Latest / True Crime Reactions / MURDERED: Angela "Mischelle" Lawless | Case Reaction & Analysis

Transcript

MURDERED: Angela "Mischelle" Lawless | Case Reaction & Analysis · True Crime Reactions

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Imagine for a second that you are driving down this
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: incredibly dark, isolated road. It's somewhere in the midwestern.
• 0:06
  Speaker 2: United States, right, and it's cold.
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. It is November of nineteen ninety two. The
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: air is absolutely freezing, and you know you don't have
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: a cell phone because well nobody really has them yet.
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: They're just totally off the grade, completely disconnected. You are
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: alone in the world until you get to wherever you're
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: going and you round this bend in the road and
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: up ahead you see a car just sitting.
• 0:28
  Speaker 2: There on the shoulder this park there.
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: Well, see, that's the thing. The headlights are blazing, right,
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: they're just slicing right through the pitch black. And as
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: you slicing right through the pitch black, and as you
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: slow down and you kind of pull up alongside it,
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: you realize you can hear the engine humming. Oh wow, yeah,
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: it's idling. You can see the exhaust just pluming out
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: into the freezing air. But when you lean over and
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: look inside the windows, the driver is gone.
• 0:55
  Speaker 2: I mean, that is just it's the absolute definition of
• 0:57
  Speaker 2: an active, unresolved crisis. Right as the machine is alive,
• 1:01
  Speaker 2: you know, the car is on, but the human element
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: is completely absent, and that immediately tells your brain that
• 1:06
  Speaker 2: whatever happened, that this didn't happen hours ago, It happened
• 1:10
  Speaker 2: like moments.
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: Ago, moments ago, and that terrifying just sort of frozen
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: in time moment is exactly where we are starting today's
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: deep dive.
• 1:18
  Speaker 2: I'm really looking forward to this one me too.
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: We are unpacking this staggering, decades old mystery that has
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: been condensed into what I can honestly only describe as
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: a masterclass in suspense.
• 1:30
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it really is.
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: We are looking at a fifty four minute true crime
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: exploration that came out in July of twenty eighteen. It's
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: from the Audio Check Network. Specifically, there's show Crime Junkie
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: and the piece is titled Murdered Angela Michelle Lawless.
• 1:45
  Speaker 2: And I think it's important to set our mission for today.
• 1:48
  Speaker 2: You know, our goal is in just to walk through
• 1:50
  Speaker 2: the tragic facts of Michelle Lallace's death, although her story
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: is obviously the beating heart of the source material we're
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: analyzing today, right absolutely, but we are really going to
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: look closely at the archetel picture of the narrative. I mean,
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: how do you take this hyperlocal murder from nineteen ninety
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: two decades of just completely convoluted police work and a
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: staggering sixteen year miscarriage.
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: Of justice, which is just insane to think about.
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: It, totally insane. But how do you translate all of
• 2:18
  Speaker 2: that heavy, dense reality into an audio format that actually
• 2:22
  Speaker 2: captivates a global audience. Yeah. By dissecting how storytellers Ashley
• 2:26
  Speaker 2: Flowers and brit Prey Watt frame this case, we actually
• 2:30
  Speaker 2: uncover a lot about the complexities and honestly, the massive
• 2:33
  Speaker 2: blind spots of the criminal justice system itself.
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: And that structural piece, like the way it's built, is
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: what I really want to tear into first, because this
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: release sits at exactly fifty four.
• 2:42
  Speaker 2: Minutes, right under an hour.
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: Yeah, And if you think about the sheer volume of
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: information that exists in a twenty six year old murder case,
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: I mean, you have the initial crime scene reports, the autopsy,
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: weeks and months of dead end.
• 2:55
  Speaker 2: Leads, the suspect interrogations, right.
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: The interrogations, a full criminal trial, a conviction, the appeals process,
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: and then eventually an exoneration sixteen years later.
• 3:03
  Speaker 2: It's a mountain of paper, exactly.
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: It's thousands of pages of legal and forensic documents. So
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: how do you synthesize all of that into less than
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: an hour? I mean it requires this ruthless level of
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: editorial compression.
• 3:16
  Speaker 2: It really does. You're entirely right. It requires the hosts
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: to act as curators rather than just arkivists.
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: Whooh, I like that distinction.
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: Yeah, because in a fifty four minute window, you you
• 3:27
  Speaker 2: cannot possibly present every single piece of evidence. You have
• 3:30
  Speaker 2: to establish a narrative spine. And the spine they chose
• 3:34
  Speaker 2: to build this specific story around is the concept of
• 3:38
  Speaker 2: unresolved tension and systemic failure. Like, every single detail they
• 3:42
  Speaker 2: include in those fifty four minutes has to serve a
• 3:45
  Speaker 2: specific function. It has to keep the listener engaged while
• 3:48
  Speaker 2: efficiently transferring these really complex legal concepts, which they.
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: Do so well. Right from the jump. I was actually
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: looking at the metadata and the synopsis for this specific release,
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: and they do something immediately that caught my eye. Well,
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: they don't build this slow atmospheric runway. The text of
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: the description itself just throws these direct questions right at you.
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: It says, who would she have pulled over for? And
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: where was she headed?
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: Uh? Right?
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: And it's so smart because it shifts you from being
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: a passive listener, you know, just waiting to be entertained,
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: to an active investigator. You are literally handed the puzzle
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: box before the audio even starts playing.
• 4:25
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a very deliberate cognitive primer.
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 4:29
  Speaker 2: By placing those specific behavioral questions right there in the text,
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: the hosts are essentially programming your brain on how to
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: process the information you're about to hear.
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: Oh that's interesting.
• 4:41
  Speaker 2: Yeah, they're basically telling you, Hey, don't get lost in
• 4:43
  Speaker 2: the weeds of the physical evidence just yet, pay attention
• 4:47
  Speaker 2: to the psychological gaps in the logic.
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: But okay, I actually want to push back on another
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: part of that synopsis because it feels incredibly counterintuitive to me.
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: Okay, let's hear it.
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: They give away the ending right there in the text.
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: It says, and I'm quoting here, even though a man
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: serves sixteen years for her murder, the current sheriff is
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: convinced they still have not captured Michelle's killer.
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a massive spoiler, right.
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: And if I'm say, watching a mystery movie, I don't
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: want the director telling me and the trailer that the
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: guy they arrest in the middle of the film is
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: actually innocent. I mean, doesn't that completely deflate the tension
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: of the investigation.
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: I get why you'd say that it's a really fascinating critique,
• 5:27
  Speaker 2: but I would actually argue it creates a much more
• 5:30
  Speaker 2: sophisticated type of tension. How so, well, think about it.
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: If they had hidden that fact, you would spend the
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: first half in the narrative just trying to figure out
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: how the police brilliantly caught the killer.
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: True, I'd be looking for the clues that confirm his
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: guilt exactly.
• 5:44
  Speaker 2: But by telling you upfront that the justice system failed,
• 5:47
  Speaker 2: and I mean failed spectacularly for sixteen years, it fundamentally
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: alters your listening posture.
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: Okay, I see where you're going.
• 5:55
  Speaker 2: Yeah, you are now listening to the initial nineteen ninety
• 5:57
  Speaker 2: two investigation with profound skeptic Ah.
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: Right. It basically turns the whole thing into an autopsy
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: of the police work itself.
• 6:06
  Speaker 2: Precisely, it gives you dramatic irony. You possess this terrible
• 6:09
  Speaker 2: truth that the nineteen ninety two investigators don't have yet.
• 6:12
  Speaker 2: Oh wow. Yeah, So when you hear about a witness
• 6:16
  Speaker 2: coming forward or a new piece of evidence being collected,
• 6:18
  Speaker 2: you aren't sitting there thinking, Oh, here we go, this
• 6:21
  Speaker 2: is the smoking gun.
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: You're thinking, is this the mistake?
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: Yes, you're thinking is this the lie? Is this the
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: specific misstep that puts an innocent man away for a
• 6:30
  Speaker 2: decade and a half. It replaces that standard who do
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: nit tension with this creeping dread of how does this
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: go so terribly wrong?
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: That is so true? And that dread? I mean, it
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: is clearly resonating on a massive scale. I was digging
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: into the geographic data provided in our sources, and the
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: reach of this specific audio release is staggering.
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: It really is global.
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: Yeah, we're talking about a tragedy that happened in a small,
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: hyperlocal American community back in nineteen ninety two. Yet the
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: analysis list listeners in over one hundred regions Algeria, Vietnam, Botswana, Brazil.
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: I mean, the content has been consumed and translated into Arabic, Russian,
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: simplified Chinese. It just makes you wonder how does a
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: local cold case from the American Midwest find an audience
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: in Madagascar.
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: I think it speaks to the absolute universality at the
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: core themes, right, the human element, exactly the specifics of
• 7:25
  Speaker 2: the case like the make of the car, the exact
• 7:26
  Speaker 2: layout of the Missouri roads. Those are local. But the
• 7:29
  Speaker 2: fear of the unknown, the tragedy of a young life
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: cut short, and honestly, the horrifying reality of a government
• 7:37
  Speaker 2: locking an innocent person in a cage for sixteen years.
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: Yeah, that resonates anywhere completely.
• 7:41
  Speaker 2: Those are deeply human, universal concepts. A true crime network
• 7:46
  Speaker 2: like audio Chuck, they take these localized traumas and they
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: elevate them into these almost global parables, parables about the
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: fragility of life and the really fatal flaws of human judgment.
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: And if you think about that from the victim's perspective,
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: I mean, Michelle Lallace's case could have so easily just
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: got the dust in some basement evidence room somewhere. Oh
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: it happens all the time, right, forgotten by everyone except
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: her immediate family. But now her name is being spoken
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: in dozens of languages, decades after her death.
• 8:11
  Speaker 2: And that actually democratizes the investigative process in a way.
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: What do you mean, Well, when local resources are exhausted,
• 8:18
  Speaker 2: cases go col that's just the reality. But broadcasting the
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: details to millions of people worldwide leverages this massive cognitive surplus.
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: Okay, I like that term cognitive surplus.
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: Right, because obviously it's highly unlikely a listener in say Fiji,
• 8:35
  Speaker 2: holds the missing physical clue to a nineteen ninety two
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: Missouri murder.
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: Obviously, Yeah, but.
• 8:40
  Speaker 2: The collective pressure created by millions of eyes and ears
• 8:43
  Speaker 2: often forces local authorities to act. It forces them to
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: allocate new funding, or test old DNA, or just fundamentally
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: rethink their assumptions.
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: Which is exactly what happened here. And that brings us
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: back to that terrifying tableau we started with the details
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: that Ashley and Britt ask us to visualize the car. Yes,
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: let's really put ourselves in that moment. In November nineteen
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: ninety two, Michelle Lawless is found deceased in her car
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: by what the initial reports call passers.
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: By right, good Samaritans.
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: But the condition of the vehicle that is the anchor
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: of this entire mystery. The headlights are on and the
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: engine is still running.
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: See as an analyst looking at crime scene reconstruction, a
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: running car is one of the most loaded pieces of
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: forensic evidence you can encounter, really.
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: More than like a weapon left behind in.
• 9:28
  Speaker 2: Terms of establishing a timeline and a narrative, absolutely, because
• 9:32
  Speaker 2: an engine running is a mechanical state of suspension.
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: Okay, break that down for me.
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: Well, when you arrive at your destination, what do you do.
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: You put the car in park, you turn the key,
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: the engine dies, the lights turn off.
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: Right, I'm done driving exactly.
• 9:46
  Speaker 2: That is a completed action. A running engine implies a
• 9:49
  Speaker 2: paused action. It screams to the observer that whatever interrupted
• 9:54
  Speaker 2: this journey was supposed to be temporary.
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: Oh man, it's paused, not parked. Because if you leave
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: your car running on the side of the road, you
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: fully expect to be back behind the wheel in seconds,
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: like you are maybe checking a tire or I don't know,
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: dropping a letter in a mailbox. You don't leave a
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: car running if you plan on being gone.
• 10:13
  Speaker 2: You really don't. Yeah, and let's look at the actual
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: mechanics of that vehicle to understand the timeline. Here a
• 10:19
  Speaker 2: car idling with its headlights blazing. It is actively draining fuel.
• 10:24
  Speaker 2: It's relying on the alternator. It's loud, Yes, it's loud,
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: and it is highly conspicuous in the pitch black of
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: a November night. It is a literal beacon in the dark.
• 10:35
  Speaker 2: That's a spotlight exactly, Yeah, it draws the eyes of
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: anyone within a mile radius. Therefore, whoever intercepted Michelle, they
• 10:45
  Speaker 2: had to have acted with terrifying speed.
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: Because if the killer takes their time right, a truck
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: driver or just another commuter comes around the bend and
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: sees them standing right there in the headlights.
• 10:55
  Speaker 2: Precisely, they didn't have the time to you know, lean
• 10:57
  Speaker 2: into the steering column, turn the car off, take keys,
• 11:00
  Speaker 2: or even try to roll the vehicle into a ditch
• 11:02
  Speaker 2: to hide.
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: It, which means it happened fast.
• 11:04
  Speaker 2: Incredibly fast. The presence of the running car severely narrows
• 11:08
  Speaker 2: the window of the crime. The perpetrator had to intercept her,
• 11:11
  Speaker 2: commit the violence, and completely vanish all within the natural
• 11:15
  Speaker 2: gap of traffic on that specific road. It suggests this
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: really horrifying intersection of extreme violence and extreme brevity.
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: And that physical reality directly ties into those two massive
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: questions that the podcast poses. Where was she headed and
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: who would she have pulled over?
• 11:33
  Speaker 2: For the behavioral questions.
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: Right, let's break those down because they seem simple on
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: the surface, you know, just basic questions, but I know
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: investigators build entire profiles around these answers. So why is
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: where was she headed? Such a critical data point.
• 11:49
  Speaker 2: Well in the field of victimology, establishing the victim's intended
• 11:52
  Speaker 2: route is step one.
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: We all have routines, right, I drive the same way
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: to work every day.
• 11:57
  Speaker 2: Exactly. If investigators know where she left from where she
• 12:00
  Speaker 2: was supposed to arise, they can calculate her exact transit time.
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: Okay, I see.
• 12:04
  Speaker 2: So if her route usually takes twenty minutes, but she
• 12:07
  Speaker 2: has found an hour after she left her starting point,
• 12:10
  Speaker 2: you suddenly have forty minutes of completely unaccounted time.
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: That's a huge gap.
• 12:14
  Speaker 2: It's massive. It tells investigators whether she was maybe taking
• 12:18
  Speaker 2: a shortcut, whether she was on a familiar road, or
• 12:20
  Speaker 2: whether she had been severely detoured off her path.
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: Right, Because if you are found deceased on the road
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: you take every single day, that tells a completely different
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: story than if you're found like twenty miles in the
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: opposite direction on some dirt road you've never driven over.
• 12:34
  Speaker 2: Oh, Exactly, if she was on her normal, everyday route,
• 12:37
  Speaker 2: it strongly suggests a crime of opportunity by a random
• 12:41
  Speaker 2: predator or someone who intimately knew her schedule and just
• 12:45
  Speaker 2: lay in wait. And if she wasn't if she was
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: completely off her route, it implies she was lured there
• 12:52
  Speaker 2: or forced there, or maybe she panicked into driving somewhere
• 12:56
  Speaker 2: to escape someone following her.
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: Okay, so let's look at that second question then, because
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: this one, this one really bothers me. Who would you
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: have pulled over for?
• 13:04
  Speaker 2: It's a loaded question.
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: It is because the framing of that question automatically assumes
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: an action on her part. It assumes she willingly hit
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: the brakes and consciously pulled to the shoulder right. But
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: what if we question that? What if she didn't choose
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: to pull over at all? What if a car swerved
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: in turline and violently forced her off the road.
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: It's crucial to question the premise just as you're doing.
• 13:25
  Speaker 2: That's good investigation. So let's explore both avenues. First, let's
• 13:29
  Speaker 2: look at the forced stop scenario. Okay, if a vehicle
• 13:32
  Speaker 2: aggressively intercepts you, runs you off the road, or slams
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: on its brakes right in front of you, the physical
• 13:38
  Speaker 2: evidence of the scene usually reflects that chaos.
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: You mean, like tire marks exactly.
• 13:44
  Speaker 2: You find deep erratic skid marks on the pavement. You
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: find paint transfer or damage to the victim's bumper or
• 13:50
  Speaker 2: side panels. You find the car parked at an awkward,
• 13:53
  Speaker 2: violent angle, maybe half in a ditch.
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: But based on the scene described here in our sources,
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: the car is just sitting there on the shoulder, idling
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: headlights on. It feels organized.
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: Organized is the perfect word, and that lack of kinetic
• 14:08
  Speaker 2: chaos is exactly why investigators lean heavily toward the theory
• 14:12
  Speaker 2: of a voluntary stop.
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: Because it doesn't look like a crash.
• 14:15
  Speaker 2: Right, the vehicle appears to have been guided to the
• 14:17
  Speaker 2: shoulder in a controlled, deliberate manner. Now, I want you
• 14:21
  Speaker 2: to put yourself in the shoes of a young woman
• 14:23
  Speaker 2: driving alone at night in nineteen ninety two.
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: It's terrifying.
• 14:27
  Speaker 2: It is. Pulling over on a dark, isolated road is
• 14:31
  Speaker 2: an incredibly vulnerable act. It goes against literally every survival
• 14:36
  Speaker 2: instinct we have.
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I would never do it unless I had a really,
• 14:39
  Speaker 1: really compelling reason.
• 14:40
  Speaker 2: Exactly so, victimology dictates she would only voluntarily stop for
• 14:45
  Speaker 2: a very narrow category of people.
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: Okay, who are they?
• 14:48
  Speaker 2: The first category is trust someone she knew intimately, a friend,
• 14:53
  Speaker 2: a family member, a boyfriend. Oh right, she recognizes their
• 14:58
  Speaker 2: car parked in the side of the road, or she
• 15:01
  Speaker 2: recognizes them standing there flagging her down. Her brain instantly
• 15:04
  Speaker 2: says safe, so she pulls over, and she leaves the
• 15:07
  Speaker 2: car running while she rolls down the window to see
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: what they need.
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: That makes total sense. I mean, if I'm driving and
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: I see my brother's car broken down on the shoulder,
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: I'm pulling over immediately. I'm not even thinking about it, right,
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: So what's the other.
• 15:17
  Speaker 2: Category, authority, specifically law enforcement? Oh?
• 15:22
  Speaker 1: Oh wow?
• 15:23
  Speaker 2: Yeah, if flashing red and blue lights suddenly appear in
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: your rear view mirror, societal conditioning just takes over.
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you comply, you pull over, you.
• 15:31
  Speaker 2: Pull over the shoulder, you put the car in park,
• 15:33
  Speaker 2: but you generally leave the engine running as you wait
• 15:36
  Speaker 2: for the officer to approach your window.
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: That wow, the running engine fits the police stop scenario perfectly.
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: I mean, if a cop pulls you over, you don't
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: instantly kill the engine and throw your keys on the
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: dash unless they explicitly order you to. You just sit
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: there with the car idling.
• 15:51
  Speaker 2: It is a deeply chilling realization. It really is, because
• 15:54
  Speaker 2: think about the implications. If it was the trust category.
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: Her inherent kindness and familiar already were weaponized against her
• 16:01
  Speaker 2: by someone she cared about. Betrayal, total betrayal. But if
• 16:04
  Speaker 2: it was the authority category, she was betrayed by the
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: very symbols and institutions that are literally meant to protect her.
• 16:12
  Speaker 2: Either way, her psychological compliance was used to orchestrate her murder.
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: And yet, from this incredibly tight, puzzling crime scene, the
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: local police build an investigation, They gather evidence, they focus
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: on a suspect, They take it to trial, and they win.
• 16:27
  Speaker 2: They get a conviction.
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: Yes, a man is convicted, and for sixteen years he
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: sits in a prison cell for the murder of Michelle Lallace.
• 16:34
  Speaker 2: And this is the massive structural pivot of the entire case,
• 16:39
  Speaker 2: the sixteen year void.
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: It's so heavy. The source material drops this fact and
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: it just hangs there in the air, a staggering miscarriage
• 16:47
  Speaker 1: of justice. I want you, if you're listening to this
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: right now, to really sit with the weight of that time.
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: Sixteen years. It's not just a number on a page now,
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: it is.
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: The complete annihilation of a human life. Yeah, to have
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: sixteen years stolen from you, to be locked in a
• 17:04
  Speaker 2: cage for a brutal crime you did not commit knowing
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: for a fact that the real killer is out there
• 17:11
  Speaker 2: breathing free air. It is a psychological trauma that most
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: of us cannot even begin to fathom.
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: I try to think about what sixteen years actually looks
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: like practically speaking, in terms of an investigation, like, let's
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: do the math here, nineteen ninety two plus sixteen years
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: puts us in two thousand.
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: And eight, a totally different era.
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: Completely. It's like if you were building a house, right,
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: and for sixteen years, you pour the concrete, you frame
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: the walls, you run the electrical and you lay the roof.
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: You put all this work in.
• 17:35
  Speaker 2: Okay, I follow you.
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: And then one day the city comes by and says, oh, hey,
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: you built this on the wrong address. You can't just
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: pick the house up and move it to the right lot.
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: You have to tear the entire thing down to the dirt.
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: But by now it's been sixteen years, so the original
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: blueprints from nineteen ninety two are completely faded and ruined.
• 17:52
  Speaker 2: That is a phenomenal analogy for what happens to physical evidence.
• 17:56
  Speaker 2: It really is, because look at how much the world
• 17:58
  Speaker 2: changed between nineteen ninety two two in two thousand and eight.
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: I mean, cell phones alone.
• 18:03
  Speaker 2: Exactly in nineteen ninety two, DNA profiling was in its
• 18:07
  Speaker 2: absolute infancy. It was clunky and required massive samples. By
• 18:11
  Speaker 2: two thousand and eight, we have rapid touch DNA analysis,
• 18:14
  Speaker 2: we have widespread AFIS fingerprint databases, cell phone tower triangulation.
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: All this new tax But because the justice.
• 18:23
  Speaker 2: System believed the puzzle was solved back in the nineties,
• 18:26
  Speaker 2: the physical evidence from Michelle's car was likely just boxed
• 18:29
  Speaker 2: up and shoved into a non climate controlled storage facility.
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: Which means it could have degraded, the.
• 18:34
  Speaker 2: Graded, contaminated lost. Yeah, and it's not just the physical evidence, witnesses,
• 18:38
  Speaker 2: age memories.
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: More.
• 18:39
  Speaker 2: If people move out of state, people die. The original
• 18:42
  Speaker 2: trail doesn't just go cold. It gets buried under a
• 18:44
  Speaker 2: mountain of times it's gone. And honestly, the dual tragedy
• 18:48
  Speaker 2: here is that for those sixteen years, Michelle's family was
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: forced to believe a lie.
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: Oh the family, I didn't even think about that aspect.
• 18:57
  Speaker 2: Yeah, they went through the grueling trauma of a murdered trial,
• 19:00
  Speaker 2: They watch a man be sentenced, and they likely spent
• 19:04
  Speaker 2: years trying to build some semblance of closure on that foundation.
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: And then it's ripped away.
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: When the exoneration happens, the state essentially knocks on their
• 19:12
  Speaker 2: door and says, we were wrong. The person who murdered
• 19:16
  Speaker 2: Michelle is still out there. It resets their grief all
• 19:19
  Speaker 2: the way back to the night of the running car.
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: I am always so baffled by how this happens on
• 19:23
  Speaker 1: a systemic level, Like how does an entire punents department,
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: a prosecutor's office, and a jury of peers get it
• 19:30
  Speaker 1: so completely wrong?
• 19:31
  Speaker 2: It's a system of human beings, unfortunately.
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: But is it just malicious corruption? Do they just want
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: to close a case to look good for the press
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: and they don't care who goes down for it.
• 19:39
  Speaker 2: Well, outright corruption certainly exists, and we've seen it. The
• 19:42
  Speaker 2: far more common and I think insidious culprit in these
• 19:46
  Speaker 2: miscarriities of justice is cognitive blind spots, Like what specifically
• 19:51
  Speaker 2: confirmation bias?
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: Okay, I want to really dig into that, because I
• 19:55
  Speaker 1: know the textbook definition of confirmation bias, like seeking out
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: info that support it's what you already believe, right exactly,
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: But how does that actually play out in a homicide investigation?
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: How does a mental bias lead to a sixteen year
• 20:09
  Speaker 1: false conviction.
• 20:11
  Speaker 2: Well, in the messy reality of a police precinct, an
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: investigation rarely looks like a clean, objective scientific experiment. It's
• 20:19
  Speaker 2: not CSI, it is not CSI. What often happens is
• 20:23
  Speaker 2: that early in the case, detectives receive a tip, or
• 20:27
  Speaker 2: maybe they find a suspect who just seems good for
• 20:30
  Speaker 2: the crime.
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: Well, it makes them good for it.
• 20:32
  Speaker 2: Maybe this person has a prior record, Maybe they acted
• 20:34
  Speaker 2: nervous and fail to polygraph, which, by the way, are notoriously.
• 20:37
  Speaker 1: Unreliable, right, totally inadmissible in a lot of places, exactly.
• 20:41
  Speaker 2: Or maybe a questionable witness just points a finger at them, so.
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: The cops get tunnel vision, they lock onto their guy.
• 20:46
  Speaker 2: They do, and once that psychological anchor is dropped, human
• 20:50
  Speaker 2: neurology actually works against them. They begin subconsciously filtering all
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: incoming data through the lens of this suspect's guilt.
• 20:58
  Speaker 1: Everything confirms the theory.
• 21:00
  Speaker 2: Yes, if they find a piece of physical evidence that
• 21:04
  Speaker 2: matches their theory, they highlight it in bold in their reports.
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: They champion it. Right, But if they find a piece
• 21:10
  Speaker 2: of evidence that contradicts their theory, say they find a
• 21:14
  Speaker 2: bloody footprint at the scene, that is three sizes too
• 21:17
  Speaker 2: small for their suspect.
• 21:18
  Speaker 1: They don't use it to clear him.
• 21:20
  Speaker 2: No, they don't use it to eliminate him. Subconsciously, they
• 21:23
  Speaker 2: rationalize it away. They say, oh, well, the killer must
• 21:26
  Speaker 2: have worn shoes that were too small on purpose to
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: throw us off, or they simply ignore the footprint altogether.
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: That is terrifying because they aren't necessarily doing it to
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: be evil like villains in a movie. They genuinely believe
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: they have the right guy, so they think they are
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: just cleaning up the edges of the narrative for the jury.
• 21:44
  Speaker 2: Exactly, they transition from the investigative question who committed this
• 21:48
  Speaker 2: crime to the declarative statement, let's prove how he committed
• 21:52
  Speaker 2: this crime? WHOA, And once the prosecutor gets on board,
• 21:56
  Speaker 2: they present this highly curated, artificially smooth out narrative to
• 22:00
  Speaker 2: a jury and the jury buys it. Because the jury
• 22:02
  Speaker 2: doesn't see the discarded evidence. They don't see the ignored
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: leads or the footprint that was too small. They only
• 22:08
  Speaker 2: see the confirmation bias presented as absolute, undeniable truth.
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: Which perfectly explains why when the current sheriff takes over
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: this case decades later, he isn't just looking at a
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: cold case.
• 22:19
  Speaker 2: Not all.
• 22:20
  Speaker 1: He has to actively deconstruct sixteen years of institutional lies
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: before he can even start looking for the real killer.
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: He has to totally dismantle the confirmation by it. It's
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: a monumental task, and that brings us to the twist,
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: the revelation that completely blew my mind and basically rewrites
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: the entire first chapter of this mystery.
• 22:40
  Speaker 2: This is where the narrative architecture of the podcast truly
• 22:43
  Speaker 2: flexes its.
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: Muscles, going back to the exact wording in the synopsis,
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: because it is so deliberate. The current sheriff is convinced
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: they still have not captured Michelle's killer, and he believes
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: it could all be tied back to the man or
• 22:55
  Speaker 1: men who initially found her car.
• 22:57
  Speaker 2: The passers by the good smareans, Yes.
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: The people who supposedly discovered the tragic scene and called
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: for help.
• 23:04
  Speaker 2: It's a massive narrative whiplash, It totally is.
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: But here's my question. If this new sheriff is so
• 23:11
  Speaker 1: convinced that the finders are actually the killers, what is
• 23:14
  Speaker 1: holding up the arrest. It feels like you have this
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: one thousand piece jigsaw puzzle. The final piece is sitting
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: right in the center of the table, but it just
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: won't step into the hole. Why not just arrest them?
• 23:24
  Speaker 2: Because the barrier to an arrest in a scenario like
• 23:27
  Speaker 2: this is the monumental difference between knowing someone did it
• 23:31
  Speaker 2: in your gut and proving it in a court of
• 23:34
  Speaker 2: law beyond a reasonable doubt. Twenty six years later, oh right,
• 23:38
  Speaker 2: proving it. And this loops directly back to the confirmation
• 23:41
  Speaker 2: bias we just discussed. Because the nineteen ninety two investigators
• 23:45
  Speaker 2: focused all their energy are building a case against the
• 23:47
  Speaker 2: wrong man, they inherently destroyed the forensic viability of the
• 23:51
  Speaker 2: real suspects.
• 23:52
  Speaker 1: Heay explain that how did they destroy it? Do you
• 23:54
  Speaker 1: mean they just lost the evidence? No?
• 23:55
  Speaker 2: I mean think about how a fresh crime scene is processed.
• 23:58
  Speaker 2: If the police arrive on the scene and they view
• 24:00
  Speaker 2: the men who found the car as heroes, as these
• 24:03
  Speaker 2: helpful citizens who called nine to one one, they do
• 24:06
  Speaker 2: not treat them as suspects, right, but the good guys
• 24:08
  Speaker 2: exactly so. They probably didn't beg their hands to test
• 24:11
  Speaker 2: for gunshot residue. They didn't seize their clothing to look
• 24:14
  Speaker 2: for microspatter of blood. They certainly didn't impound their vehicles
• 24:18
  Speaker 2: to search for the victim's hair or fibers.
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: Oh man, they let them walk right out of the
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: golden hour of evidence collection because of the initial narrative
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: framing exactly.
• 24:28
  Speaker 2: They took their statements, thanked them for their civic duty,
• 24:31
  Speaker 2: and let them go home to potentially wash away all
• 24:34
  Speaker 2: the physical evidence. That is just ugh. You can't go
• 24:37
  Speaker 2: back twenty six years later and test a shirt for
• 24:39
  Speaker 2: blood spatter. If that shirt was washed a thousand times
• 24:43
  Speaker 2: or thrown in the garbage two decades ago, the physical
• 24:46
  Speaker 2: evidence attached to those men is gone forever.
• 24:48
  Speaker 1: Let's talk about the psychology of that for a second,
• 24:51
  Speaker 1: because this is kind of a well known trope in
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: true crime, right, the killer inserting themselves into the investigation.
• 24:57
  Speaker 2: It is a known phenomenon, yes.
• 24:59
  Speaker 1: But I always struggle with the logic of it. I mean,
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: if I commit a horrendous crime, the absolute last thing
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: my brain is telling me to do is call the
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: police and invite them to come stand.
• 25:08
  Speaker 2: Next to me. Right. Flight response, Yeah.
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: Self preservation should make you run as far away as
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: possible and never look back. Why would a killer ever
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: volunteer to be the one to find the body.
• 25:18
  Speaker 2: It seems completely counterintuitive to a rational mind. I agree,
• 25:22
  Speaker 2: But criminal profilers see this pattern repeatedly, and there are
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: three primary psychological drivers for this specific behavior.
• 25:30
  Speaker 1: Okay, what's the first one.
• 25:31
  Speaker 2: The first is control. A killer knows that the narrative
• 25:35
  Speaker 2: established in the first forty eight hours of an investigation
• 25:38
  Speaker 2: is absolutely critical. By being the one to find the scene,
• 25:42
  Speaker 2: they get to dictate the exact parameters of the initial
• 25:45
  Speaker 2: police report.
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: They get to spin the story before the cops even
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: have a chance to look around.
• 25:50
  Speaker 2: Right. They tell the cops, oh, I saw a suspicious
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: green truck speeding away, And suddenly the cops spend a
• 25:55
  Speaker 2: week looking for a phantom green truck. But more importantly,
• 25:58
  Speaker 2: inserting themselves divides them with a built in, ironclad alibi
• 26:02
  Speaker 2: for forensic contamination.
• 26:04
  Speaker 1: Wait, how does it do that?
• 26:05
  Speaker 2: Think about it. If you murder someone in their car,
• 26:08
  Speaker 2: your fingerprints are highly likely to be on the door handle.
• 26:11
  Speaker 2: Your footprints are in the mud next to the tire.
• 26:14
  Speaker 2: If the police trace those back to you a week later,
• 26:17
  Speaker 2: out of nowhere, you are caught.
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 26:19
  Speaker 2: But if you call nine to one one and say, hey,
• 26:21
  Speaker 2: I just found this car on the side of the road.
• 26:23
  Speaker 2: I opened the door to see if she was breathing.
• 26:25
  Speaker 2: I walked all around the vehicle looking for help. You
• 26:28
  Speaker 2: have just legally explained away why all of your DNA
• 26:32
  Speaker 2: and physical trace evidence is at the crime scene.
• 26:35
  Speaker 1: Wow, it's essentially inoculating yourself against the forensic evidence. It's
• 26:40
  Speaker 1: exactly what it is that is so deeply manipulative. Okay,
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: what are the other reasons?
• 26:44
  Speaker 2: The second reason is a perverse psychological thrill. Some offenders,
• 26:49
  Speaker 2: particularly those with psychopathic traits, derive a massive ego boost
• 26:53
  Speaker 2: from being in close proximity to the police like a game,
• 26:56
  Speaker 2: very much a game. They enjoy sitting in the interview room,
• 27:00
  Speaker 2: playing the role of the concerned citizen, secretly knowing they
• 27:03
  Speaker 2: are outsmarting the detectives right to their faces. They get
• 27:06
  Speaker 2: off on hiding in plain sight.
• 27:07
  Speaker 1: That's just sick.
• 27:09
  Speaker 2: And the third reason, the third is much less calculated.
• 27:12
  Speaker 2: In fact, it's sheer blinding panic and nick. Yeah, they
• 27:15
  Speaker 2: commit the crime, They flew the scene, and maybe ten
• 27:18
  Speaker 2: minutes down the road there adrenaline crashes and absolute terror
• 27:22
  Speaker 2: sets in. They realize, oh my god, I dropped my
• 27:25
  Speaker 2: wallet in the grass, or they realize a car drove
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: past and might have seen their license plate, so.
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: They have to go back.
• 27:32
  Speaker 2: They are forced to return to the scene to cover
• 27:34
  Speaker 2: their tracks. Oh and while they are there fumbling around,
• 27:39
  Speaker 2: someone else pulls up another car. Oh, so they have
• 27:42
  Speaker 2: to instantly pivot and play the role of the discoverer
• 27:45
  Speaker 2: to explain why they're standing over a body.
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: That makes me want to completely revisit the image of
• 27:50
  Speaker 1: the running car from earlier, Like we imagine coming across
• 27:53
  Speaker 1: this idling vehicle headlights blazing in the dark. Right, if
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: the current sheriff is right and the passers by are
• 27:59
  Speaker 1: actually killers, we have to completely reevaluate that entire visual
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: The scene wasn't discovered. It was a stage play.
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: Yes, the staging theory is chilling. Let's walk through it together.
• 28:10
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 28:10
  Speaker 2: The perpetrators force Michelle to pull over, or maybe she
• 28:14
  Speaker 2: stops voluntarily to help them because she trusts them. The
• 28:17
  Speaker 2: violence occurs right then they realize that a car idling
• 28:20
  Speaker 2: on the side of the road with its headlights on
• 28:23
  Speaker 2: is going to attract attention very very quickly.
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: It's too visible exactly, so.
• 28:28
  Speaker 2: They leave the scene. They go establish a quick alibi
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: somewhere else, and then they purposely loop back around to
• 28:33
  Speaker 2: find her. They call the police themselves to cement themselves
• 28:37
  Speaker 2: as innocent witnesses before anyone else can discover the car
• 28:41
  Speaker 2: and report it.
• 28:42
  Speaker 1: Wow, or if we use your panic theory, what if
• 28:46
  Speaker 1: the running car was the reason they got caught in
• 28:48
  Speaker 1: the act.
• 28:49
  Speaker 2: Oh, that is a highly plausible, terrifying scenario. Let's play
• 28:53
  Speaker 2: that out. The crime is literally in progress.
• 28:56
  Speaker 1: The car is running, it's loud, the lights are on.
• 28:58
  Speaker 2: Suddenly, the perpetrators see the glow of another car's headlights
• 29:01
  Speaker 2: coming over the hill. They realize they don't have time
• 29:04
  Speaker 2: to get back to their own vehicle and flee without
• 29:06
  Speaker 2: being clearly spotted.
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: They're trapped.
• 29:08
  Speaker 2: They are trapped in the headlights of the approaching car,
• 29:10
  Speaker 2: so they pivot instantly. They step away from the victim's vehicle,
• 29:14
  Speaker 2: wave their arms frantically at the approaching driver, and screen
• 29:17
  Speaker 2: help call nine when one we just found this woman.
• 29:20
  Speaker 1: That is horrifying. It means that the nine to one
• 29:23
  Speaker 1: to one call, the very document that started this entire
• 29:26
  Speaker 1: decades long legal process, wasn't a desperate act of civic
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: duty at all.
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: No, it was an improvised performance.
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: It was a lie born out of absolute necessity to
• 29:36
  Speaker 1: avoid being caught red handed, and.
• 29:38
  Speaker 2: If the current sheriff's instincts are correct, it was a
• 29:41
  Speaker 2: performance that worked flawlessly for over a quarter of a century.
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: It's insane.
• 29:45
  Speaker 2: It worked so well that it completely blinded the original detectives,
• 29:50
  Speaker 2: derailed a murder investigation, and cost an innocent man sixteen
• 29:54
  Speaker 2: years of his freedom. The initial assumptions made by those
• 29:57
  Speaker 2: first responders, they simply became the concrete foundation upon which
• 30:01
  Speaker 2: the entire false house was built.
• 30:03
  Speaker 1: It really makes you wonder about the interpersonal dynamics of
• 30:06
  Speaker 1: that nineteen ninety two investigation. Yeah, I mean, in a
• 30:08
  Speaker 1: hyper local setting like that, did the police actually know
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: these passers by?
• 30:12
  Speaker 2: It's very possible.
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: Was there a so sier economic bias at play? You know,
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: the classic Oh Jim goes to my church. He comes
• 30:18
  Speaker 1: from a good family, as dad owns the hardware store.
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: He couldn't possibly be involved in something this brutal mentality.
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: The halo effect, right, So they give Jim a pass
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: and instead they go look for someone who fits their
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: preconceived stereotypical idea of a criminal.
• 30:33
  Speaker 2: That happens incredibly often in tight knit communities. The halo
• 30:36
  Speaker 2: effect protects the guilty while the horn effect condemns the innocent.
• 30:40
  Speaker 2: It is the perfect breeding ground for the exact confirmation
• 30:44
  Speaker 2: bias that ruined the initial investigation.
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: Which is exactly why a fifty four minute deep dive
• 30:49
  Speaker 1: from audio check is so powerful. Because Ashley Flowers and
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: brit Prawatt aren't just telling a spooky story about a
• 30:55
  Speaker 1: car on a dark road.
• 30:56
  Speaker 2: No, They're doing much more than that.
• 30:58
  Speaker 1: They are taking these incredibly vents, emotionally devastating layers of psychology,
• 31:03
  Speaker 1: forensic failure, and legal tragedy, and they are laying them
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: out clearly for a global audience. They are showing us
• 31:09
  Speaker 1: the fragility of truth.
• 31:11
  Speaker 2: They are demonstrating that a crime scene is never just
• 31:13
  Speaker 2: a collection of physical evidence.
• 31:15
  Speaker 1: What is it?
• 31:15
  Speaker 2: Then? It is a narrative. It's a story constructed by
• 31:18
  Speaker 2: the people who survive it, the people who find it,
• 31:21
  Speaker 2: and the people who are paid to investigate it. And
• 31:23
  Speaker 2: as this case proved so tragically, narratives can be deeply flawed,
• 31:28
  Speaker 2: unintentionally manipulated, or just entirely fabricated.
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: So let's pull all these threads together. We started with
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: this really visceral image, a running car on a dark
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: Missouri road in November nineteen ninety.
• 31:39
  Speaker 2: Two, The Paused Life.
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: Yes, the headlights piercing the night, the engine humming a
• 31:44
  Speaker 1: tragic mechanical representation of a paused life. We move through
• 31:48
  Speaker 1: the agonizing questions of victimology, trying to understand the psychological
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: levers of trust or authority that left a young woman vulnerable.
• 31:56
  Speaker 1: We confronted the massive sixteen year void of a false conviction,
• 32:00
  Speaker 1: really examining how confirmation bias can systematically steal a man's
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: life and deny a grieving family true justice.
• 32:06
  Speaker 2: And then the twist, and.
• 32:07
  Speaker 1: We ended on the modern day sheriff's bold theory that
• 32:10
  Speaker 1: the very first people on the scene, the supposed good Samaritans,
• 32:14
  Speaker 1: or the architects of the nightmare all along.
• 32:16
  Speaker 2: It really is a profound journey through the evolution and
• 32:20
  Speaker 2: the massive pitfalls of a criminal investigation. It highlights how
• 32:25
  Speaker 2: the initial framing of an event, who is deemed helpful
• 32:28
  Speaker 2: and who is deemed suspicious in those first forty eight
• 32:30
  Speaker 2: hours dictates absolutely everything that follows, for better or worse.
• 32:34
  Speaker 1: And in the case of Michelle Lawless, it was catastrophically
• 32:37
  Speaker 1: for worse.
• 32:38
  Speaker 2: Absolutely, It really leaves you.
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: With a lot to process, not just about the specifics
• 32:43
  Speaker 1: of the Michelle Lawless case or how true crime media operates,
• 32:46
  Speaker 1: but honestly about how we process information in our own
• 32:50
  Speaker 1: daily lives.
• 32:51
  Speaker 2: I agree, if a legal conviction, a supposed absolute truth,
• 32:55
  Speaker 2: verified by the highest courts, can be completely flipped twenty
• 32:58
  Speaker 2: six years later, it demands that we practice a healthy,
• 33:02
  Speaker 2: rigorous skepticism about the world around.
• 33:04
  Speaker 1: Us exactly, And that is the philosophical threat. I want
• 33:06
  Speaker 1: to leave you the listener to pull on today. I
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: want you to think about the passers by in your
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: own life.
• 33:11
  Speaker 2: That's a great point.
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: Think about the narratives you accept daily without a second thought.
• 33:17
  Speaker 1: How often do you accept the initial framing of a situation,
• 33:20
  Speaker 1: whether it's a conflict at work, a story in the news,
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: or just a rumor in your social circle. How quickly
• 33:27
  Speaker 1: do you decide who the good guys and the bad
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: guys are without ever questioning the source of that information?
• 33:32
  Speaker 2: We do it all the time, we do.
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: But if the criminal justice system, with all of its
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: resources and supposed checks and balances, can build a house
• 33:40
  Speaker 1: on the wrong foundation for sixteen years, just because they
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: trusted the first people on the scene, what assumptions are
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: you making today that might be the very things preventing
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: you from seeing the truth.
• 33:51
  Speaker 2: We all inherently want the diagnosis of our world to
• 33:54
  Speaker 2: be clean. We want the heroes to be obvious and
• 33:57
  Speaker 2: the villains to be easy to spy. But sometimes the
• 34:00
  Speaker 2: shadow in the story isn't a monster hiding in the dark.
• 34:03
  Speaker 2: Sometimes the shadow is the person holding the flashlight.
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: Wow, that is a thought that is going to linger
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: for a long time. Thank you so much for joining
• 34:12
  Speaker 1: us on this deep dive. Keep questioning the information around you,
• 34:15
  Speaker 1: keep looking for the paused actions and the narratives. You
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: are handed and we will catch you next time.