Latest / Hell and Gone: Murder Line / Hell and Gone Murder Line: Nina Ingram Part 3

Transcript

Hell and Gone Murder Line: Nina Ingram Part 3 · Hell and Gone: Murder Line

0:46
Speaker 1: School of Humans.
0:49
Speaker 2: Helen Got Murder Line actively investigates cold case murders in
0:53
Speaker 2: an effort to raise public awareness invite witnesses to come
0:56
Speaker 2: forward and present evidence that could potentially be further investigated
1:00
Speaker 2: by law enforcement. While we value insights from family and
1:03
Speaker 2: community members, their statements should not be considered evidence and
1:07
Speaker 2: point to the challenges of verifying facts inherent in cold cases.
1:12
Speaker 2: We remind listeners that everyone has presumed innocent until proven
1:15
Speaker 2: guilty in a court of law. Nothing in the podcast
1:19
Speaker 2: is intended to state or imply that anyone who has
1:22
Speaker 2: not been convicted of a crime is guilty of any wrongdoing.
1:26
Speaker 2: Thanks for listening.
1:30
Speaker 3: Sometime after ten pm on April twenty first, two thousand
1:34
Speaker 3: and six, twenty one year old college student Nina Ingram
1:37
Speaker 3: was brutally murdered inside her apartment, Unit number one at
1:42
Speaker 3: the Law Quad Complex in Fayettvile, Arkansas. The cause of
1:46
Speaker 3: death was ligature strangulation, and the Arkansas State Crime Lab
1:51
Speaker 3: ruled the death a homicide. Despite the fact that detectives
1:55
Speaker 3: interviewed dozens of Nina's friends, co workers, and her significant other,
1:59
Speaker 3: they had no viable suspects for years. One big question
2:04
Speaker 3: was how did Nina's killer get access to her apartment.
2:09
Speaker 1: One of the theories that police.
2:10
Speaker 3: Had early on was that Nina's killer rushed her at
2:14
Speaker 3: her apartment door and pushed her inside when she put
2:17
Speaker 3: her key into the door, which could explain why none
2:20
Speaker 3: of the neighbors who police spoke to reported hearing screams
2:23
Speaker 3: on the night of April twenty first. But Nina's door
2:27
Speaker 3: was locked from the inside, her keys, purse, and all
2:31
Speaker 3: of her belongings, including her cell phone, were with her,
2:34
Speaker 3: and there was no sign of forced entry. She was
2:37
Speaker 3: violently strangled, which must have taken several minutes, and yet
2:41
Speaker 3: there was no sign of anything taken from.
2:43
Speaker 1: Her residence or of sexual assault.
2:47
Speaker 3: So if Nina's killer did force their way in, that
2:50
Speaker 3: would mean that they either locked the door behind them
2:53
Speaker 3: or locked the door from the inside and then went
2:56
Speaker 3: out another way, probably through the unlocked front window. But
3:01
Speaker 3: if they did that, that would mean that they carefully
3:04
Speaker 3: replaced the screen and pulled the window down to the
3:07
Speaker 3: exact same spot where it was opened before. The Fayetteville
3:12
Speaker 3: Police Department considered this a cold case, one of the
3:15
Speaker 3: only unsolved cases since the nineteen seventies, but then in
3:20
Speaker 3: twenty twelve, they arrested and charged twenty six year old
3:24
Speaker 3: Rico Tavarius Cone with Nina's murder, but the case against
3:28
Speaker 3: Rico Cone was not as solid as it appeared to
3:30
Speaker 3: be on the surface. He spent over three years behind bars,
3:34
Speaker 3: and then the case against him was dismissed.
3:38
Speaker 1: Three years later.
3:39
Speaker 3: In twenty eighteen, Rico filed a civil lawsuit against the
3:42
Speaker 3: Fayetteville Police Department, detectives, and employees at the Arkansas State
3:47
Speaker 3: Crime Lab, who he alleged violated his civil rights. The
3:51
Speaker 3: allegations made in Rico Cohne's lawsuit are obviously only one
3:55
Speaker 3: side of this story, but it is a completely different
3:59
Speaker 3: story than the one that has been put out, at
4:02
Speaker 3: least so far, by the fate of a police department.
4:05
Speaker 3: The lawsuit claims that there were several people of interests
4:09
Speaker 3: who police interviewed over the years, people who were, according
4:13
Speaker 3: to the lawsuit, potential suspects. The lawsuit alleges that these
4:17
Speaker 3: potential suspects were overlooked. This case is still unsolved. The
4:23
Speaker 3: person who murdered Nina Ingram has never been arrested or charged,
4:28
Speaker 3: so this person is still out there and we have
4:31
Speaker 3: access to part of this case file through a Foyer request.
4:35
Speaker 3: Could the clues to the killer's identity be in this
4:39
Speaker 3: case file?
4:41
Speaker 1: I'm Catherine Townsend.
4:42
Speaker 3: Over the past five years of making my true crime podcast,
4:45
Speaker 3: Helen Gone, I've learned that there's no such thing as
4:48
Speaker 3: a small town where.
4:49
Speaker 1: Murder never happens.
4:51
Speaker 3: I have received hundreds of messages from people all around
4:54
Speaker 3: the country asking for help with an unsolved murder that's
4:56
Speaker 3: affected them, their families, and their communities. If you have
5:00
Speaker 3: a case you'd like me and my team to look into,
5:03
Speaker 3: you can reach out to us at our Helen Gone
5:05
Speaker 3: Murder Line at six seven eight seven four four six
5:08
Speaker 3: one four or five. That's six seven eight seven four
5:11
Speaker 3: four six one four or five, or you can send
5:15
Speaker 3: us a message on Instagram at Helen Gonepod. This is
5:19
Speaker 3: Helen Gone Murder Line. Rico's lawsuit, and again this claim
6:06
Speaker 3: is just one side of the story, alleged that multiple
6:09
Speaker 3: and credible direct reports and evidence had been submitted to
6:12
Speaker 3: the Fayetful Police Department and other law enforcement agencies over
6:16
Speaker 3: the years, but the lawsuit alleges that detectives ignored this evidence. Instead,
6:22
Speaker 3: they laser focused on Rico and quote missed multiple opportunities
6:26
Speaker 3: to investigate and perhaps actually solve this unsolved crime end quote,
6:31
Speaker 3: So they were chasing what the lawsuit called a wrongful
6:35
Speaker 3: and unconstitutional conviction against Rico. The lawsuit alleges that the
6:40
Speaker 3: arrest warrant was obtained under fraudulent pretenses because the police
6:44
Speaker 3: claimed they had three independent witnesses, but in fact, the
6:48
Speaker 3: lawsuit pointed out all they had was a single person,
6:51
Speaker 3: Randy Applewhite, because the second person Brenda case was a
6:55
Speaker 3: friend of Randy's and she was repeating what Randy told her. Now,
6:59
Speaker 3: the arrest warrant claimed that there was a third person,
7:01
Speaker 3: an ex girlfriend of Rigo's named Kathleen Slaughter. The warrant
7:05
Speaker 3: stated that Kathleen had shared intimate details about Nina's homicide
7:10
Speaker 3: with detectives, but the lawsuit said.
7:13
Speaker 1: That information was incorrect.
7:15
Speaker 3: The lawsuit says that this third person was quote never
7:19
Speaker 3: specifically or sufficiently identified, and never existed at all, conclusory,
7:24
Speaker 3: at best, fabricated at worse end quote. These are serious allegations. Basically,
7:32
Speaker 3: the lawsuit claimed that the police attempted to get an
7:37
Speaker 3: arrest warrant, but the prosecuting attorney would not grant that
7:41
Speaker 3: warrant because the evidence was insufficient. So the lawsuit stated
7:46
Speaker 3: that after that police went back to the prosecuting attorney
7:49
Speaker 3: with essentially exactly the same evidence, but now there were
7:53
Speaker 3: three people instead of just one, and this time the
7:56
Speaker 3: warrant was granted. Rico's attorney, Tony Pirani, claimed that on Wednesday,
8:02
Speaker 3: January TEWOD twenty fourteen, he and the rest of the
8:06
Speaker 3: defense team met with Detective Carlton, the lead detective on
8:09
Speaker 3: this case, Detective Brooks, and the prosecuting attorney and his
8:13
Speaker 3: chief deputy at the Fayeteville Police Department. They were there
8:16
Speaker 3: to review the physical evidence still in the police department's possession.
8:21
Speaker 3: Their purpose there was to figure out the current status
8:24
Speaker 3: of all DNA testing, to figure out what had been tested,
8:28
Speaker 3: what the results were, and what the communication was between
8:32
Speaker 3: the Fayetful Police Department and the Arkansas State Crime Lab
8:35
Speaker 3: regarding this case. Two days later, Rico's attorneys had another
8:39
Speaker 3: meeting with personnel at the Arkansas State Crime Lab. Now,
8:43
Speaker 3: the lawsuit states that during this meeting they realized there
8:46
Speaker 3: were irregularities in the testing and procedures in this case.
8:51
Speaker 3: They said some pieces of evidence in Nina's case had
8:54
Speaker 3: not been properly labeled or tested, and that safeguards had
8:58
Speaker 3: been failed in regards to DNA tape lifts that were
9:02
Speaker 3: done from Nina's clothing. On April twenty six, twenty twelve,
9:06
Speaker 3: Officer Carlton called Brenda Case later labeled Confidential Informant IE
9:11
Speaker 3: in the search warrant documents, She told defendant Carlton that
9:15
Speaker 3: her friend Randy Applewhite had a detailed account of the
9:18
Speaker 3: Nina Ingram homicide allegedly from Rico Cone.
9:22
Speaker 1: Now.
9:22
Speaker 3: Rico Cone allegedly told Randy that he was at the
9:26
Speaker 3: Law Couad apartments to buy marijuana, that he saw Nina
9:29
Speaker 3: in the parking lot, and that he hit on her,
9:31
Speaker 3: and that Nina turned him down. Brenda Kay said that
9:35
Speaker 3: Randy told her Rico came back later and went to
9:38
Speaker 3: Nina's apartment, using the excuse that he needed to borrow something.
9:42
Speaker 3: He knocked on the door, Nina opened the door and
9:45
Speaker 3: then tried to shut it, but it failed to close
9:47
Speaker 3: all the way, and at that point Rico entered Nina's
9:49
Speaker 3: apartment and strangled her to death. So Randy Applewhite became
9:54
Speaker 3: Confidential Informant number two. But Rico's lawsuit claims that Randy's
9:59
Speaker 3: story did change over time, and that the second time
10:03
Speaker 3: that Detective Carlton spoke to Randy, on May first, twenty twelve, quote,
10:08
Speaker 3: she had already significantly changed her own reported timeline, substantially
10:12
Speaker 3: altering her earlier story, which should have given an early
10:16
Speaker 3: clue that something was amiss end quote. The lawsuit also
10:20
Speaker 3: alleges that Detective Carlton helped Randy apple White financially, that
10:26
Speaker 3: he encouraged her to contact crime stoppers so she could
10:28
Speaker 3: collect the cash reward if she continued to cooperate, which
10:31
Speaker 3: she did, and the lawsuit claimed that Detective Carlton, in
10:35
Speaker 3: what they called a highly unusual move, destroyed his own
10:39
Speaker 3: investigative field notes. Rico's defense attorneys were preparing for his trial,
10:44
Speaker 3: so they contacted Randy apple White, and on December seventeenth,
10:48
Speaker 3: twenty thirteen, according to the lawsuit, when Rico's legal team
10:52
Speaker 3: spoke to Randy, she told them she did not believe
10:55
Speaker 3: that Rico was guilty of the murder. The civil lawsuit
10:59
Speaker 3: also claimed that Randy said she was quote no longer
11:02
Speaker 3: certain exactly what, if anything, she recalled Rico, ever having
11:07
Speaker 3: said regarding any alleged involvement in the Ingram homicide, and
11:11
Speaker 3: that she wanted no part in a criminal prosecution which
11:14
Speaker 3: could potentially see Rico convicted of capital murder and sentenced
11:18
Speaker 3: to death end quote. The lawsuit alleges that on several
11:24
Speaker 3: occasions that Detective Carlton gave Randy apple White money, including
11:29
Speaker 3: thirty five dollars in gas money on May third, twenty twelve,
11:32
Speaker 3: and also a hotel room that he booked for her
11:35
Speaker 3: and her children for two nights at the Clarion Inn
11:37
Speaker 3: for one hundred and twenty four dollars and fifty eight cents. Now,
11:40
Speaker 3: this apparently happened after Detective Carlton got a call from
11:44
Speaker 3: Randy apple White alleging that Rico had assaulted her. After
11:48
Speaker 3: that incident, they did DNA testing on Randy's shirt and
11:52
Speaker 3: they found no match to Rico Cone. During this time,
11:56
Speaker 3: detectives were doing a deep dive into Rico Cone's history
12:00
Speaker 3: and his employment record. They were conducting follow up calls
12:04
Speaker 3: and visits with current and former residents of the Law
12:07
Speaker 3: Quad apartments.
12:09
Speaker 1: While this was going on.
12:11
Speaker 3: On May fourteenth, twenty twelve, Rico Cone got wind of
12:15
Speaker 3: the police investigation against him, and that's when, according to
12:19
Speaker 3: his attorney, He decided to voluntarily talk to police because,
12:23
Speaker 3: according to the civil lawsuit, Rico wanted to be cleared.
12:27
Speaker 3: At this interview, police gave Rico a doctor pepper to
12:30
Speaker 3: drink after he said he was thirsty. Then Detective Carlton
12:34
Speaker 3: told Rico that they had taken a DNA sample from
12:37
Speaker 3: that doctor Pepper camp and that they had matched the
12:41
Speaker 3: DNA on it to a DNA sample taken from the
12:43
Speaker 3: crime scene, meaning the detective told Rico that Rico had
12:48
Speaker 3: been inside Nina Ingram's apartment. This, however, was not true.
12:53
Speaker 3: I want to point out by the way that we
12:54
Speaker 3: can't know the inner workings of Detective Carlton's mind at
12:58
Speaker 3: this point, but it is not illegal for detectives to
13:01
Speaker 3: light to suspects. Often it's encouraged. I've actually taken the
13:06
Speaker 3: read Interrogation seminar as part of my private investigator training.
13:09
Speaker 3: That's the same one the police take, and in that
13:12
Speaker 3: seminar they actually teach you how to lie. But Rico
13:15
Speaker 3: Cone's civil lawsuit alleges that the police didn't stop there.
13:20
Speaker 3: The lawsuit alleges that not only was the case against
13:23
Speaker 3: Rico Cone weaked to nonexistent, but that the judge who
13:26
Speaker 3: issued the search warrant, and the public were actually being misled.
13:30
Speaker 3: They were being told that Rico Cone was the only
13:34
Speaker 3: Bible suspect, But in fact, as we got into last week,
13:37
Speaker 3: Rico Cone was not the only man questioned, and there's
13:41
Speaker 3: nothing about Rico Cone in the case by up to
13:44
Speaker 3: the year two thousand and eight, at least nothing that's
13:47
Speaker 3: been publicly released via FOI request. I could not find
13:51
Speaker 3: any mention of Rigo Cone in the pieces of the
13:54
Speaker 3: case file that we were given, though again we can't
13:57
Speaker 3: be sure that we have every document because much later
14:01
Speaker 3: after the case against Rigo Cone was dismissed, Rico Cone's
14:05
Speaker 3: entire criminal case was sealed by a judge. There is
14:09
Speaker 3: no mention of Rico Cone's name in connection with the
14:12
Speaker 3: Nina Ingram case anywhere in the Arkansas court system. After that,
14:17
Speaker 3: Nina's case went cold again. And while of course we
14:20
Speaker 3: can't know for sure what was happening behind the scenes
14:23
Speaker 3: of the investigation, publicly, the statements made by police appeared
14:27
Speaker 3: to indicate they believed they did have the right person,
14:31
Speaker 3: but they did not have enough evidence to prosecute Rigo Cone.
14:35
Speaker 3: They had one year to refile charges, but they never did,
14:39
Speaker 3: which means Nina's killer was.
14:41
Speaker 1: Still out there.
14:53
Speaker 3: One of the things that police were trying to figure
14:55
Speaker 3: out early on was was this a random attack or
14:59
Speaker 3: someone whom Nina knew, because even though everyone they talked
15:02
Speaker 3: to said Nina was this super nice person and they
15:05
Speaker 3: couldn't imagine anyone would want to hurt her, the fact
15:08
Speaker 3: is someone did brutally strangle her, and her cell phone
15:12
Speaker 3: was in her pocket, She had no defensive wounds on
15:15
Speaker 3: her hands, and she was not sexually assaulted. Also, her
15:19
Speaker 3: purse was found near her body with money inside it,
15:22
Speaker 3: and nothing obvious was taken from her apartment, so, at
15:26
Speaker 3: least on the surface, the motive did not appear to
15:28
Speaker 3: be robbery or sexual assault. And I keep coming back
15:32
Speaker 3: to the locked door because I believe it could.
15:35
Speaker 1: Be a crucial clue.
15:36
Speaker 3: When Nina's brother, Noah and his roommate Chad got to
15:40
Speaker 3: her apartment the day her body was found, the door
15:43
Speaker 3: was double locked. Her brother had to crawl in through
15:45
Speaker 3: an open window next to the door, then he unlocked
15:48
Speaker 3: the regular.
15:49
Speaker 1: Lock and the dead bowl.
15:51
Speaker 3: So if the killer left through the door, how did
15:54
Speaker 3: they lock it behind themselves?
15:58
Speaker 1: Police asked several people about.
16:00
Speaker 3: Nina's keys, including Nina's boyfriend, Josh Stewart.
16:04
Speaker 1: We talked to Josh.
16:05
Speaker 3: He said that he met Nina in March of two
16:07
Speaker 3: thousand and five when they started working at the same Walmart.
16:11
Speaker 3: They started dating later that summer.
16:14
Speaker 4: There's a new store that's being open and Rogers Arkansas.
16:17
Speaker 4: We were helping you get that store set up and
16:20
Speaker 4: so met her at that time, but we didn't start
16:24
Speaker 4: dating more over the summer. By midsummer May of late summer,
16:28
Speaker 4: say I was bye. We started dating, So we didn't
16:30
Speaker 4: date for very long. At the most seven eight months
16:34
Speaker 4: we were seeing each other exclusively. You know, we have
16:37
Speaker 4: started talking about getting the place together because we spend
16:39
Speaker 4: our time together. Anyway, She spent a lot of time
16:42
Speaker 4: at my apartment changedly move along grade.
16:46
Speaker 3: Josh said that he did not have a key to
16:48
Speaker 3: her apartment, and even though she had a key to
16:50
Speaker 3: his place, and even though they regularly switch vehicles, He
16:53
Speaker 3: said they did this because he had to commute for work.
16:57
Speaker 3: He worried that his older truck wouldn't make it all
16:59
Speaker 3: the way to Bentonville, so on the days he had
17:01
Speaker 3: to make that drive, Nina would lend him her two
17:04
Speaker 3: thousand and two Toyota Corolla.
17:06
Speaker 1: Josh told detectives he.
17:08
Speaker 3: Had not actually been inside Nina's apartment for a couple
17:11
Speaker 3: of months. Their routine was she would get off work,
17:14
Speaker 3: usually shower, and then come to his place to hang out.
17:17
Speaker 3: Sometimes they would go out when she came to his place.
17:21
Speaker 3: Sometimes she would stay over there. Sometimes she would go
17:23
Speaker 3: back home, but he pretty much never stayed at her place.
17:28
Speaker 3: He also told detectives that Nina often felt he would
17:31
Speaker 3: get angry with her if she didn't stay over. In
17:35
Speaker 3: two thousand and six, Josh told detectives that his relationship
17:38
Speaker 3: with Nina had been going great. He said Nina planned
17:41
Speaker 3: to move in with him when her lease was up.
17:43
Speaker 3: He said she was easy going and they got along
17:46
Speaker 3: super well, that they came from similar hard working family backgrounds,
17:49
Speaker 3: and that they had shared values. They were both working
17:52
Speaker 3: their way through college. He said, I was going to
17:55
Speaker 3: marry that girl. He cried as he told detectives quote,
17:59
Speaker 3: it's the best relationship that I've ever had. Police asked
18:04
Speaker 3: about the keys several times. Josh clarified that his truck
18:08
Speaker 3: keys were on a removable ring, so when they swapped vehicles.
18:12
Speaker 3: He said he would take the truck keys on their
18:13
Speaker 3: little silver ring and give them to Nina and vice versa,
18:16
Speaker 3: so that allowed them to swap vehicle keys without swapping
18:20
Speaker 3: the entire key ring. Police also asked Josh if Nina
18:24
Speaker 3: had noticed anything at work or at home if there
18:27
Speaker 3: was anyone who would want to hurt her. Josh said
18:30
Speaker 3: not at work, but he said Nina had told him
18:33
Speaker 3: about some guys at her apartment complex who were cat
18:36
Speaker 3: calling her. He told detectives this happened five days before
18:40
Speaker 3: Nina's murder on Easter Sunday, April sixteenth, two thousand and six.
18:44
Speaker 3: While Josh said he hadn't been inside Nina's apartment in months,
18:47
Speaker 3: he said he had waited for Nina in the parking
18:49
Speaker 3: lot of her complex on Easter Sunday, April sixteenth, two
18:53
Speaker 3: thousand and six. He said on that day, both he
18:56
Speaker 3: and Nina had the day off. He said they hung
18:58
Speaker 3: out together and went to Walmart to buy some stuff.
19:01
Speaker 3: After that, they swung by her apartment complex so she
19:04
Speaker 3: could run inside and change before they went out to eat.
19:07
Speaker 3: Josh said that while he was waiting for Nina in
19:09
Speaker 3: the law Quad parking lot, he noticed two or three
19:12
Speaker 3: young men, who he had described a police as young
19:15
Speaker 3: male kids aged fourteen to fifteen years old, and at
19:18
Speaker 3: least one of them driving a truck. He said that
19:22
Speaker 3: Nina had told him on that day that one of
19:24
Speaker 3: these guys had been cat calling her and called her
19:27
Speaker 3: a bitch, and that he had considered confronting them but didn't.
19:31
Speaker 4: She guys just said something to me, and I'm like, well,
19:33
Speaker 4: whe they say, she's whether he was hollering at me
19:35
Speaker 4: and trying to get come talk to them, and I
19:38
Speaker 4: just ignored them. And she's kind of shaken up by
19:40
Speaker 4: that enough to mention it to me, and I, well,
19:44
Speaker 4: do we need the same thing? And she was like, well,
19:46
Speaker 4: now they drove off, so it was from like a vehicle.
19:50
Speaker 4: She just kind of shook it off, and you know,
19:53
Speaker 4: I don't know, it's not that big deal. Let's just
19:54
Speaker 4: move on. That's the only time that I recall her
19:58
Speaker 4: being uncomfortable about anybody in the complex.
20:01
Speaker 3: Later, Rico's defense team talked to Josh as well. He
20:05
Speaker 3: told them that the mental image he had in his
20:07
Speaker 3: head from that day was that it could have been
20:09
Speaker 3: a couple of white guys and that they were definitely
20:11
Speaker 3: younger than him.
20:12
Speaker 1: And Nina.
20:14
Speaker 3: Another former law squad resident named Catherine Austin, who lived
20:17
Speaker 3: in apartment number eighty two, told police on April seventeenth,
20:21
Speaker 3: two thousand and seven, that around the time of the murder,
20:23
Speaker 3: there were four men. She described them as clean cut,
20:26
Speaker 3: white males hanging around in that parking lot in a
20:29
Speaker 3: white four door pickup truck. Catherine said two of these
20:33
Speaker 3: guys came up to her apartment door and asked her
20:35
Speaker 3: what her name was. She said that this made her
20:38
Speaker 3: very uncomfortable because they invaded her personal space.
20:42
Speaker 1: Again.
20:43
Speaker 3: According to the lawsuit, there were several potential people of
20:46
Speaker 3: interests who the suit claimed should have been thoroughly investigated.
20:49
Speaker 3: The lawsuit alleges that the lead detective, Scott Carlton, when
20:52
Speaker 3: he took over the investigation, very quickly became totally focused
20:57
Speaker 3: on Rico Cone, and that Detective Carlton was quote exhibiting
21:01
Speaker 3: clear signs of cognitive bias, repeatedly assisted Josh in matching
21:05
Speaker 3: up his answers with his prior statements by telling him
21:08
Speaker 3: what an excellent job he was doing and even providing
21:10
Speaker 3: him with a transcript of his prior statement with highlighted portions,
21:14
Speaker 3: and it was only after that happened that Josh then
21:17
Speaker 3: changed his statement back to having been present in the
21:19
Speaker 3: parking lot end quote. The lawsuit alleged there was really
21:24
Speaker 3: no evidence, physical or otherwise against Rico Cone, but there
21:29
Speaker 3: were pieces of evidence that could have pointed to other
21:32
Speaker 3: people of interest.
21:34
Speaker 1: There was the text message. Josh told police.
21:36
Speaker 3: That Nina had communicated with someone online prior to leaving
21:40
Speaker 3: his residence. On April twenty first, two thousand and six,
21:43
Speaker 3: detective found a text message on Nina's cell phone from
21:46
Speaker 3: a contact listed as Joey. The message read quote I
21:50
Speaker 3: see be careful, be one hundred percent see ya end quote.
21:54
Speaker 3: But that person Joey was never identified in the case file.
21:59
Speaker 3: So who was Joey? Was he the last.
22:01
Speaker 1: Person who Nina messaged? What did he mean by be careful?
22:06
Speaker 3: Was this just a random occurrence or could it be
22:09
Speaker 3: a clue. Several potential pieces of evidence were sent to
22:13
Speaker 3: the Arkansas State Crime Lab, including Nina's clothes that she
22:17
Speaker 3: was wearing, plus other items of clothing including jeans, towels,
22:22
Speaker 3: and socks, the dead bolt and doorknob from the front door,
22:25
Speaker 3: a small black elastic cord with a white button that
22:28
Speaker 3: was found under the bed, Nina's betting, and the black
22:31
Speaker 3: leather belt that was found in the kitchen trash can.
22:34
Speaker 3: They also found other items, including a Valentine's card that
22:37
Speaker 3: was from Josh and a poem that Nina had written
22:39
Speaker 3: to her mom. The lawsuit mentions the fact that the
22:43
Speaker 3: DNA evidence collection procedures were much less advanced in two
22:47
Speaker 3: thousand and six than they are today. The training of
22:50
Speaker 3: law enforcement and the procedures at the Arkansas State Crime
22:53
Speaker 3: Lab were also not what they are today. This would
22:58
Speaker 3: become a crucial component of Rico's lawsuit.
23:03
Speaker 1: Another question that we had when.
23:05
Speaker 3: Reviewing this case file were who were the men whom
23:08
Speaker 3: Nina was seen talking to at her apartment complex in
23:11
Speaker 3: the days before her death. Detectives talked to a neighbor
23:15
Speaker 3: of Nina's who said she saw Nina sitting on a
23:18
Speaker 3: bench in her apartment building on April twentieth, two thousand
23:20
Speaker 3: and six, the day before she was murdered. Nina was
23:23
Speaker 3: talking to a white male described as having slightly bigger
23:27
Speaker 3: than medium builled, with blondish brown hair and a pasty
23:30
Speaker 3: white complexion, approximately five foot eight to five foot ten
23:33
Speaker 3: inches tall. The neighbor told police she had seen Nina
23:37
Speaker 3: come home with a similar looking mail on multiple prior
23:40
Speaker 3: occasions after dark. Now remember, Nina's boyfriend, Josh, told police
23:46
Speaker 3: that he had not been inside Nina's apartment in months. However,
23:50
Speaker 3: he did say he had been in the parking lot
23:53
Speaker 3: a few days before her murder. This neighbor also said
23:56
Speaker 3: that she saw Nina that same week with another different
23:59
Speaker 3: white male with lighter brown hair and a medium build
24:02
Speaker 3: between five foot ten and five foot eleven inches tall,
24:05
Speaker 3: that the two of them had walked together to Nina's apartment,
24:08
Speaker 3: standing very close with the white male than following Nina
24:11
Speaker 3: into the apartment. This could have been Nina's brother or
24:15
Speaker 3: another friend, but this information, to our knowledge, was never
24:19
Speaker 3: followed up on in the police file. Another question we
24:23
Speaker 3: had was could someone have been stalking Nina. Police did
24:27
Speaker 3: talk to a friend of Nina's named Samantha Stevens. She
24:30
Speaker 3: said Nina had told her in the past that someone
24:33
Speaker 3: had been stalking her at her apartment and following her around,
24:36
Speaker 3: but there are no more details about this in the
24:38
Speaker 3: case file, including when they had this conversation and how
24:41
Speaker 3: recently it happened.
24:43
Speaker 1: It just as in the.
24:44
Speaker 3: Past, the Fayetteville police department asked the FBI to get
24:48
Speaker 3: involved with Nina's case, and they did. In March of
24:51
Speaker 3: two thousand and seven, Detective John Gentry of the Faetful
24:54
Speaker 3: Police Department worked with a crime analyst named Tom Dover
24:58
Speaker 3: of the Behavioral Analysis Unit of the FBI as part
25:02
Speaker 3: of the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program or VISCAP. They prepared
25:06
Speaker 3: and generated a criminal investigative analysis of the Nini Ingram homicide,
25:11
Speaker 3: including a very detailed profile of potential suspects. So ViCAP
25:17
Speaker 3: has a few different functions. One of them is the
25:19
Speaker 3: one that most of us have seen in the movies
25:21
Speaker 3: where the FBI criminal profiler comes in. They have a
25:24
Speaker 3: big marker board with a bunch of unsolved homicides on it.
25:27
Speaker 3: They analyze major violent crimes and can link cases based
25:30
Speaker 3: on behavioral and geographical similarities. Basically, they find patterns, but
25:35
Speaker 3: ViCAP also looks at individual cases and from the information
25:39
Speaker 3: in the case file. By examining the crime scene, they
25:41
Speaker 3: can give a profile of the unsub short for unknown
25:44
Speaker 3: subject or unidentified subject. This is meant to help local
25:48
Speaker 3: law enforcement narrow down their search. On April sixteenth, two
25:51
Speaker 3: thousand and seven, the FBI gave the profile that they
25:55
Speaker 3: produced to the FFUL Police Department. The VISCAP profile was
26:00
Speaker 3: pretty much the opposite of ricocone. The VISCAT profile stated
26:04
Speaker 3: that Nina's killer was likely a Caucasian male, familiar and
26:08
Speaker 3: comfortable in the area, and that they were likely living
26:10
Speaker 3: in or near Fayette, Arkansas. In terms of the man
26:14
Speaker 3: being Caucasian, that would track with the initial interviews, not
26:18
Speaker 3: one single person mentioned a person of color as hanging
26:21
Speaker 3: around the apartment building. So, in addition to believing that
26:24
Speaker 3: the killer was local and not a transient, the VISCAP
26:27
Speaker 3: profile stated that they believed the evidence suggested that the
26:32
Speaker 3: killer knew Nina and may have had an intimate relationship
26:35
Speaker 3: with her, and that they were familiar with her schedule. Again,
26:39
Speaker 3: this is the opposite of ricocone. He was a stranger
26:42
Speaker 3: to Nina. To the witness Randy Applewhite story, Rico only
26:47
Speaker 3: saw her briefly and attacked her because he just happened
26:50
Speaker 3: to see her coming home. The FBI stated that Nina's killer,
26:54
Speaker 3: according to the profile they provided quote, knew his or
26:58
Speaker 3: her proximity to her would not cause her alarm end quote,
27:02
Speaker 3: So they believed that Nina's killer was someone who if
27:06
Speaker 3: she saw them in line at Taco Bell or hanging
27:08
Speaker 3: out at Walmart, or maybe even in her apartment complex,
27:11
Speaker 3: maybe would not be immediately freaked out and shut the
27:15
Speaker 3: door in their face. The VISCAT profile suggested that Nina
27:19
Speaker 3: and the offender may have gotten into some kind of
27:21
Speaker 3: a conflict in the past, but they believed that it
27:25
Speaker 3: was likely that the offender had been nice to her
27:28
Speaker 3: in the run up to the killing. So the FBI
27:31
Speaker 3: seemed to think that this murder was something the killer
27:34
Speaker 3: had planned out fairly carefully. And this next part of
27:38
Speaker 3: the FBI's report is interesting. Quoted in court documents, it read,
27:41
Speaker 3: quote offender may have been excessively nice to the victim
27:45
Speaker 3: in the time preceding the homicide, in hopes this behavior
27:48
Speaker 3: would deflect law enforcement's attention away from him after the homicide.
27:53
Speaker 1: End quote.
27:54
Speaker 3: The final note was that the offender may have executed
27:58
Speaker 3: a well constructed plan in committing the homicide, so the
28:01
Speaker 3: profiler believed this was not a random attack, and finally,
28:06
Speaker 3: the profiler believed the offender was likely satisfied that the
28:10
Speaker 3: victim is dead. The VISCAT profile also stated that the
28:18
Speaker 3: offender was quote likely monitoring this case through the media,
28:22
Speaker 3: and may have already been contacted by law enforcement regarding
28:25
Speaker 3: the incident.
28:27
Speaker 1: So they were looking for someone.
28:29
Speaker 3: Who knew Nina, who maybe had been rejected by her,
28:32
Speaker 3: who was potentially inserting themselves into her case to help
28:35
Speaker 3: law enforcement, and who may be monitoring the case through
28:39
Speaker 3: the media.
28:41
Speaker 1: Now.
28:41
Speaker 3: The lawsuit stated that none of those details matched Rico Cone,
28:46
Speaker 3: but almost all of them matched the person that the
28:49
Speaker 3: lawsuit called person of interest A Josh and another person
28:54
Speaker 3: the person they called person of interest B. Based on
29:09
Speaker 3: the FBI's assessment of Nina's case, Rico Cone did not
29:13
Speaker 3: fit the profile of her killer. The lawsuit alleged that
29:17
Speaker 3: the lead detective, Scott Carlton, and his colleagues were quote
29:21
Speaker 3: seeking solely to obtain a conviction and close out a
29:23
Speaker 3: politically difficult case, without regard to where the facts or
29:27
Speaker 3: evidence may lead end quote. The lawsuit also accused the
29:31
Speaker 3: lead detective and his colleagues of conspiring with the Arkansas
29:35
Speaker 3: State Crime Lab to hide or manipulate evidence and intentionally
29:40
Speaker 3: and deliberately misleading both the Office of the Prosecutor Attorney
29:44
Speaker 3: and the general public about the relative strengths and weaknesses
29:48
Speaker 3: of what the lawsuit called an improper, illegitimate, and unconstitutional case.
29:53
Speaker 3: The lawsuit mentioned someone else who they called person of
29:57
Speaker 3: interest B. Now, this person is not named in the lawsuit,
30:01
Speaker 3: but by comparing the civil lawsuit to the part of
30:03
Speaker 3: the case file that we have access to, this person
30:06
Speaker 3: appears to match the description of a man named Jarvis Harper.
30:11
Speaker 3: Jarvis was someone who first came up in the case
30:14
Speaker 3: file in two thousand and eight.
30:15
Speaker 1: On August fifth, two thousand and eight.
30:17
Speaker 3: Officers from the Fayetable Police Department went to a residence
30:20
Speaker 3: where a woman was requesting help to obtain an order
30:22
Speaker 3: of protection.
30:23
Speaker 1: The woman's name was Nicki Perry.
30:26
Speaker 3: She wanted the restraining order against her boyfriend, twenty nine
30:28
Speaker 3: year old Jarvis Harper. She told officers that she and
30:32
Speaker 3: Jarvis had been living together for about five years. She
30:35
Speaker 3: said that he was a quote controlling individual who monitors
30:39
Speaker 3: her every move end quote. She said Jarvis had a
30:42
Speaker 3: camera inside the house. She said he installed it there
30:45
Speaker 3: to track her. She claimed that it recorded twenty four
30:48
Speaker 3: hours a day. She said she was afraid of turning
30:50
Speaker 3: the camera off because Jarvis allegedly had a bad temper.
30:54
Speaker 3: Nicki also said Jarvis had done something to the back door,
30:57
Speaker 3: basically disabled it so she couldn't get out of the
30:59
Speaker 3: apartment the back way, meaning Nicki told officers that she
31:03
Speaker 3: would always have to go through the front door to
31:05
Speaker 3: leave the apartment. Jarvis, also, according to Nicki, asked her
31:09
Speaker 3: to change her name and start going by the name
31:12
Speaker 3: Lindsey Knight, which she said she agreed to do. The
31:17
Speaker 3: latest incident that led to her calling the police had
31:19
Speaker 3: actually started three days before. She said that on that day,
31:23
Speaker 3: on April second, two thousand and eight, that Jarvis had
31:27
Speaker 3: tied her hands together with black drawstring cords that he
31:30
Speaker 3: took out of a pair of athletic shorts. Nicki said
31:33
Speaker 3: that he left her tied up for half the day,
31:35
Speaker 3: starting at around two pm. She said, while she was
31:39
Speaker 3: tied up, Jarvis sat on top of her and held
31:42
Speaker 3: his Bretta nine milimi a pistol to her head, demanding
31:46
Speaker 3: to know the truth about her activity. Apparently he believed
31:49
Speaker 3: she had been lying to him. Nikki said that she
31:52
Speaker 3: complied because she was terrified. She said she had been
31:54
Speaker 3: too afraid to call the police. On the police report,
31:57
Speaker 3: it noted detectives took away the drawstring cords from the
32:01
Speaker 3: athletic shorts as evidence. But there was something else at
32:04
Speaker 3: that residence. In the living room, Jarvis had a framed
32:08
Speaker 3: photo of Nina Ingram. It was the same photo that
32:11
Speaker 3: had been passed out to Walmart employees after Nina died,
32:15
Speaker 3: and in fact, Jarvis worked with Nina at the Sixth
32:18
Speaker 3: Street Walmart. But Jarvis, apparently, according to the lawsuit, didn't
32:23
Speaker 3: actually get the photo that way. In fact, Rico's lawsuit
32:27
Speaker 3: claims that Jarvis wanted a way to remember Nina, so
32:31
Speaker 3: he went and tracked down the photo from another employee.
32:34
Speaker 3: The lawsuit claimed Jarvis was not aware that the framed
32:38
Speaker 3: photograph of Nina Ingram that he had on his wall
32:41
Speaker 3: was the same one they handed out at Walmart. Police
32:44
Speaker 3: later questioned Nikki about this photo. Nicki said when she
32:48
Speaker 3: had asked about the photo of Nina, Jarvis told her
32:51
Speaker 3: the photo was there because Nina was a friend of his,
32:53
Speaker 3: and also he was good friends with her boyfriend, Josh.
32:57
Speaker 3: Jarvis told her that he had worked with Nina at
32:59
Speaker 3: Walmart and that he quote was pretty sure he knows
33:03
Speaker 3: who did it, meaning knows who killed Nina, but that
33:05
Speaker 3: it could not be proven. So we have a person
33:09
Speaker 3: with a definite connection to Nina Ingram, someone who worked
33:12
Speaker 3: with her and her boyfriend, who was accused of choking
33:15
Speaker 3: his girlfriend with the cord of his athletic shorts, and
33:18
Speaker 3: who allegedly exhibited violent behavior. We know that, according to
33:22
Speaker 3: the autopsy report, Nina was strangled with an object that
33:26
Speaker 3: was between one sixteenth of an inch and one eighth
33:29
Speaker 3: of an inch wide, and that the murder weapon was
33:31
Speaker 3: never found. In addition to the photographs of Nina on
33:35
Speaker 3: the wall, Jarvis also had photographs of other women in
33:39
Speaker 3: a filing cabinet next to his computer. Nicki told police
33:43
Speaker 3: Jarvist told her one of the women was a missing person,
33:46
Speaker 3: but did not give her any more details about that woman,
33:49
Speaker 3: about the case, or where or when the woman supposedly
33:53
Speaker 3: went missing. Nicki told police she didn't remember a lot
33:56
Speaker 3: of details about the files she saw inside Jarvis's office,
34:00
Speaker 3: other than the fact that she said the name McMillan
34:03
Speaker 3: was written on the bottom front of one of those photos.
34:07
Speaker 3: Nicki said that again, besides Nina, who she had specifically
34:10
Speaker 3: asked about, she did not know who any of these
34:13
Speaker 3: other women were. Police also talked to Nicki's mother, Susie
34:17
Speaker 3: Susie told detectives that Jarvis was a martial arts expert,
34:20
Speaker 3: that he had various martial arts weapons and guns and
34:23
Speaker 3: ninja items in the home, and that he was quote
34:26
Speaker 3: as self proclaimed ninja and black belt end quote. Jarvis
34:31
Speaker 3: confirmed to police that he did practice martial arts. Police
34:35
Speaker 3: searched the bedroom and remove some items, including a black
34:38
Speaker 3: scheme mask. Next week, We're going to hear more from
34:42
Speaker 3: Nina's boyfriend at the time, Josh, about his relationship with Dina,
34:46
Speaker 3: his relationship with Jarvis, and his theories on the case.
34:50
Speaker 3: We're also going to try to figure out who the
34:54
Speaker 3: other women were on Jarvis's wall. I'm Katherine Townsend. This
35:00
Speaker 3: is Helen Gone Murder Line. Helen Gone Murder Line is
35:05
Speaker 3: a production of School of Humans and iHeart Podcasts. It's
35:08
Speaker 3: written and narrated by me Katherine Townsend and produced by
35:11
Speaker 3: Gabby Watts. Special thanks to Amy Tubbs for her research
35:15
Speaker 3: assistance and James Wheaton for legal review. Noah camer mixed
35:19
Speaker 3: and scored this episode. Our theme song is by Ben Salep.
35:22
Speaker 3: Executive producers are Virginia Prescott, Brandon Barr, and LC Crowley.
35:27
Speaker 3: Listen to Helen Gone ad free by subscribing to the
35:29
Speaker 3: iHeart True Crime Plus.
35:30
Speaker 1: Channel on Apple Podcasts.
35:32
Speaker 3: If you were interested in seeing documents and materials from
35:35
Speaker 3: the case, you can follow the show on Instagram.
35:38
Speaker 1: At ellen gonpot.
35:39
Speaker 3: If you have a case you'd like me and my
35:41
Speaker 3: team to look into, you can reach out to a
35:43
Speaker 3: at our Hellngong Murder Line at six seven eight seven
35:47
Speaker 3: four four six one four five. That's six seven eight
35:50
Speaker 3: seven four four six one four five.
35:57
Speaker 1: School of Humans