Latest / Wicked and Grim: A True Crime Podcast / Susan Monica - Oregon Pig Farm Killer

Transcript

Susan Monica - Oregon Pig Farm Killer · Wicked and Grim: A True Crime Podcast

• 0:07
  Speaker 1: On a remote farm in southern Oregon, two men vanished
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: after taking jobs with a woman who preferred the company
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: of her animals over other people. But when investigators arrived
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: looking for one of the missing men, they uncovered a
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: horrifying secret involving human remains, brutal killings, and pigs that
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: had been feeding on something they shouldn't be. What followed
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: was a disturbing investigation into the life of a woman
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: whose shocking confessions raised the terrifying possibility that there were
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: even more victims hidden somewhere on her farm. This is
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: the story of Susan Monica, the Oregon pig farm killer.
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: My name's Ben.
• 0:54
  Speaker 2: I'm Nicole, and you're listening to Wicked and Grim.
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: A true crime podcast.
• 1:09
  Speaker 3: Listener discretion is advised.
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: You hear that?
• 1:29
  Speaker 2: No.
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: Do you hear that?
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: Sounds like jingle bells, eh?
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: I mean, it's jingly ice.
• 1:34
  Speaker 3: Mm-hmm.
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: And it's delicious. It may or may not be some
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: whiskey in this.
• 1:38
  Speaker 3: Oh, okay.
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: No, you're just drinking water over there, right?
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: With a little bit of whiskey potentially. Just saying.
• 1:45
  Speaker 2: It's one of those days you needed it.
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: It is. I feel pretty like mopey. Like not like bad.
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: I just feel like blah because it's been like super
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: rainy and super gross here last few days. So I just.
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: My energy is matching the weather.
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: That's all it is.
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: Which is fair.
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: It is.
• 2:03
  Speaker 2: There's been a lot of true crime news, I feel like,
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: this past week or so.
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: There has.
• 2:08
  Speaker 2: A lot of things going down.
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: This past couple months, even, and we haven't really talked
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: about much of it, but there is one specific one
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: I know you wanted to mention today.
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: Well, yeah, the whole Krista Pike ordeal.
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: Dang, that one's been kind of fascinating to follow.
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: That one has been angering me quite a bit.
• 2:27
  Speaker 2: Yeah. So basically she was sentenced to death. I think
• 2:30
  Speaker 2: it took, I don't know how long, but literally forever
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: for her actually to have the day where she was
• 2:35
  Speaker 2: going to get her death penalty.
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: She was on death row for a while.
• 2:38
  Speaker 2: And then they gave her two like lethal injections, but
• 2:43
  Speaker 2: she somehow survived them.
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:48
  Speaker 2: And she's like awake and stuff now.
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: Well, I don't understand.
• 2:52
  Speaker 2: I don't get how that works.
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: I don't understand that either. Like I, to be fair,
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: I haven't read the articles. I'm kind of waiting for
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: the result of the story before I dive in and
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: kind of figure it out and maybe even cover it
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: on podcast.
• 3:06
  Speaker 2: I want to cover it.
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: Um, so I'm just waiting before I do my research.
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: But as far as my understanding is when someone goes
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: to lethal injection and you inject them and they're dying,
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: why are you saving them? That makes no sense to me.
• 3:23
  Speaker 2: Well, the injection went wrong. Something went wrong. So I
• 3:28
  Speaker 2: don't know exactly how, but then they did it again
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: and it still was fucked up. So, I mean, I
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: can't recall hearing about this before. Like, I feel like
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: it's pretty simple what you would have to do. So
• 3:43
  Speaker 2: I don't know. It's just interesting that this somehow got
• 3:46
  Speaker 2: botched or whatever.
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: Well, even with it being botched, sure. Shit happens. I
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: get that. Okay. Then there was some life-saving interventions put
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: into place. Okay. The point is for her to be killed.
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: So I don't understand why you're trying to save her life,
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: but I digress. They did. Now she's awake. Isn't she
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: in the hospital? She's awake. Why is she not immediately
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: going back to get her injections?
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: Well, see, my thought is I bet you because something happened,
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: it was no longer like humane of sorts, maybe the
• 4:20
  Speaker 2: way she was going to die or something because the
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: injection didn't quite work. And so, yeah, they had to
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: take different measures to make it humane. But now I
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: bet you anything she won't be put to rest. Well, yeah.
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: I don't think she will.
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: Now it opens up a whole new can of worms.
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: There's a potential for her doing a lawsuit to say,
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: you botched this, you harmed me. Now I have life altering,
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: you know, things that are going on and you don't
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: get to kill me because I already technically served my
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: lethal injection sentence. So there is so much this opens
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: up when the situation should be, no, you are sentenced
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: to death. You should be serving that right now. We're not,
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: I can go on and on.
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: I know there should really be no gray area, but
• 5:05
  Speaker 2: the world we live in, there is a lot of
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: gray area. And I think that she'll probably come out
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: of this alive.
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: I understand you want a humane death. I get it.
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: Fair enough. But if something's botched in my mind and
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: you enter non-humane area, saving that person is non-humane to
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: the person that they killed and the reason why they're
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: in that sentence in the first place. So you're just
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: in a muddy water and I feel you just need
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: to march forward, get it done as humane as possible
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: given your circumstances.
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: Well, like back in the day when they had hangings
• 5:41
  Speaker 2: and stuff, I bet you sometimes people, you know, they
• 5:45
  Speaker 2: didn't necessarily die from like the neck breaking or something.
• 5:48
  Speaker 3: Oh, yeah.
• 5:49
  Speaker 2: But they they wouldn't have just been like, oh, shit,
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: we did this wrong. Let's bring you over here to
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: recover and you're good now. Like, I don't know. Like,
• 5:59
  Speaker 2: it just wouldn't. They probably would have just left you
• 6:01
  Speaker 2: to suffer.
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: We covered a story recently where the guy was going
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: to get burned at the stake. And they're going to
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: choke him first. And this is in like, it was
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: like the 1800s or something.
• 6:12
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: And they're going to choke him out first. So he
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: was either unconscious or already dead when they burned him.
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: But it botched. And so they just burnt him regardless.
• 6:24
  Speaker 2: But, you know, there is also the argument. It's like, gosh,
• 6:28
  Speaker 2: like it's almost a freaking miracle that she survived that. Sure.
• 6:33
  Speaker 2: So it's like, shit, why? Why did that happen? You know,
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: but that's. but she did terrible things. So it's like,
• 6:40
  Speaker 2: she should pay for her sentence, but it also, I
• 6:43
  Speaker 2: don't know. I'm a bit weird that way in the
• 6:45
  Speaker 2: sense of like, okay, well, why did that not work?
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: Like, yeah, but the reason why it could not work,
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: you can argue that it's a miracle. It's something from
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: God or divine intervention, but you can also argue that
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: the person who administered the lethal injection may have not
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: gotten a perfect score and missed the vein or that
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: they have been stressed at work recently, or that maybe the,
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: the place where they got the chemical, they had to
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: change an ingredient that wasn't quite as potent or reacted
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: slightly different. There's a million things and only one of
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: them is, or a couple of them, is divine intervention.
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: Well, and it's probably, yeah, there's probably many logical reasons.
• 7:22
  Speaker 2: You're right.
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: So which one is the truth?
• 7:25
  Speaker 2: But yeah, I do want to cover this story one
• 7:27
  Speaker 2: day because it is pretty freaking, it's a mess really
• 7:30
  Speaker 2: right now. It is.
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: It's a mess.
• 7:33
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: And we will cover it, but we are waiting for
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: The final result, which at this point, it might still
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: take a while for us to get there.
• 7:41
  Speaker 2: Yeah, for the fire to die down, I guess.
• 7:45
  Speaker 3: Exactly.
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: But anyways, we chatted for over five minutes on that.
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: I think we should get into today's story right away.
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: Let's do it.
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: Okay. So this is the story of something that's very
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: closely correlated to an infamous story of Robert Pickton. And
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: I'm just going to say that, and now I'm going
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: to get into it. So Robert Harry Haney was born
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: on June 26, 1957. He grew up in a working-class environment,
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: and it was where he developed an interest in working
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: with his hands. In his teenage years, he reportedly struggled socially.
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: He had relatively few close friends and eventually dropped out
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: of high school. At one point, Robert even ran away
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: from home for a while with a friend before he
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: subsequently returned, but that's besides the point. Now, as he
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: grew older... Robert found his footing in construction. He developed
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: very practical skills in carpentry, repairs, and general labor, becoming
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: someone who could make a living taking a very wide
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: variety of jobs. It was during these years that he
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: met Talia Larson, whom he eventually married. Together, Robert and
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: Talia had five children, and for much of their marriage,
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: Robert worked long hours to support the family. He was
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: a hardworking man who regularly put in six day work weeks. However,
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: spending much like that much time away from his family
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: and his wife, it created a lot of difficulties in
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: his marriage. And by 2003, Robert and Talia had divorced.
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: Following their separation, Robert moved to Medford, Oregon, taking his
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: four children who were still living with them in the
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: home along the road. There he continued working in construction.
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: providing for his four children as they grew older and
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: eventually even beginning their own lives. And with his children
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: now becoming independent, Robert decided to make some changes in
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: his life. After decades of raising a family, maintaining a household, well,
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: he wanted a lifestyle that offered a lot more freedom.
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: So he purchased a travel trailer. He could tow this
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: behind his pickup truck. He could take himself and his
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: new dog and begin traveling around Oregon finding temporary construction
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: jobs and handyman work wherever it was available. He enjoyed
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: the independence that came with his new arrangement of his life.
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: He could travel between communities, take on a job for
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: a while, move somewhere else whenever he was ready. In
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: doing so, he generally worked for cash and didn't maintain
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: a conventional banking arrangement. And although he was frequently on
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: the move, he continued to have contact very regularly with
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: his children. Now, by 2013, Robert was 55 years old
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: and still earning a living through physical labor. His experience
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: with construction made him particularly suited to jobs involving renovations,
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: building projects, and property maintenance. It was this kind of
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: work that eventually brought him to a rural property outside Weimar, Oregon,
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: owned by a woman named Susan Monica. Now, Susan was
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: born on July 8th, 1948 in California under her birth name,
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: Steven Buchanan, and spent much of her early life around
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: the San Francisco Bay area. She had a younger brother
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: and a sister, although her family relationships became strained over
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: the years. Susan served in the United States Navy during
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: the Vietnam War. spending approximately three years and seven months
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: in the service before receiving an honorable discharge. Following her
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: military service is when Susan began their transition as a
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: woman and pursued work in engineering. From there, she studied
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: her engineering, architect, and mathematics, although she didn't obtain a
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: formal degree. Her professional experience reportedly included engineering work involving
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: submarines in the San Francisco area, and she was also
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: a skilled metal worker who could weld, fabricate equipment, and
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: operate heavy machinery. In 1991, Susan purchased approximately 20 acres
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: of undeveloped land along West Evans Creek Road in Weimar,
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: an unincorporated community in Jackson Community, south of Oregon. The
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: property was situated in a very heavily wooded rural area
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: east of Grand Pass, surrounded by forests and scattered residential properties.
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: There was little infrastructure when she acquired the land, And
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: so much of the development fell on Susan herself. She
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: cleared sections of the property, constructed a large barn, established
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: animal enclosures, and created a living area within one of
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: the structures. She also began raising pigs and chickens, eventually
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: maintaining a sizable collection of livestock. Now with all of this,
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: it's no surprise to say Susan preferred a relatively isolated
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: lifestyle and wasn't particularly interested in modern conveniences. She kept
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: working on her property and the farm, and the grounds even,
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: that accumulated considerable amounts of machinery, scrap metal, discarded materials,
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: and other items over the years. To support herself financially,
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: Susan operated a business called White Queen Construction. It specialized
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: in wrought iron fencing, railings, gates, and other ornamental metalworks.
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: Her skills? Well, they allowed her to design and fabricate
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: many of these products on her own. She also raised
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: pigs for meat and occasionally sold animals to people in
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: the surrounding community too. Now, despite her preference for solitude,
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: Susan was known around the area. Some residents described her
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: as intimidating because of her large stature, rough appearance, and
• 13:28
  Speaker 1: tendency to arrive at local businesses covered in dirt from
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: working on the farm. But others remembered her as helpful,
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: including accounts of her collecting food and delivering it to
• 13:38
  Speaker 1: elderly residents. Now, maintaining the property was a substantial undertaking,
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: and Susan occasionally hired people to help with some things
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: like clearing brush or moving material and completing construction projects.
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: She advertised locally using handwritten cards posted in stores or
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: would approach people at a mission and grant pass and
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: sought workers through various different channels. And by 2013, Susan
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: was planning to construct a more permanent house in the
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: property and needed someone to help out with some building experience.
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: And Robert, well, he just so happened to be in
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: the area looking for work and also a place where
• 14:18
  Speaker 1: he could park his RV trailer.
• 14:20
  Speaker 2: That's perfect then.
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: The two found each other through Susan's outreach for workers
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: and they reached an agreement where Robert got to live
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: on Susan's land with his dog while carrying out construction
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: work and handyman work. So Robert brought his trailer to
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: the nearly 20 acre farm property. and began assisting with
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: building projects and various repairs. And Susan continued operating her
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: metalworking business and caring for the livestock. By the summer
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: of 2013, Robert was spending his time working on these projects.
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: And he had his pickup truck, his motorcycle, his tools,
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: and his dog all within his RV area. He also
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: was taking up the occasional jobs elsewhere in the area too,
• 15:02
  Speaker 1: not just on Susan's farm. Now Robert's arrangement with Susan
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: involved more than simply exchanging labor for accommodations. According to Susan,
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: he also paid rent, sometimes in cash and occasionally by
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: giving her equipment instead of money. Robert apparently gave her
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: two trailers once, which she valued at approximately $ 600 each,
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: with each trailer covering two months of rent. She also
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: described receiving another $ 300 from him for rent, and Robert
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: continued searching for additional employment, including work in the logging
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: industry around Cave Junction in Josephine County, west of Weimar.
• 15:38
  Speaker 2: Okay, because she couldn't always fill his days, basically.
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: I don't think so. I don't think she had full-time
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: work for him, but there was certainly enough that having
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: him around was nice.
• 15:49
  Speaker 2: Handy, yeah.
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: Now, although they lived on the same property, the two
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: actually rarely socialized. Robert spent much of his time in
• 15:56
  Speaker 1: his RV or working elsewhere, occasionally visiting her living quarters
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: to make coffee or watch TV. But there were times
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: when Susan said she wouldn't see him for about an
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: entire week even. Now, by late summer, there had been
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: reportedly some difficulties. Susan described Robert as someone who occasionally
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: drank heavily, and she claimed that his behavior could become
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: unpredictable when he was intoxicated. One incident reportedly involved Robert
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: becoming loud enough to even disturb another neighbor. And Susan
• 16:29
  Speaker 1: said she spoke with him about the noise and warned
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: that he needed to be quieter while living on her property.
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: She also claimed that Robert had become deeply upset about
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: a serious incident involving one of his daughters. Apparently, Robert
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: had learned that his daughter had been the victim of rape,
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: and he occasionally spoke about confronting the person responsible.
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that would probably make you drink a little bit
• 16:53
  Speaker 2: more heavily, that's for sure.
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: Oh, for sure.
• 16:55
  Speaker 2: It's hard to deal with.
• 16:56
  Speaker 1: But it also was a bit of a spiral because
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: the more he drank, the more he would talk about it.
• 17:01
  Speaker 3: You know? Yeah.
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: Now, around September 9th, 2013, Susan also claimed that Robert's
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: behavior became especially unusual. She described an occasion where he
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: became intoxicated and damaged the room he'd been using near
• 17:15
  Speaker 1: her living quarters. According to Susan, Robert scattered his belongings
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: and left the space in considerable disorder. She said that
• 17:23
  Speaker 1: a day or two after this incident, Robert approached her,
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: gave her $ 20 to look after her dog, and he
• 17:30
  Speaker 1: apparently intended to leave the property for a while, although
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: Susan claimed he never clearly explained where he was going.
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: She said he left in a white four-door vehicle that
• 17:41
  Speaker 1: she believed resembled her own car. She claimed Robert walked
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: down towards the road, entered the vehicle, although she couldn't
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: remember whether he sat in the front or back seat,
• 17:51
  Speaker 1: and she said she was also certain on how many
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: people were already inside this vehicle. But she thought Robert
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: might be traveling to Ashland, Oregon, either for employment or
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: to deal with family stuff and things that were troubling
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: him or whatever, and he'd be back soon. He left
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: without taking most of his belongings. His pickup truck remained
• 18:09
  Speaker 1: on the property along with his motorcycle, his RV, clothing, tools,
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: and of course, his dog. Susan expected him to return,
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: so she continued feeding his dog each morning, collecting food
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: and water supplies stored inside Robert's pickup truck. Now, as
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: September passed into October, Robert's family began noticing that they
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: hadn't heard from him. His children were accustomed to their
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: father's independent lifestyle, and it wasn't unusual for Robert to
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: travel or spend time working in an area where communication
• 18:41
  Speaker 1: could be difficult. However, he generally maintained contact with his family,
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: particularly his daughters. Now, one of Robert's sons, Robert Haney Jr.,
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: known as Bobby, contacted Susan to ask about his father's whereabouts,
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: about a month after she had last seen Robert. During
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: their discussion, Bobby reportedly explained that his sister was becoming concerned,
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: and it was because Robert ordinarily contacted her once or
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: twice a week, but she'd heard nothing. Susan told Bobby
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: that Robert left the farm and suggested he probably went
• 19:15
  Speaker 1: to Ashland. But despite knowing that Robert hadn't returned for
• 19:18
  Speaker 1: several weeks, Susan didn't contact the authorities. She didn't report
• 19:23
  Speaker 1: him missing. She didn't do anything. As December 2013 approached,
• 19:30
  Speaker 1: Robert's family still hadn't heard from him. His son Jesse
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: Haney became more and more concerned and began contacting his
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: siblings to determine whether anyone had spoken with their father.
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: But nobody could establish where Robert was living or working
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: or anything. So on January 1st, 2014, Jesse and several
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: of his siblings traveled to susan's property along west evans
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: creek road to look for him when they arrived susan
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: told them that robert had left months earlier and he
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: hadn't returned she said his belongings were still there and
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: asked whether the family could actually remove them the children
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: went to examine the area where robert had been living
• 20:09
  Speaker 1: His RV was still on the property, as was his
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: pickup truck, motorcycle, and much of his personal belongings. Jesse
• 20:16
  Speaker 1: even noticed his father's leather jacket, something he frequently wore,
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: along with his tools that he relied upon for making
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: a living. And some of those tools were even scattered
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: around the area rather than being properly stored. Robert's dog
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: was also still there, roaming the property. For Jesse, the
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: abandoned tools were especially concerning. Robert had spent much of
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: his adult life working as a handyman, and his tools,
• 20:43
  Speaker 1: they were essential to his livelihood. Leaving them behind for
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: several months without making arrangements to retrieve them, well, it
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: just seemed completely out of character.
• 20:56
  Speaker 2: You kind of have me on the edge of my
• 20:57
  Speaker 2: seat here, because often cases, you can kind of be like, oh,
• 21:01
  Speaker 2: like predict pretty easily what's about to happen or what
• 21:04
  Speaker 2: goes down. And this one, my brain... Feels like it's
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: being overactive in trying to figure it out. Like, is
• 21:13
  Speaker 2: Robert sketchy? Is freaking Susan sketchy? Now, after your last
• 21:16
  Speaker 2: little few sentences, I kind of think she might be sketch.
• 21:20
  Speaker 2: But I still am not totally sure.
• 21:22
  Speaker 1: Well, I will be honest. I wrote today's episode a
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: little bit different than I normally do. I used to
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: write episodes a lot more like this, where I keep
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: things a little bit on the more mysterious side. I
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: leave things hanging, and then I kind of explain later on.
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: Whereas the last, I don't know, even year or so,
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: I've been writing things more like, here's what happened. Here's
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: how it happened after. So I usually lay everything out
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: on like, this is what happened. This is the person
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: who killed and person who died. Now let's go into
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: why and how and it all fanning out.
• 21:53
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: What I'm doing today is essentially backwards. Here's the slow
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: buildup of it all. The slow question marks that come.
• 21:59
  Speaker 2: Slow burn.
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: And then the answer at the end. Yeah.
• 22:02
  Speaker 2: Well, you have me a bit excited because- I don't
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: know what the hell is happening.
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: Well, I'm glad. I've had some people comment before that,
• 22:10
  Speaker 1: you know what? They like the new writing style. They
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: like the way we're going with the show, but they've
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: missed some of the episodes where those questions hang in
• 22:16
  Speaker 1: the air. So this one's for you guys specifically. If
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: you like it when the mystery is still in it,
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: I'm writing this one specifically for you.
• 22:24
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 22:25
  Speaker 2: I feel like my brain's going wild though.
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: I'm glad. Okay, let's continue. So the site of all
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: of Robert's possessions sitting there It was so unsettling to
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: all of his kids, especially since there was no confirmed
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: destination or forwarding address or any sort of indication that
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: he was going to even return to collect anything.
• 22:44
  Speaker 2: Because also just to confirm too, he hadn't told his
• 22:47
  Speaker 2: kids that he was even like leaving this farm, right?
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: Correct. He just did one day.
• 22:52
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: So with their concerns growing, Robert's children contacted the Jackson
• 22:57
  Speaker 1: County Sheriff's Office and officially reported their father missing. Now,
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: the sheriff's office soon began investigating the circumstances surrounding his disappearance.
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: And among the investigators involved was Jackson County Sheriff Detective
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: Eric Henderson. And because Robert had been living on Susan's
• 23:14
  Speaker 1: property near Weimar, Oregon, deputies began their inquiries there. During
• 23:19
  Speaker 1: an initial visit in January of 2014, officers examined the trailer,
• 23:25
  Speaker 1: the RV, where Robert had been staying. His family had
• 23:28
  Speaker 1: already explained that his vehicle, tools, and other belongings remained
• 23:31
  Speaker 1: on the property, although his wallet was missing. Susan repeated
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: that Robert had left sometime in September, following a period
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: of heavy drinking and erratic behavior. She explained that he
• 23:43
  Speaker 1: might have traveled to Ashland to find work, deal with
• 23:46
  Speaker 1: family matters, who knows. She couldn't identify anyone who accompanied him, however,
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: and had no information where he was even currently living.
• 23:54
  Speaker 1: She had nothing. Now, as the officers were leaving Robert's RV,
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: they noticed Susan's large pigs in a nearby enclosure. Now,
• 24:04
  Speaker 1: Susan volunteered an unusual piece of information to them at
• 24:07
  Speaker 1: that point. She told them she was actually trying to
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: obtain a government grant to study how pigs consumed human bodies. Now,
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: officers returned to the property several days later for another
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: conversation with Susan. And this time, the discussion was recorded.
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: Susan told them about when Robert had become intoxicated and
• 24:29
  Speaker 1: damaged the room he was using. She also spoke about
• 24:32
  Speaker 1: the trouble she occasionally experienced with people living or working
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: on her land. During the conversation, Susan made another comment
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: about her pigs. Quote, I've threatened to kill everybody and
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: feed them to my pigs. End quote. She told the
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: officers this before adding that the pigs probably would actually
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: eat a person, although she didn't believe human flesh would
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: actually be good for them. Now, Susan characterized these remarks
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: as jokes, explaining that she had a very unusual sense
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: of humor. The comments were disturbing for sure, but investigators, though,
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: they still needed to focus on gathering evidence to establish
• 25:08
  Speaker 1: what had happened to Robert first and foremost.
• 25:12
  Speaker 2: That is some messed up shit.
• 25:14
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it is.
• 25:15
  Speaker 2: Like, read the room, dude.
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: No kidding.
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: Probably not the best time to just, you know, throw
• 25:20
  Speaker 2: that out there.
• 25:21
  Speaker 1: Oh, definitely. And, like, I've got a weird, dumb sense
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: of humor. I've also got a dark sense of humor
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: at times. I'm not about to, as officers are investigating
• 25:31
  Speaker 1: a disappearance on my property, make a joke about my
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: animals eating people.
• 25:37
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I don't know if I've ever heard of more
• 25:40
  Speaker 2: of a red flag, to be honest.
• 25:43
  Speaker 1: That, like, that's... That's not a flag. That's like just
• 25:47
  Speaker 1: a sheet that covers your entire property in just a
• 25:50
  Speaker 1: crimson red of what the fuck.
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah, like that would just make them, I don't know,
• 25:56
  Speaker 2: really question you. So I don't quite get that.
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it was not the most helpful piece of information.
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: But maybe it was.
• 26:04
  Speaker 1: Well, maybe it was. I guess we'll find out. Now,
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: part of the difficulty of this situation was that Robert
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: lived largely alone. on cash. He had no conventional banking
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: activity that investigators could simply follow, and his temporary employment
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: made it difficult to establish his movements after September as well. However,
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: Robert did possess what was called an Oregon Trail Card,
• 26:30
  Speaker 1: which is Oregon's electronic benefits card used to access government assistance,
• 26:35
  Speaker 1: including food benefits. So investigators examined the activity associated with
• 26:40
  Speaker 1: Robert's account and discovered that his benefits... had actually been
• 26:44
  Speaker 1: continued to be used after he was last seen, after
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: he was said to have disappeared. These records show transactions
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: at a Walmart in Grants Pass, Oregon, including purchases in
• 26:56
  Speaker 1: December of 2013, approximately three months after Susan claimed Robert
• 27:01
  Speaker 1: had left the property. Now, this discovery was significant because
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: if Robert had traveled elsewhere, as Susan suggested, someone was
• 27:11
  Speaker 1: still using his benefits in the area where he had
• 27:14
  Speaker 1: been living. So investigators quickly obtained surveillance footage associated with
• 27:19
  Speaker 1: the Walmart transactions. And rather than finding Robert, you know,
• 27:23
  Speaker 1: making the purchases himself there, they saw someone else. And
• 27:27
  Speaker 1: they identified that someone else as Susan Monica using the card. Now,
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: when this was brought to her, she was questioned about
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: it very thoroughly. And she explained that Robert had voluntarily
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: given her this card, also with its personal PIN number,
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: so she could actually purchase groceries for him at times.
• 27:51
  Speaker 1: She claimed that he had sometimes asked her to buy coffee, food,
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: even beer, although beer could not be purchased with the benefits,
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: but I digress. So Susan said that she used her
• 28:02
  Speaker 1: own money for the alcohol and then the card for
• 28:05
  Speaker 1: the grocery portions.
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: Super sketch.
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: But the continuing transactions raised questions about whether that permission
• 28:11
  Speaker 1: extended to the months Robert had actually been missing. Now,
• 28:16
  Speaker 1: by January 10th, 2014, authorities needed to look deeper at
• 28:19
  Speaker 1: the property Robert was living on. So police obtained a
• 28:23
  Speaker 1: search warrant for Susan's farm. The warrant and authorization covered
• 28:28
  Speaker 1: evidence associated with the identity theft and the theft alone,
• 28:32
  Speaker 1: including Robert's Oregon Trail cart. the identification, the wallet, the
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: sales receipts, the related material to that. It also included
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: vehicle registered to and controlled by Susan as well. When
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: officers arrived, they were left with a bit of a
• 28:48
  Speaker 1: needle in a haystack situation. Susan had spent more than
• 28:52
  Speaker 1: 20 years developing the property, and there were numerous places
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: where documents, cards, or other personal belongings might be stashed
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: and stored. Remember, at this point, she doesn't even actually
• 29:02
  Speaker 1: have a Now, the barn adjacent the living quarters were
• 29:14
  Speaker 1: surrounded by equipment and discarded materials. There were various sections
• 29:18
  Speaker 1: of the land that had been excavated or disturbed, and
• 29:20
  Speaker 1: the livestock occupied multiple different pens. To say the least,
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: there was a lot to search. And officers also described
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: a strong smell of animal waste and decay on the property,
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: which honestly isn't abnormal for many farms.
• 29:34
  Speaker 2: Farm animals are stinky.
• 29:36
  Speaker 1: They definitely can be stinky. We've got chickens out there
• 29:38
  Speaker 1: and we can walk 24. from our front door and
• 29:41
  Speaker 1: tell you that very same thing.
• 29:42
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: But given the property size and the condition, the search
• 29:47
  Speaker 1: presented considerable practical difficulties to say the least. Now, before
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: the officers began systematically examining individual structures and searching for
• 29:56
  Speaker 1: the items identified in the warrant, One deputy started recording
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: a video to survey the grounds, to start everything off.
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: And while he walked around the property, the deputy noticed
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: something lying on the ground in the open near Susan's
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: living quarters. It appeared to be a bone of sorts.
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: In fact, it appeared to be part of a human leg.
• 30:20
  Speaker 1: On closer examination, it was an extended piece from approximately...
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: the middle of the femur down towards the foot, including
• 30:29
  Speaker 1: the lower leg and even the toes. And it was
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: in fact human.
• 30:35
  Speaker 2: Oh my goodness. Just sitting there.
• 30:36
  Speaker 1: Just sitting there. Officers documented the discovery and notified the
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: other investigators. Susan was quickly detained and arrangements were made
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: to take her to the sheriff's office for further questioning.
• 30:49
  Speaker 1: Now the discovery of the leg also required a new warrant.
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: The original authorization was, concerned identity theft and the theft,
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: but investigators now had grounds to search for evidence connected
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: to a possible homicide. And so they applied for a
• 31:03
  Speaker 1: second search warrant covering that investigation. Meanwhile, at the Jackson
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: County Sheriff's Office, Detective Eric Henderson began questioning Susan about
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: Robert's disappearance and the unusual discovery that was just made
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: in the search of a property. The interview was being recorded.
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: And in fact, you can find the entire interrogation on YouTube.
• 31:26
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 31:28
  Speaker 2: This isn't funny at all, but I'm almost like trying
• 31:30
  Speaker 2: not to laugh because we went from someone being so
• 31:34
  Speaker 2: smart that they could sell the Eiffel Tower.
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: In the last episode, yeah.
• 31:39
  Speaker 2: To someone who was like talking to police, talking about
• 31:41
  Speaker 2: how they want to feed bodies to their pigs. And
• 31:44
  Speaker 2: there's a fucking leg just in their yard.
• 31:48
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 31:49
  Speaker 2: So it is just one end of. It's a fricking
• 31:52
  Speaker 2: scale in my opinion.
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: Very stark contrast.
• 31:54
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 31:56
  Speaker 1: Now Susan appeared willing to answer the questions from the
• 31:58
  Speaker 1: authorities and she was actually particularly concerned during so about
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: the search warrant investigators had executed on her property earlier
• 32:06
  Speaker 1: that day. In fact, she requested a copy of the
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: document herself and asked detective Henderson to read it out
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: loud because she didn't have her glasses. But Susan immediately
• 32:15
  Speaker 1: challenged some of the information contained in it, particularly the,
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: an incorrect date concerning her ownership of the property and
• 32:22
  Speaker 1: questioned whether those were inaccurate enough to keep the warrant valid. Now,
• 32:28
  Speaker 1: Detective Henderson continued by asking about Robert's benefit card, which
• 32:33
  Speaker 1: investigators knew Susan had been using since his disappearance. Susan
• 32:39
  Speaker 1: continued to explain that Robert had voluntarily given her the
• 32:43
  Speaker 1: card and its PIN number to pick stuff up for him.
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: According to Susan, she originally returned the card after making purchases,
• 32:50
  Speaker 1: but Robert eventually just allowed her to keep it because
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: she went shopping more frequently than he did. But that
• 32:56
  Speaker 1: explanation became considerably more complicated when Henderson asked why Susan
• 33:02
  Speaker 1: had continued spending Robert's benefits after he had disappeared. Now,
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: she acknowledged that she began purchasing groceries for herself approximately
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: two or three weeks after he left, estimating that she
• 33:14
  Speaker 1: had used his card around a dozen times or so.
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: And she also admitted that she continued spending the available
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: benefits and additional funds that were deposited into the account. However,
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: when the card stopped receiving money, Susan said she burned it.
• 33:31
  Speaker 1: And when she was asked whether she would have continued
• 33:33
  Speaker 1: using it if more funds were available, she said she
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: probably would have. Now, despite these admissions, though, Susan maintained
• 33:42
  Speaker 1: that Robert had originally given her permission to use the card,
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: and insisted that she hadn't considered the possibility of getting
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: in trouble if she did so. Now, as the interview continued,
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: Detective Henderson returned to Robert's disappearance. Susan repeated her account
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: of him leaving in a white vehicle sometime in September
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: of 2013, explaining that she believed he might have traveled
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: to Ashland for employment or deal with personal family matters.
• 34:11
  Speaker 1: She couldn't identify the driver, provide any information about Robert's destination,
• 34:15
  Speaker 1: but insisted he left his belongings behind. Then when Detective
• 34:20
  Speaker 1: Henderson questioned why she hadn't contacted authorities after Robert remained
• 34:24
  Speaker 1: missing for several months, well, Susan suggested she hadn't considered
• 34:29
  Speaker 1: it her responsibility. Now the conversation eventually turned to the
• 34:36
  Speaker 1: discovery officers had made on Susan's property, the leg. Detective
• 34:41
  Speaker 1: Henderson informed her that the investigators had found what appeared
• 34:44
  Speaker 1: to be a human leg lying near her living quarters.
• 34:47
  Speaker 1: And Susan immediately asked whether it had been discovered closer
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: to Robert's camper, apparently trying to understand how it could
• 34:53
  Speaker 1: have ended up near her own residence. When Detective Henderson
• 34:57
  Speaker 1: explained that the remains were only a short distance from
• 35:00
  Speaker 1: her living quarters, she acknowledged that the discovery was very unusual,
• 35:04
  Speaker 1: but she had no explanation for it. In fact, she
• 35:07
  Speaker 1: even suggested that a coyote might have carried the limb
• 35:10
  Speaker 1: from somewhere else onto her property. Now, even as Detective
• 35:15
  Speaker 1: Henderson pressed her harder about the remains, Susan continued questioning
• 35:19
  Speaker 1: whether the search warrant was legally valid, which of course
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: it was. Now, following a break, Detective Eric Fox, who
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: also served as a deputy medical examiner, joined the questioning.
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: Detective Fox explained that the remains were unquestionably human and
• 35:36
  Speaker 1: discussed how investigators could examine them for identifying characteristics, things
• 35:41
  Speaker 1: like gunshot injuries or Even evidence of other violence, too.
• 35:46
  Speaker 1: He asked Susan whether she knew anything about Robert's disappearance.
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: Anything that she might not have already disclosed. Something she
• 35:53
  Speaker 1: could have withheld. And even gradually returned the conversation to
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: the pigs and the possibility that Robert had somehow entered
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: their enclosure. Susan continued insisting she didn't know what had
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: happened to him. But eventually, asked Detective Fox a question
• 36:11
  Speaker 1: of her own. She asked if her pigs had eaten Robert,
• 36:15
  Speaker 1: would authorities kill them? Now, Detective Fox explained that he
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: couldn't answer that question without considering the circumstances. But shortly afterwards,
• 36:26
  Speaker 1: Susan began describing an incident she claimed had occurred approximately
• 36:30
  Speaker 1: a week after speaking with Robert's son, Bobby. According to
• 36:34
  Speaker 1: her account, she had gone outside one morning, to feed
• 36:38
  Speaker 1: her animals when she noticed three pigs gathered around something
• 36:41
  Speaker 1: in the middle of their enclosure. Now, ordinarily, the animals
• 36:45
  Speaker 1: approached her when she arrived with their food, excited to
• 36:48
  Speaker 1: get fed, right? But on this occasion, they remained occupied
• 36:51
  Speaker 1: with whatever was lying on the ground. Susan said she
• 36:55
  Speaker 1: walked closer and discovered that her pigs were feeding on Robert,
• 37:01
  Speaker 1: whose abdomen had been torn open, leaving his internal organs exposed.
• 37:07
  Speaker 1: She initially even claimed that Robert was still alive, because
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: she could hear him moaning and could see movement from
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: one of his arms.
• 37:17
  Speaker 2: And she's just mentioning this information now?
• 37:21
  Speaker 1: She's just mentioning it now.
• 37:25
  Speaker 2: Okay, holy frick.
• 37:27
  Speaker 1: This entire time she maintained that he just left in
• 37:30
  Speaker 1: some random car and that was that, but now her
• 37:34
  Speaker 1: pigs were eating him.
• 37:37
  Speaker 2: Well, the kids were there too, right? Or no?
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: No, this was after.
• 37:41
  Speaker 2: Oh, this was after?
• 37:42
  Speaker 1: She said this was after, about a week or so after, yeah.
• 37:45
  Speaker 3: Wow.
• 37:46
  Speaker 2: And she didn't think to maybe like pull them out
• 37:49
  Speaker 2: of there or phone the police or something?
• 37:52
  Speaker 1: Well, she did describe trying to drive the pigs away
• 37:56
  Speaker 1: from him. She said she was striking at them with
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: her hands. She was shouting, but she couldn't get them
• 38:01
  Speaker 1: to stop feeding. She said she then returned to her
• 38:06
  Speaker 1: living quarters. and retrieved a rifle and went back to
• 38:09
  Speaker 1: the enclosure. According to Susan, Robert was so severely injured
• 38:15
  Speaker 1: that she didn't believe he could survive even if emergency
• 38:18
  Speaker 1: medical assistance arrived right then and there. So rather than
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: contacting anyone, she admitted that she shot Robert in the head,
• 38:28
  Speaker 1: explaining that she believed she was ending his suffering.
• 38:31
  Speaker 2: Oh dear, that would not be a decision she should
• 38:34
  Speaker 2: have made.
• 38:35
  Speaker 1: No, it's not. Now, when detectives asked how many times
• 38:39
  Speaker 1: she'd fired her rifle, Susan couldn't provide a definitive answer.
• 38:44
  Speaker 1: She acknowledged she might have fired more than once, claiming
• 38:47
  Speaker 1: that she had turned her head away because she couldn't
• 38:49
  Speaker 1: bear to watch what she was doing. Now, after the shooting,
• 38:54
  Speaker 1: Susan said she left Robert's body inside the enclosure and
• 38:58
  Speaker 1: continued feeding her other animals. She didn't contact police or
• 39:03
  Speaker 1: attempt to arrange for his remains to be recovered. Instead,
• 39:06
  Speaker 1: she just simply allowed the pigs to continue to consume
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: his body over the following days before eventually returning to
• 39:16
  Speaker 1: collect whatever it was that was remaining. Susan described gathering
• 39:21
  Speaker 1: bones and other surviving remnants into plastic garbage bags while
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: placing Robert's clothing into a burn barrel inside the barn.
• 39:30
  Speaker 1: She told investigators that the bags were still stored on
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: a shelf near her living quarters and began drawing diagrams
• 39:37
  Speaker 1: showing exactly where they were and where she allegedly shot Robert. Now,
• 39:44
  Speaker 1: Detective Henderson questioned and scrutinized several aspects of her explanations.
• 39:49
  Speaker 1: particularly how Robert could have ended up inside an enclosure
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: that Susan claimed he had never entered or gone into before.
• 39:56
  Speaker 1: It wasn't like he was used to going in and
• 39:58
  Speaker 1: feeding the animals. He asked whether Robert had threatened her,
• 40:02
  Speaker 1: whether they had argued, or whether some confrontation might have
• 40:06
  Speaker 1: occurred before his death. But Susan denied any such incident,
• 40:10
  Speaker 1: insisting that Robert had never attacked her and that she
• 40:13
  Speaker 1: had only shot him after discovering him among the pigs,
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: gravely injured. When Detective Henderson explained that the investigators would
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: examine her buildings for blood and DNA, Susan maintained that
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: any blood inside her living quarters or barn would likely
• 40:29
  Speaker 1: belong to the animals that she had slaughtered previously. She acknowledged, however,
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: that Robert's blood might be present near the shelf where
• 40:36
  Speaker 1: she had carried and stored his remains. But that was it. Now,
• 40:41
  Speaker 1: Susan also provided details about the rifle and location of
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: the shooting. She described the firearm as a semi-automatic, and
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: suggested that investigators could use a metal detector to locate
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: spent cartridge casings inside the enclosure. Although she repeatedly struggled
• 40:56
  Speaker 1: to remember how many shots she had fired, she remained
• 41:00
  Speaker 1: adamant that she had not shot Robert anywhere else on
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: the property. And her explanation for keeping the incident secret was, well,
• 41:09
  Speaker 1: equally consistent through it all. She feared that if authorities
• 41:13
  Speaker 1: learned her pigs had consumed a person, they would have
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: to cull and destroy her flock. She claimed that she
• 41:21
  Speaker 1: had considered calling the police, but couldn't bring herself to
• 41:24
  Speaker 1: risk losing her pigs. Now, Detective Henderson wasn't convinced. Robert
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: had supposedly disappeared for weeks, then returned to the property
• 41:36
  Speaker 1: without Susan noticing, and somehow he ended up helpless inside
• 41:40
  Speaker 1: the pig's enclosure that he had never entered before. And
• 41:44
  Speaker 1: to smite Despite admitting that she had shot Robert and
• 41:47
  Speaker 1: concealed his remains, Susan continued denying that she had deliberately
• 41:51
  Speaker 1: harmed him before the pigs began feeding. Investigators pressed her
• 41:56
  Speaker 1: about these circumstances, about the possibility of an earlier confrontation,
• 42:00
  Speaker 1: and the physical evidence they expected to recover from the property.
• 42:04
  Speaker 1: But Susan maintained that she had told them everything she knew.
• 42:07
  Speaker 1: When asked whether she would be willing to undergo a
• 42:09
  Speaker 1: polygraph examination, she agreed. So a retired detective and polygraph
• 42:15
  Speaker 1: examiner named Chris traveled from Klamath Falls to conduct this examination.
• 42:21
  Speaker 1: By the time he arrived, Susan had already spent several
• 42:24
  Speaker 1: hours at the sheriff's office, and Chris began with an
• 42:28
  Speaker 1: extended preliminary interview, discussing her background, military service, employment, and
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: medical history, before explaining how the equipment he was about
• 42:37
  Speaker 1: to use worked. Susan repeated her account of finding him
• 42:41
  Speaker 1: in the pigpen, about how she had shot him, about
• 42:46
  Speaker 1: it all. But now she suggested that the movement that
• 42:51
  Speaker 1: she had seen about when he was alive, the moaning,
• 42:55
  Speaker 1: actually might have been caused by the pigs pulling at
• 42:58
  Speaker 1: his body rather than Robert actually independently moving on his own.
• 43:02
  Speaker 1: She still believed she did hear a moan, although she
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: couldn't say with certainty whether Robert was conscious when she
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: discovered him. Nonetheless, Susan maintained that she returned to her
• 43:12
  Speaker 1: living quarters, retrieved the rifle, and shot him because she
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: believed he was suffering. Now, before the test began, Chris
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: asked Susan whether anyone else had died on her property
• 43:25
  Speaker 1: and whether investigators might discover additional human remains. She denied
• 43:31
  Speaker 1: knowing about any other deaths and maintained that Robert was
• 43:34
  Speaker 1: the only person that she had shot. Throughout the discussion,
• 43:38
  Speaker 1: Susan occasionally wandered into unrelated subjects, including her views on
• 43:42
  Speaker 1: population growth, animal welfare, and criminal punishment. And when Chris
• 43:47
  Speaker 1: asked what might prevent someone from admitting that they had
• 43:50
  Speaker 1: caused Robert's death under different circumstances, Susan acknowledged that such
• 43:55
  Speaker 1: a person might simply want to avoid going to prison.
• 44:00
  Speaker 1: Chris explained how the polygraph was about to work and
• 44:03
  Speaker 1: instructed Susan to remain still and answer each question with
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: a simple yes or no. If you don't follow those directions,
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: it can actually muddle up and have the test come
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: back incomplete. Once the examination began, however, Chris had difficulty
• 44:19
  Speaker 1: obtaining usable readings. Susan repeatedly moved in her chair, adjusted
• 44:25
  Speaker 1: her breathing, and coughed during the questioning, which caused issues
• 44:29
  Speaker 1: with the machine's readings. Chris interrupted the process several times,
• 44:33
  Speaker 1: reminding her that movement interfered with the instrument's and made
• 44:37
  Speaker 1: the result charts difficult to interpret. And he even questioned
• 44:40
  Speaker 1: her how she'd been able to speak for an extended
• 44:43
  Speaker 1: period without coughing, but suddenly appeared unable to control it
• 44:46
  Speaker 1: during this exam. Susan explained that she was attempting to relax,
• 44:50
  Speaker 1: but was having difficulty doing so.
• 44:53
  Speaker 2: Okay, I will just pipe in, sometimes when you're not
• 44:56
  Speaker 2: allowed to like cough, you get coughing attacks. Like if
• 45:01
  Speaker 2: you're supposed to be quiet or chill, right? Like that's
• 45:04
  Speaker 2: when things in your body are like, I got a
• 45:07
  Speaker 2: sneeze or I got a cough or whatever.
• 45:09
  Speaker 1: Well, I'm going to do a little test right now.
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: I guarantee you, you haven't itched your face in hours,
• 45:14
  Speaker 1: but I guarantee you now that I say your face
• 45:17
  Speaker 1: is probably itchy. Don't itch your face. You probably have
• 45:19
  Speaker 1: a spot you can already notice growing. That's a bit itchy.
• 45:22
  Speaker 2: No, that's not going to work on me because my
• 45:24
  Speaker 2: back's been itchy this whole time and I've really want
• 45:26
  Speaker 2: to scratch it, but I'm just sitting here waiting.
• 45:28
  Speaker 1: Well, I'm sure someone out there listening right now is
• 45:30
  Speaker 1: experiencing exactly what I'm describing.
• 45:32
  Speaker 2: And they're like, thanks, Ben.
• 45:34
  Speaker 1: Sorry, but it proves my point. It proves your point. Now, eventually, though,
• 45:39
  Speaker 1: Chris stopped the exam because he couldn't obtain sufficient reliable
• 45:42
  Speaker 1: recordings from her. Meaning he couldn't tell if Susan was
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: telling the truth or if she was lying. Chris, of course,
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: suspected that she might be interfering with the test, but
• 45:51
  Speaker 1: Susan denied doing anything deliberately. Regardless, he disconnected the equipment
• 45:57
  Speaker 1: and did resume questioning her directly, though. Now, Susan had
• 46:00
  Speaker 1: described experiencing considerable anxiety around other people, particularly in crowded environments.
• 46:06
  Speaker 1: She preferred spending time alone and found the isolation of
• 46:10
  Speaker 1: a rural property much more comfortable than life in a
• 46:13
  Speaker 1: busy city. So Chris suggested that Robert's death might have
• 46:17
  Speaker 1: resulted from an accidental confrontation, perhaps during one of her
• 46:21
  Speaker 1: anxiety episodes that Susan had previously described. He questioned whether
• 46:26
  Speaker 1: she could have become frightened or angry. and reacted violently
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: without intending to kill him. What he was doing was
• 46:33
  Speaker 1: essentially baiting her to admit more than she already had.
• 46:37
  Speaker 1: But Susan continued insisting that she hadn't injured Robert before
• 46:41
  Speaker 1: discovering him inside that enclosure. After the polygraph examiner finished,
• 46:47
  Speaker 1: Detective Henderson resumed the interrogation and continued to focus on
• 46:50
  Speaker 1: the circumstances surrounding Robert's appearance in the enclosure, emphasizing that
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: Susan had admitted to shooting him but still hadn't explained
• 46:59
  Speaker 1: how he suffered the injuries that supposedly made the shooting necessary.
• 47:04
  Speaker 1: He pointed out that Robert had never been responsible for
• 47:06
  Speaker 1: feeding the pigs before, and according to Susan herself, had
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: little reason to enter the pen at all. So if
• 47:14
  Speaker 1: Robert had been attacked while conscious and capable of moving,
• 47:18
  Speaker 1: investigators wanted to understand why he hadn't attempted to escape.
• 47:23
  Speaker 1: Detective Henderson also explained that forensic examination of the property
• 47:27
  Speaker 1: involved would help determine whether Susan's statements matched the physical
• 47:31
  Speaker 1: evidence on hand. And eventually, Susan acknowledged that she had
• 47:39
  Speaker 1: actually withheld something important.
• 47:41
  Speaker 2: Oh, of course she did. This lady is full of shit.
• 47:44
  Speaker 1: Quote, There is something else that I don't want to say.
• 47:48
  Speaker 1: End quote. Susan hesitated and struggled to continue. but the
• 47:55
  Speaker 1: detective encouraged her to speak, assuring her that he was listening.
• 48:00
  Speaker 1: She then asked for another piece of paper, and on
• 48:03
  Speaker 1: it she began drawing a diagram of her property. As
• 48:07
  Speaker 1: Detective Henderson watched, Susan indicated a location on the grounds
• 48:11
  Speaker 1: and explained that something was buried approximately three feet beneath
• 48:16
  Speaker 1: the surface there. But she wasn't describing another piece of
• 48:19
  Speaker 1: Robert's remains or anything like that, though. Quote, There's part
• 48:24
  Speaker 1: of another body. End quote. Detective Henderson asked who this
• 48:31
  Speaker 1: person was. Susan identified him as a man named Steve,
• 48:36
  Speaker 1: struggling briefly with his surname because he couldn't quite pronounce it,
• 48:40
  Speaker 1: and provided a version of his name, which is Stephen
• 48:44
  Speaker 1: Frank D'Alessino. Now, the man Susan had identified was a
• 48:48
  Speaker 1: 59-year-old laborer who had lived and worked in rural communities
• 48:52
  Speaker 1: surrounding Weimar, Oregon. Stephen had a daughter. Although their relationship
• 48:57
  Speaker 1: had become distant over the years, she described having little
• 49:00
  Speaker 1: contact with her father during the period before his disappearance
• 49:04
  Speaker 1: and hoped that they might eventually reconnect. Stephen lived approximately
• 49:09
  Speaker 1: five miles from Susan's property and had been acquainted with
• 49:12
  Speaker 1: her for years. He sometimes traveled around the area in
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: a bicycle, finding odd jobs and occasionally working at Susan's farm.
• 49:20
  Speaker 1: According to Susan, he was capable of doing good work,
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: particularly with helping on construction and property maintenance. The arrangement
• 49:29
  Speaker 1: that they had was informal. She said that she would
• 49:32
  Speaker 1: sometimes compensate him with beer rather than money. Susan also
• 49:37
  Speaker 1: described Stephen as someone who struggled with alcohol. and occasionally
• 49:40
  Speaker 1: stole property to obtain money for his drinking problem. She
• 49:44
  Speaker 1: claimed he knew which neighbors' houses were occupied when and where,
• 49:49
  Speaker 1: whether owners were away or where they would be, and
• 49:52
  Speaker 1: recalled an occasion when he allegedly took several silver dollars
• 49:55
  Speaker 1: from her and exchanged them for beer. Then in 2012,
• 50:00
  Speaker 1: Stephen was still occasionally working for Susan when she claimed
• 50:04
  Speaker 1: two firearms disappeared from her living quarters. One was a rifle,
• 50:09
  Speaker 1: The other was a pistol. Susan told Detective Henderson that
• 50:14
  Speaker 1: the weapons had gone missing from the usual places and
• 50:17
  Speaker 1: that other valuables, they were left untouched, which led her
• 50:22
  Speaker 1: to suspect someone familiar with her property had taken them.
• 50:25
  Speaker 1: And she believed it was Stephen who was responsible. So,
• 50:31
  Speaker 1: she decided to confront him about it. According to Susan's account,
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: Stephen became angry when she accused him of stealing the firearms.
• 50:41
  Speaker 1: She said the argument escalated into a physical struggle inside
• 50:44
  Speaker 1: her living quarters, where she kept a small five-shot. 22
• 50:48
  Speaker 1: caliber revolver near her bed. Stephen allegedly grabbed for the
• 50:53
  Speaker 1: weapon and declared that he wasn't going back to prison
• 50:57
  Speaker 1: for stealing her property. A brief struggle occurred where she
• 51:02
  Speaker 1: tried to take the weapon away, but Stephen lifted the
• 51:05
  Speaker 1: gun and shot himself in the head. Susan said, though,
• 51:09
  Speaker 1: it didn't end there. Stephen fired one shot, but he
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: remained standing. He then moved into an adjoining hallway while
• 51:18
  Speaker 1: she followed him, and he continued firing into his own
• 51:23
  Speaker 1: head until he had emptied all five bullets into his
• 51:28
  Speaker 1: skull before finally collapsing.
• 51:31
  Speaker 2: I don't think that would be possible.
• 51:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's pretty far-fetched in my mind, too.
• 51:36
  Speaker 2: I feel like you'd do one shot. Like that, and
• 51:39
  Speaker 2: you're done, really. Maybe two, but gosh.
• 51:43
  Speaker 1: While Detective Henderson asked Susan how Stephen could have remained
• 51:46
  Speaker 1: conscious and mobile after the initial shot, Susan insisted that
• 51:51
  Speaker 1: the revolver was a particularly small weapon and had suggested
• 51:55
  Speaker 1: that some bullets struck his skull without penetrating it, bouncing
• 51:58
  Speaker 1: or glancing off. She believed that four rounds had left
• 52:03
  Speaker 1: indentations while only one had actually broken through entering his skull,
• 52:08
  Speaker 1: killing him. Now, this is not something that I know
• 52:13
  Speaker 1: for certain, but this is something we've talked about on
• 52:15
  Speaker 1: this podcast before. 22 caliber pistols have been historically extremely
• 52:21
  Speaker 1: popular with gang members, mobsters who are committing a hit
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: because the 22 caliber bullet is powerful enough to enter
• 52:30
  Speaker 1: the skull, but not exit. So it'll enter, bounce around
• 52:34
  Speaker 1: inside the head, scramble the brains, and it is A, quiet,
• 52:40
  Speaker 1: and B, doesn't leave much of a mess. So if
• 52:43
  Speaker 1: she's accounting for someone holding up a pistol to the
• 52:45
  Speaker 1: side of his head, firing five times with such a weapon,
• 52:49
  Speaker 1: and four of those five shots do not enter, I
• 52:52
  Speaker 1: call flat out bullshit.
• 52:55
  Speaker 2: Yeah, she sort of seems like she has almost like
• 52:58
  Speaker 2: an answer for everything, but then it just doesn't make sense.
• 53:02
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Just trying to deflect anything.
• 53:06
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 53:08
  Speaker 1: Now, the detectives continued questioning her about the mechanics of
• 53:11
  Speaker 1: the alleged suicide, including whether she had physically restrained Stephen
• 53:15
  Speaker 1: or attempted to take the revolver away. She said she
• 53:18
  Speaker 1: did in a struggle with him with a gun briefly,
• 53:20
  Speaker 1: but maintained that Stephen had fired every single shot himself
• 53:25
  Speaker 1: and then described what she had done with his body. See,
• 53:28
  Speaker 1: rather than contacting authorities, Susan moved Stephen's remains into another
• 53:35
  Speaker 1: pig enclosure and left him there for approximately two or
• 53:38
  Speaker 1: three weeks. During that time, her pigs consumed much of
• 53:41
  Speaker 1: his body. Once little remains were just left behind to
• 53:45
  Speaker 1: just bones, basically, she then collected what she could and
• 53:49
  Speaker 1: prepared to bury them elsewhere on the property. She explained
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: that she had already accumulated animal bones from pigs, sheeps,
• 53:55
  Speaker 1: and goats that had died or been slaughtered on the farm.
• 53:58
  Speaker 1: And she then mixed Stephen's remains with those bones and
• 54:02
  Speaker 1: placed everything in a hole that she had dug near
• 54:04
  Speaker 1: the area where she was working on the property. According
• 54:08
  Speaker 1: to Susan, though, neighbors actually noticed her disposing bones and
• 54:13
  Speaker 1: burying them, and they actually called police. She told them
• 54:18
  Speaker 1: about how deputies visited her farm and questioned her about
• 54:21
  Speaker 1: what she was burying. Susan explained that the remains belonged
• 54:24
  Speaker 1: to livestock, and one officer examined a bone and identified
• 54:29
  Speaker 1: it to belong to a pig. She even claimed she
• 54:33
  Speaker 1: offered the officer a shovel to dig up the rest
• 54:35
  Speaker 1: if he'd like. Now, Detective Eric Fox also questioned Susan
• 54:41
  Speaker 1: about her account of Stephen's death. He explained that he
• 54:44
  Speaker 1: examined more than a thousand bodies during his career, and
• 54:47
  Speaker 1: he'd never encountered a case involving someone shooting themselves five
• 54:51
  Speaker 1: times in the head. Susan pushed with her argument that
• 54:56
  Speaker 1: the bullets must have bounced off his skull, but Detective
• 54:59
  Speaker 1: Fox wasn't buying it. He asked her whether she might
• 55:02
  Speaker 1: have shot him herself after an initial injury, suggesting that
• 55:06
  Speaker 1: her explanation about ending Robert's suffering could also apply to Stephen.
• 55:12
  Speaker 1: Maybe he shot himself once, was still alive, then you
• 55:14
  Speaker 1: pulled the trigger the rest of the time, leading to
• 55:16
  Speaker 1: something like that, trying to draw out more information like
• 55:19
  Speaker 1: he'd already done. But Susan rejected that possibility and insisted
• 55:24
  Speaker 1: Stephen fired all five shots. Meanwhile, investigators went and searched
• 55:30
  Speaker 1: the location that Susan had marked on her diagram. Working
• 55:34
  Speaker 1: under the second search warrant, they recovered human remains from
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: the area she identified, confirming that another person had in
• 55:40
  Speaker 1: fact been buried on the property. The discovery substantiated part
• 55:44
  Speaker 1: of Susan's confession, although it did not establish the circumstances
• 55:48
  Speaker 1: of Stephen's death. So with physical remains available for examination,
• 55:52
  Speaker 1: detectives questioned Susan again. This time, she actually changed her
• 55:57
  Speaker 1: account substantially. In her revised version of the account, Susan
• 56:01
  Speaker 1: claimed Stephen had attacked her after she confronted him about
• 56:05
  Speaker 1: the missing firearms. She alleged that he had grabbed at
• 56:08
  Speaker 1: a rifle and struck her with it, rupturing her right
• 56:11
  Speaker 1: breast implant. Then during the confrontation, Susan said she retrieved
• 56:15
  Speaker 1: a small pistol and fired into Stephen's head, but the
• 56:17
  Speaker 1: bullet lodged in his scalp without penetrating his brain. According
• 56:22
  Speaker 1: to Susan, Stephen remained capable of moving and pursued her
• 56:25
  Speaker 1: into the barn, where their struggle continued. She claimed she
• 56:29
  Speaker 1: eventually wrestled the rifle away from him, but he fell
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: to the ground and grabbed at her leg. Susan then
• 56:35
  Speaker 1: admitted to firing the rifle into his head several times,
• 56:39
  Speaker 1: explaining that he continued gripping at her even after she
• 56:43
  Speaker 1: believed he had been fatally injured. She suggested that the
• 56:48
  Speaker 1: continued gripping was an involuntary muscle reaction, rather than any
• 56:55
  Speaker 1: sort of evidence that Stephen was still conscious. which in
• 56:59
  Speaker 1: my opinion is just another last-ditch effort to minimize any
• 57:03
  Speaker 1: sort of culpability. She's been doing this this whole time,
• 57:06
  Speaker 1: but I digress. Now, this new account differed significantly from
• 57:12
  Speaker 1: her original explanation of pulling the trigger on his own
• 57:14
  Speaker 1: head five times, where he basically committed suicide. But no
• 57:20
  Speaker 1: matter what story she wanted to stick with, both accounts
• 57:23
  Speaker 1: placed Stephen's death in 2012 with a confrontation over missing firearms,
• 57:27
  Speaker 1: and it ended with Susan disposing of his remains through
• 57:31
  Speaker 1: her pigs. Beyond those similarities, the circumstances of the shooting,
• 57:36
  Speaker 1: that remains disputed. Investigators now had two victims, two sets
• 57:42
  Speaker 1: of human remains, and multiple explanations from the same woman
• 57:46
  Speaker 1: about how both men had died. Now, the physical investigation
• 57:51
  Speaker 1: required considerably more than a conventional search because the property
• 57:54
  Speaker 1: contained accumulated rubbish, scrap metal, abandoned equipment, animal enclosures, and
• 57:59
  Speaker 1: numerous places where objects had been buried or potentially burned
• 58:03
  Speaker 1: or whatever. Inside the barn, officers located human remains in
• 58:07
  Speaker 1: or around the areas Susan had described. She had told
• 58:10
  Speaker 1: Detective Henderson that Robert's surviving bones were stored in plastic
• 58:14
  Speaker 1: garbage bags, all up on the shelf right near her
• 58:17
  Speaker 1: living quarters. And during questioning, she described recovering his skull even.
• 58:22
  Speaker 1: along with several bones and portions of his pelvis and spine,
• 58:25
  Speaker 1: after leaving his body to the pigs. Investigators also examined
• 58:29
  Speaker 1: a burn barrel where Susan claimed she had disposed of
• 58:31
  Speaker 1: Robert's clothing, along with the surrounding grounds and structures for
• 58:35
  Speaker 1: additional evidence. Then, of course, following Susan's additional directions, investigators
• 58:40
  Speaker 1: searched the burial location she had marked for Stephen, and
• 58:44
  Speaker 1: human remains were recovered from that area, buried along with
• 58:47
  Speaker 1: animal remains. And now the condition of both men's remains
• 58:51
  Speaker 1: made the forensic examination particularly challenging. Much of their soft
• 58:56
  Speaker 1: tissue was missing. Many bones showed extensive damage consistent with
• 59:01
  Speaker 1: animal feeding, which limited investigators' ability to reconstruct complete injuries
• 59:06
  Speaker 1: inflicted before death. Although lucky enough... the surviving skeletal evidence
• 59:12
  Speaker 1: still provided some important information about things like gunshots, cutting injuries,
• 59:17
  Speaker 1: and the treatment of the bodies. Now for Robert, investigators
• 59:21
  Speaker 1: examined the severed leg discovered during the initial search. Forensic
• 59:25
  Speaker 1: anthropologist Veronica Vance identified marks on the femur consistent with
• 59:30
  Speaker 1: a sharp implement, including chopping damage associated with an axe
• 59:35
  Speaker 1: or a similar tool of sorts. The bone also showed
• 59:38
  Speaker 1: evidence of animal gnawing. These findings introduced a whole other
• 59:43
  Speaker 1: element that Susan hadn't explained during her initial confession. At
• 59:48
  Speaker 1: least part of Robert's remains appeared to have been deliberately
• 59:52
  Speaker 1: cut rather than separated entirely through animal feedings. Now, this
• 59:58
  Speaker 1: was significant because Susan had repeatedly maintained that she never
• 1:00:02
  Speaker 1: dismembered Robert at all. According to her, she simply recovered
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 1: what the pigs had left behind and stored those remains
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 1: in garbage bags. The chopping marks, however, directly challenged that explanation,
• 1:00:15
  Speaker 1: although the available skeletal evidence couldn't establish precisely when the
• 1:00:20
  Speaker 1: cuts were inflicted. In particular... The examination couldn't conclusively determine
• 1:00:26
  Speaker 1: whether the cutting occurred before or after Robert's death, or
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 1: before or after the pigs fed. Now, investigators also examined
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 1: the surviving portions of Stephen's skull for gunshot injuries. The
• 1:00:39
  Speaker 1: recovered remains showed evidence of multiple gunshot wounds, but they
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 1: didn't establish the extraordinary sequence Susan had described, no matter
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 1: which version you believe. Now, both men's remains presented evidence
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 1: consistent with gunshot injuries and animal feeding. However, the destruction
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 1: of the bodies complicated attempts to determine the complete sequence
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 1: of the events, including the injuries that were inflicted while
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 1: the men were alive. Investigators therefore had to examine the
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 1: physical findings alongside Susan's statements, the firearms associated with the property,
• 1:01:13
  Speaker 1: and the locations where she claimed the shootings occurred. Blood
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 1: evidence was another consideration. During her interrogation, Susan identified several
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 1: places where these investigators might encounter blood, including the barn
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 1: where she slaughtered livestock and the shelf where Robert's remains
• 1:01:29
  Speaker 1: were stored. Now, as investigators worked through all of this,
• 1:01:35
  Speaker 1: Susan made another statement that raised even more concerns. See,
• 1:01:40
  Speaker 1: if there were two bodies, police thought there was a
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 1: very real possibility that there might be more. So during
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 1: her interrogations, investigators repeatedly questioned Susan about whether they might
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 1: find other human remains buried on her farm. And during
• 1:01:55
  Speaker 1: one exchange, Detective Henderson asked Susan whether she would tell
• 1:01:59
  Speaker 1: investigators if someone else had been killed and buried somewhere
• 1:02:03
  Speaker 1: in her land. Now, Susan was reluctant to give a
• 1:02:07
  Speaker 1: straightforward answer, questioning why she should disclose something like that
• 1:02:11
  Speaker 1: without any sort of like, you know, guarantee of something.
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 1: It's just going to create more problems for her. but
• 1:02:17
  Speaker 1: the detective pressed the issue, explaining that investigators needed to
• 1:02:22
  Speaker 1: account for everyone else who might be missing. Susan then
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 1: made a wild statement. Quote, If I tell you where
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 1: the 17 bodies are, I'm going to go to jail
• 1:02:34
  Speaker 1: for the rest of my life. End quote. It was
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 1: an alarming remark.
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 3: 17 bodies? Yes.
• 1:02:45
  Speaker 1: Susan had previously joked about killing people and feeding them
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 1: to her pigs, but this was different. Now, Susan didn't
• 1:02:53
  Speaker 1: identify additional victims. She didn't provide their names or direct
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 1: investigators to any other further burial sites. Whether she was
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 1: making another deliberately provocative joke, attempting to intimidate detectives, or
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 1: referring to something genuine, it's unclear to this day.
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 2: To this day. Okay. Because right there, I was like,
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 2: that joke almost makes sense. If she has that many victims,
• 1:03:19
  Speaker 2: how detached she is from it.
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 1: Definitely. Not only that, why did she say 17? That's
• 1:03:25
  Speaker 1: a very specific number.
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 2: But you would think they would have found them, or
• 1:03:29
  Speaker 2: at least some more.
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 1: Who knows?
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 2: It is 20 acres. Yeah.
• 1:03:32
  Speaker 1: She owns 20 acres. I guess. I guess. Now, considering
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 1: the discoveries already made on her property, though, investigators couldn't
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 1: afford to assume that she was joking, and the possibility
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 1: of additional victims became an important consideration as they continued
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 1: to search the farm. Authorities expanded their excavation of the
• 1:03:51
  Speaker 1: property using heavy equipment to examine disturbed ground and other
• 1:03:54
  Speaker 1: locations considered potentially significant. Investigators reportedly dug 136 holes across
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 1: the property and recovered more than 400 remains. additional bone fragments,
• 1:04:06
  Speaker 1: which were examined and determined to be animal remains rather
• 1:04:09
  Speaker 1: than evidence of human. The search also uncovered large quantities
• 1:04:13
  Speaker 1: of clothing, footwear, and personal belongings that prompted additional questions
• 1:04:19
  Speaker 1: about people who had previously worked or lived there. Detectives
• 1:04:24
  Speaker 1: attempted to identify former workers and establish whether they were
• 1:04:27
  Speaker 1: still alive, and the people they were able to trace
• 1:04:30
  Speaker 1: were accounted for. and investigators never established any additional homicide victims. Now,
• 1:04:37
  Speaker 1: the pigs associated with the property, well, unfortunately, they were
• 1:04:41
  Speaker 1: euthanized and culled during the investigation, despite Susan's repeated requests
• 1:04:46
  Speaker 1: that authorities protect them. She even proposed that the animals
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 1: be butchered and their meat be donated to the Rogue
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 1: River Community Center, but that proposal wasn't accepted since their
• 1:04:56
  Speaker 1: diet was contaminated with human flesh.
• 1:04:59
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that is not a good recommendation.
• 1:05:02
  Speaker 1: Exactly. Now, following the investigation, Susan was charged with two
• 1:05:07
  Speaker 1: counts of murder, two counts of first-degree abuse of a corpse,
• 1:05:11
  Speaker 1: and one count of identity theft. She maintained that Robert
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 1: had already been fatally injured by her pigs when she
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 1: shot him, while claiming that Stephen died during the confrontation
• 1:05:22
  Speaker 1: in which she acted in self-defense. With both men's remains
• 1:05:27
  Speaker 1: recovered on her property, The lengthy police interviews preserved all
• 1:05:31
  Speaker 1: on video, the prosecutors prepared to challenge those explanations before
• 1:05:35
  Speaker 1: a jury. On April 15, 2015, Susan's trial began in
• 1:05:40
  Speaker 1: Jackson County Circuit Court in Medford, Oregon, before Judge Tim Barnack.
• 1:05:46
  Speaker 1: Prosecutors relied heavily on Susan's recorded statements, forensic examinations, and
• 1:05:50
  Speaker 1: the circumstances surrounding both deaths. Susan had legal representation but
• 1:05:55
  Speaker 1: was also permitted to participate collectively in conducting her own defense,
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 1: including questioning witnesses. Her attorney acknowledged that she had shot
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 1: both men, but argued that the shootings did not automatically
• 1:06:07
  Speaker 1: constitute murder. The central question was whether Susan had intentionally
• 1:06:12
  Speaker 1: caused their deaths without legal justification. Throughout the proceedings, jurors
• 1:06:18
  Speaker 1: watched substantial portions of Susan's recorded interrogations. Hearing her describe
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 1: Robert's supposed encounter with the pigs, and her contradictory explanations
• 1:06:29
  Speaker 1: of Stephen's death. Detective Eric Henderson testified about the investigation
• 1:06:34
  Speaker 1: and his repeated attempts to establish what had actually happened.
• 1:06:39
  Speaker 1: Susan actually questioned him directly about his unwillingness to accept
• 1:06:44
  Speaker 1: her explanations and whether investigators had sufficiently pursued alternative possibilities.
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 1: At several points, Judge Barnack intervened her questions because they
• 1:06:53
  Speaker 1: became improper or turned into arguments rather than any sort
• 1:06:56
  Speaker 1: of examination of the witness. Now, the forensic evidence also
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 1: created additional difficulties for the defense. Jurors heard testimony concerning
• 1:07:06
  Speaker 1: gunshot injuries to both victims and animal damage to the remains.
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 1: Forensic anthropologist Veronica Vance described sharp force damage to Robert's
• 1:07:15
  Speaker 1: femur consistent with chopping by axe or similar implement, contradicting
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 1: Susan's statement directly. The examination couldn't establish, though, whether those
• 1:07:27
  Speaker 1: particular cuts occurred before or after death or before or
• 1:07:30
  Speaker 1: after consumption by the pigs. But their presence raised serious
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 1: questions about Susan's account. Stephen's extensive gunshot injuries were also
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 1: difficult to reconcile with Susan's original claim that he'd shot
• 1:07:42
  Speaker 1: himself in the head. Now, another significant witness was Jordan Ferris,
• 1:07:48
  Speaker 1: who had spent time incarcerated with Susan while she awaited
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 1: her trial. Ferris testified that Susan had made incriminating admissions
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 1: about shooting a man during an argument and leaving his
• 1:08:00
  Speaker 1: body for her pigs. According to the court records, the
• 1:08:04
  Speaker 1: admissions specifically concerned Stephen, but Ferris' own criminal history, including
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 1: convictions involving theft, burglary, and methamphetamines, complicated her credibility. She
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 1: also possessed a birthday card that was written by Susan
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 1: and given to her while incarcerated, and it was signed
• 1:08:21
  Speaker 1: with a very disturbing phrase, Susan, however, maintained that this
• 1:08:33
  Speaker 1: inscription was merely another example of her unusual sense of humor. Now,
• 1:08:38
  Speaker 1: after approximately six days of testimony, the case was submitted
• 1:08:42
  Speaker 1: to the jury, and on April 21, 2015, jurors returned
• 1:08:47
  Speaker 1: with their verdict after roughly one hour of deliberations. Susan
• 1:08:52
  Speaker 1: Monica said, was found guilty on all five counts. During
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 1: sentencing Judge Barnack addressed the severity of the crimes and
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 1: Susan's treatment of the victims. He emphasized that she had
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 1: shot two men and allowed their bodies to be consumed
• 1:09:08
  Speaker 1: by her pigs, describing her as a cold-blooded killer. And
• 1:09:14
  Speaker 1: Susan received two consecutive life sentences with a minimum of
• 1:09:19
  Speaker 1: of 50 years in prison before becoming eligible for parole. Susan,
• 1:09:25
  Speaker 1: of course, continued challenging her conviction through the courts. Her
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 1: direct appeal was unsuccessful in 2017 when the Oregon Court
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 1: of Appeals affirmed the judgment, and she subsequently pursued post-conviction relief,
• 1:09:38
  Speaker 1: alleging that her attorneys had provided inadequate representation, including arguments
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 1: involving the search warrant, testimony witness, and the handling of
• 1:09:47
  Speaker 1: forensic evidence. On April 27, 2022, the Oregon Court of
• 1:09:52
  Speaker 1: Appeals issued its decision, rejecting those claims. The court concluded
• 1:09:58
  Speaker 1: that the evidence presented against Susan was overwhelming and that
• 1:10:02
  Speaker 1: the alleged deficiencies in her representation did not justify overturning
• 1:10:06
  Speaker 1: the convictions. Now, for Robert's five children and Stephen's surviving family,
• 1:10:13
  Speaker 1: the convictions established legal responsibility for two deaths that had
• 1:10:17
  Speaker 1: occurred before on an isolated farm where both men had
• 1:10:20
  Speaker 1: gone seeking work. Robert's family had spent months searching for
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 1: their father while Stephen's daughter had lost the opportunity to
• 1:10:27
  Speaker 1: reconnect with him. And although investigators established how the remains
• 1:10:32
  Speaker 1: had been concealed and recovered, the precise circumstances leading to
• 1:10:36
  Speaker 1: both shootings remains obscured by Susan's conflicting accounts. But what
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 1: the jury ultimately determined was that Robert Harry Haney and
• 1:10:46
  Speaker 1: Stephen Frank Haney Delacino had both been murdered by Susan
• 1:10:51
  Speaker 1: Monica and that she had subject their remains to further
• 1:10:54
  Speaker 1: abuse rather than reporting their deaths. And that's the story
• 1:11:01
  Speaker 1: of the Oregon pig farm killer.
• 1:11:05
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 2: The story. That's what you have to say is.
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 3: Yeah. I don't know.
• 1:11:10
  Speaker 2: That one is fricking nasty. I can't stop thinking about that.
• 1:11:16
  Speaker 2: Some people might have eaten those pigs from the first
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 2: death or if there are others. But I feel like
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 2: if there were more, they would have found more bodies.
• 1:11:29
  Speaker 2: I don't know. I know you say 20 acres, but
• 1:11:31
  Speaker 2: it's not like she really hid the other ones well.
• 1:11:35
  Speaker 1: True, but would they have discovered, say for example, the
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 1: second body, Stephen, if she didn't say something? In fact,
• 1:11:43
  Speaker 1: police had already examined that bone pile earlier well.
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 2: Briefly yeah yeah well also having like the remains of
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 2: animals does not.
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 1: Help it doesn't it really doesn't not only that farms
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 1: mud and stuff accumulates quick land gets disturbed so much
• 1:12:04
  Speaker 1: so to say well that looks like a spot where
• 1:12:06
  Speaker 1: someone could be buried in two months that's going to
• 1:12:09
  Speaker 1: look the same as everything else if If cattle or
• 1:12:12
  Speaker 1: pigs or chickens are moving all over it and you
• 1:12:14
  Speaker 1: can no longer distinguish it from other patches of ground.
• 1:12:17
  Speaker 1: So did they find every patch that looked or could
• 1:12:20
  Speaker 1: have been suspicious?
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 3: Jeez.
• 1:12:23
  Speaker 1: Hard to say.
• 1:12:24
  Speaker 2: I honestly also think she should have been like stuck
• 1:12:28
  Speaker 2: with some sort of animal cruelty type charge.
• 1:12:30
  Speaker 1: Oh, I agree.
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 2: Because it was her fault that those pigs had to die.
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you're right. I agree. Wholeheartedly.
• 1:12:38
  Speaker 2: But I mean, I guess what's the point when she's
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 2: already getting two life sentences?
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 1: Yeah. And she's not going anywhere. 50 years of parole.
• 1:12:48
  Speaker 1: So she done.
• 1:12:50
  Speaker 2: Wow. That is just crazy.
• 1:12:53
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 1:12:54
  Speaker 2: And do you think that these two stories that she
• 1:12:57
  Speaker 2: gave are complete bullshit and that she actually just killed them?
• 1:13:00
  Speaker 3: 100%.
• 1:13:00
  Speaker 2: And fed the bodies to the pigs?
• 1:13:03
  Speaker 1: Everything she was doing was backpedaling, constantly backpedaling, coming up
• 1:13:06
  Speaker 1: with another excuse. She went from, he shot himself in
• 1:13:11
  Speaker 1: the head five times to, okay, he shot himself one.
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 1: Then I shot him the other four. What?
• 1:13:16
  Speaker 2: Yeah. She is like bat shit crazy. Really?
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 1: Oh, totally fucked.
• 1:13:21
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:13:21
  Speaker 1: She was bragging before any of this came out. She
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 1: was already bragging about wanting to get a grant to
• 1:13:27
  Speaker 1: feed people to her pigs for, for what research purposes? What,
• 1:13:31
  Speaker 1: what research does that?
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 3: Why?
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I, yeah, it makes no, like pretty much everything
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 2: that came out of her mouth just makes no sense.
• 1:13:41
  Speaker 1: No, she's disgusting.
• 1:13:44
  Speaker 2: Very disturbed.
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 1:13:46
  Speaker 1: And Susan was 66 years old when she was convicted.
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 1: So 50 years parole, which that would put her way
• 1:13:54
  Speaker 1: too old to ever get out.
• 1:13:55
  Speaker 3: Oh yeah.
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 2: And you just got to feel so bad for this,
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 2: these victims. Like, I mean, we knew more the most
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 2: about Robert. But like his poor kids.
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 3: God. I know.
• 1:14:07
  Speaker 2: How the hell do you accept that as a reason
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 2: your dad died? Like, holy shit.
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 1: It's tough. But there's monsters out there enough that are
• 1:14:14
  Speaker 1: doing this to people.
• 1:14:15
  Speaker 2: And he seemed like he had like a cool life.
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 2: How he was like had his little trailer and he,
• 1:14:20
  Speaker 2: you know, went around finding work and his dog. Oh
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 2: my God. I hope they took the dog.
• 1:14:24
  Speaker 1: I couldn't find anything on that because I knew you
• 1:14:26
  Speaker 1: were going to ask that. But I'm assuming someone took
• 1:14:29
  Speaker 1: the dog.
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 3: Yes. Yeah.
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, I hope it was one of the kids.
• 1:14:32
  Speaker 1: Is what I mean. Oh, yeah. That's what I meant too.
• 1:14:35
  Speaker 2: I really hope. Gosh.
• 1:14:37
  Speaker 1: Well, that was an interesting story. Definitely, as you put it,
• 1:14:41
  Speaker 1: a stark contrast from the last one. But hopefully you
• 1:14:45
  Speaker 1: enjoyed it just the same. Thank you guys for being here.
• 1:14:48
  Speaker 1: Your support means the world. All this research, the writing
• 1:14:51
  Speaker 1: from the contrast of a guy selling the Eiffel Tower
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 1: to a woman feeding people to pigs. All of the
• 1:14:57
  Speaker 1: work is done by us in our tiny home. And
• 1:15:00
  Speaker 1: we get to do it because of your support. It
• 1:15:02
  Speaker 1: goes so far. You're incredible. You are amazing. Thank you
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 1: for being here for us and a long journey. And
• 1:15:09
  Speaker 1: of course, until next time.
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 2: Stay wicked.
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 3: Thank you. So,