavation machinery is brought in to uncover his casket.
31:54
Speaker 1: They construct a secure forensic tent directly over the grave
31:57
site to shield the process. When they open the casket,
32:00
they discovered that thirty years in the Arizona soil has
32:03
taken its toll.
32:04
Speaker 2: The remains are heavily mummified, the soft tissue is gone.
32:08
They are dealing almost entirely with skeletal structures.
32:12
Speaker 1: Forensic anthropologists step in to perform the extraction. Retrieving DNA
32:16
from decades old skeletal remains is a race against environmental degradation.
32:21
Speaker 2: DNA agreedes quickly when exposed to moisture and bacteria, but
32:25
bone matrix, specifically, the osteocytes locked inside the dense calcium
32:29
phosphate acts as a protective bolt.
32:31
Speaker 1: So the anthropologist carefully selects specific pieces of bone and
32:35
several teeth, as the pulp inside teeth is often the
32:38
most well preserved source of historical DNA, And.
32:41
Speaker 2: While they are sifting through these skeletal remains inside the casket,
32:44
they find a detail that feels like a heavy dose
32:46
of poetic justice.
32:47
Speaker 1: Rolling around inside the skull cavity is the actual point
32:50
two to two caliber bullet Ryan Bennett used to end
32:53
his own life in nineteen ninety four.
32:55
Speaker 2: The extraction of those bones leads to the final rigorous
32:58
scientific hurdle. When you process historical degraded bone DNA, the
33:03
risk of exogenous contamination, meaning DNA from the soil The
33:07
anthropologists or the original mortician is extremely high.
33:11
Speaker 1: You cannot risk a false positive on a case of
33:13
this magnitude.
33:15
Speaker 2: To ensure absolute, unimpeachable scientific validity, they divide the bone
33:19
and tooth fragments. They send them to two completely independent,
33:22
highly specialized laboratories, the Arizona Department of Public Safety Crime
33:26
Lab and the Forensic DNA Lab at Marshall University.
33:29
Speaker 1: Both labs have to undergo the painstaking process of decalcifying
33:33
the bone matrix, extracting whatever fragmented DNA remains, running PCR
33:37
amplification to copy those tiny fragments into a readable profile,
33:41
and comparing it against the thumb butte evidence.
33:43
Speaker 2: Both labs operate blindly from one another. Both labs have
33:46
to reach the exact same conclusion independently.
33:49
Speaker 1: And in March twenty twenty three, the scientific consensus is delivered.
33:52
The DNA extracted from Brian Bennett's exhumed bones is a
33:55
definitive direct match to the unknown male profile pulled from
33:59
the Night teen ninety sexual assault survivor's rape kit.
34:02
Speaker 2: Furthermore, he is confirmed as the major contributor to the
34:05
DNA found on the mouth swab and the murder weapons
34:08
used to bludgeon Kathy's posito in nineteen eighty seven.
34:12
Speaker 1: The structural integrity of the science is absolute. The case
34:15
is closed.
34:15
Speaker 2: After thirty six years of investigative dead ends, false suspects,
34:19
and technological leaps, the evidence finally caught up to the
34:23
reality of the crime.
34:24
Speaker 1: The emotional fallout of that final notification is staggering. The
34:28
detectives make the phone calls for Kathy Spisito's family in Brooklyn.
34:32
They spent nearly four decades carrying the agonizing belief that
34:36
the man who slaughtered their daughter might have been a
34:38
close friend, someone she trusted, someone in her inner circle.
34:42
Speaker 2: The revelation that it was a random, volatile predator operating
34:45
in the woods offers a grim but necessary clarity.
34:49
Speaker 1: And the call to Renee Sandoval rewrites the entire narrative
34:53
of her trauma. For thirty years, she lived with the
34:55
burden of believing she was his primary victim. She had
34:58
no idea she had been kidnapp by an active murderer.
35:01
Speaker 2: She survived an encounter with a man who had already
35:03
proven his willingness to slaughter a young woman in broad daylight.
35:06
Speaker 1: When the detectives informed her of the nineteen eighty seven murder.
35:10
She expressed profound heartbreak for Kathy, a woman who had
35:13
her entire life stolen. But simultaneously, the revelation validated every
35:18
single warning she had screamed at the police department back
35:21
in nineteen ninety three.
35:22
Speaker 2: She knew exactly what he was. She told the detectives,
35:25
I just can't let this experience, this monster, keep me
35:28
from enjoying life.
35:30
Speaker 1: It is an incredible testament to the resilience of a survivor,
35:33
refusing to let the trauma define her existence.
35:36
Speaker 2: The resolution of this case stands as a monument to
35:38
the relentless advancement of forensic genetic genealogy. It is fundamentally
35:43
altering the landscape of criminal justice.
35:46
Speaker 1: Predators who committed atrocities in the seventies and eighties, who
35:48
have slept soundly for decades, believing they beat the statute
35:51
of limitations on their anonymity, are suddenly waking up to
35:54
the reality that their own distant cousins have unknowingly handed
35:58
them over to the police.
35:59
Speaker 2: The true unsung heroes of this specific resolution aren't just
36:03
the modern geneticists. It's the nineteen eighty seven first responders,
36:07
the original medical examiner, the deputies, who locked down the trail.
36:11
Speaker 1: Without a doubt. In nineteen eighty seven, the concept of
36:14
extracting a ystr genetic profile from a cellular swab of
36:18
a broken tooth was the equivalent of science fiction. But
36:21
they meticulously swabbed the bite marks, They preserved the heavy
36:25
metal wrench, They cataloged the blood evidence.
36:28
Speaker 2: They executed their duties with the profound trust that the
36:31
future of forensic science would eventually provide the answers they
36:34
so desperately lacked in their present. Without that boots on
36:38
the ground foresight, parabon nanolabs has nothing to sequence. The
36:42
genealogy tree has no root.
36:44
Speaker 1: It is a remarkable chain of custody spanning generations. But
36:47
before we conclude this deep dive, I want to pose
36:49
a final thought regarding the psychology of Brian Bennett's end,
36:53
a detail that builds on the timeline of his violent
36:55
escalation and his sudden death.
36:57
Speaker 2: Let's follow that tread.
36:58
Speaker 1: The investigative consensus noted throughout the source material is that
37:01
Brian Bennett took the easy way out in nineteen ninety
37:04
four by putting a point two to two caliber bullet
37:07
in his head. He avoided a trial. He avoided looking
37:10
Kathy Sposito's mother in the eye. He avoided facing Renee
37:13
Santoval in a courtroom.
37:15
Speaker 2: It is universally viewed as the final act of a
37:17
coward running from accountability.
37:19
Speaker 1: He undeniably escaped the judicial consequences of his actions, but
37:23
examine the timeline of his control. He murders Kathy in
37:27
nineteen eighty seven. He assaults a woman in nineteen ninety
37:30
He assaults a woman in Chino Valley and beats the charges.
37:33
Speaker 2: By June of nineteen ninety three, his ego is massive.
37:37
Speaker 1: He kidnaps Renee at knife point. He dictates that he
37:40
hates women. He feels like a god in that vehicle.
37:43
He has absolute, terrifying dominance over her life. But then
37:48
the traffic stop happens, and what does Renee do?
37:51
Speaker 2: She exploits his momentary distraction. She slides into the driver's seat,
37:54
steals his vehicle, and leaves him stranded on the side
37:57
of the road with the police.
37:58
Speaker 1: She completely dismantles dominance. A woman the very demographic he
38:02
pathologically hates and seeks to destroy, outsmarts him, overpowers him,
38:07
and exposes his pathetic reality to the authorities.
38:10
Speaker 2: Even though the polygraph failure allowed him to walk free temporarily,
38:14
the psychological damage was done.
38:15
Speaker 1: He killed himself shortly after that incident. Was his suicide
38:18
actually driven by the fear of prison or was it
38:21
triggered by the devastating psychological realization that his mask of
38:24
invincibility was permanently shattered.
38:26
Speaker 2: The collapse of a predator's narcissism, it shifts the perspective entirely.
38:31
His death isn't just an evasion of justice. It is
38:35
the direct result of a fatal psychological blow dealt by
38:38
a survivor who refused to be a victim. Renee Sandoval's
38:41
will to live overpowered his will to destroy.
38:44
Speaker 1: It's a profound reminder that while science eventually closed the file,
38:48
it was the courage of a survivor that ultimately ended
38:50
the threat. Thank you for joining us on this deep
38:53
dive into the shadows of thumb. Butte keeps seeking the
38:56
truth behind the headlines, and we will see you next time.