Latest / Crime Night / A Fingerprint Match With Mismatched DNA

Transcript

A Fingerprint Match With Mismatched DNA · Crime Night

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Imagine finding a killer's fingerprint like perfectly preserved at a
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: crime scene. Just a 100 percent undeniable match.
• 0:07
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: But then when you test the DNA left right next
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: to it, it belongs to someone else entirely. So welcome
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: to what investigators call a 1 percent crime scene.
• 0:17
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it's it is the exact kind of scene that.
• 0:21
  Speaker 2: Seasoned detectives might only see once in an entire career.
• 0:25
  Speaker 2: I mean, it's a landscape just filled with contradictions. Oh, absolutely.
• 0:28
  Speaker 2: Where the physical evidence completely defies logic. Yeah. And the
• 0:32
  Speaker 2: killer just seems to operate like a total ghost.
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: Exactly. And today, we are pulling from a massive stack
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: of cold case files, forensic reports, and behavioral analyses to
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: step directly into the shoes of a real-life investigator.
• 0:45
  Speaker 2: We really want you to evaluate the evidence with us.
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: Right, because for this deep dive, we're looking at a
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: notoriously baffling unsolved double homicide. So I want you to
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: picture the stifling heat of a Kentucky summer.
• 0:56
  Speaker 2: Oh, that heavy, humid heat.
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: Yes, it's Sunday, May 29, 2011, in Florence, Kentucky. It's
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: Memorial Day weekend.
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: So everyone is out and about.
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: Exactly. The air is thick with humidity, you know, the
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: kind that makes the asphalt shimmer. Families are packing up
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: their cars for the lake or getting barbecue grills ready.
• 1:14
  Speaker 2: Just a classic American holiday weekend.
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: Right. And for a lot of folks in this town,
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: the morning starts with the familiar, comforting routine of church.
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: Which brings us to our targets for this deep dive,
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: the victims.
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: Bill and Peggy Stevenson.
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: Yes. 74-year-old Bill and Peggy. By all accounts, I mean
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: just the absolute sweetest, most generous couple you could ever
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: possibly meet.
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: They were high school sweethearts, right? Yeah.
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: Married for over 50 years. Bill is this social butterfly.
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: He's a deacon who literally never meets a stranger.
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: The kind of guy everyone in town knows.
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: Totally. And Peggy is more of a quiet homebody, but
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: she's an absolute fixture in the community because she's the
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: church organist. Right.
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: So Sunday is their day.
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: Exactly. Sunday is their day. They're there every single week,
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: just like clockwork.
• 1:59
  Speaker 2: But on this particular Sunday... Their daughter Beth is sitting
• 2:03
  Speaker 2: in the pews with her family, and she notices her
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: parents' regular seats are empty.
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: Which is so unusual for them.
• 2:10
  Speaker 2: Completely. And that creeping dread starts immediately. Because, I mean,
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: a broken routine in an elderly, highly regimented couple? That's
• 2:21
  Speaker 2: a massive red flag.
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: Right. You instantly know something is wrong.
• 2:24
  Speaker 2: Exactly. And it wasn't just the main church service, either. See,
• 2:28
  Speaker 2: Bill ran this highly unique church. truck stop ministry. Oh, right.
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: I remember reading about that.
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: Yeah. He held early morning services in a chapel built
• 2:37
  Speaker 2: inside an old semi-trailer specifically for transient truck drivers. Wow.
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: That's dedication.
• 2:43
  Speaker 2: It really is. And Beth quickly learns he didn't show
• 2:46
  Speaker 2: up for that service either.
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: So the panic just fully sets in. I mean, Beth
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: had just seen them the day before at her daughter's graduation. Right.
• 2:52
  Speaker 2: They were perfectly fine.
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: Yeah. So she asks her husband, Claude, to swing by
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: the condo and just check on them, make sure they're okay.
• 2:59
  Speaker 2: Which makes sense.
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: So Claude heads over to their multi-unit complex. He lets
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: himself into the main building, walks down the first floor hallway,
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: and he knocks on their front door.
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: And gets nothing.
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: Nothing. He knocks again. Still nothing. So he decides to
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: walk around to the back of the building.
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: Because they have a patio, right?
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: Yeah, the Stephensons have a sliding glass door that opens
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: directly to an outside patio area.
• 3:21
  Speaker 2: So Claude walks up to that patio, and he sees
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: the screen door is pulled shut. But the heavy glass
• 3:27
  Speaker 2: door behind it, it looks slightly open.
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: Which is already a bad sign.
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: Right. And he reaches out for the handle of the
• 3:33
  Speaker 2: screen door. He expects it to be latched. You know,
• 3:36
  Speaker 2: he expects to have to rattle it or knock on
• 3:38
  Speaker 2: the glass to get their attention.
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: But it isn't?
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: No. It just glides right open on its tracks. And
• 3:43
  Speaker 2: for a homicide investigator, an unlatched door in a secure
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: condo isn't just a minor detail.
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: It's a clue.
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: It's a profound behavioral clue. Because most people lock their
• 3:54
  Speaker 2: doors at night. Especially the elderly.
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: Right. So what does that tell us?
• 3:58
  Speaker 2: Well, An unlatched door implies one of two things. Either
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: the victims opened it for someone they knew and trusted,
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: or the killer meticulously manipulated the entry point to control
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: exactly how the scene would be discovered.
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: Wow. It's just, it's the exact fraction of a second
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: where a family's life splits permanently into the before and
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: the after.
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: Truly.
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: Because what Claude sees inside that condo is just a nightmare.
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: He instantly knows Bill and Peggy are dead and he
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: calls the police immediately.
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: That's anyone what?
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: But you have to look at the environment here. This
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: is a multi-unit condo. Neighbors share walls.
• 4:34
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: How does a double murder happen in a place like
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: that without someone like raising an alarm? It just seems impossible.
• 4:41
  Speaker 2: Well, we naturally assume violent crimes are these loud, chaotic events.
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: But acoustic dampening in modern condos can really swallow sound.
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: I guess that's true.
• 4:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah, violence can often be horrifyingly quiet. And when police
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: actually canvassed the neighbors, they did find something. What did
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: they find? One person remembered hearing a really faint sound.
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: They described it like a broom hitting a wall.
• 5:05
  Speaker 1: Just a broom hitting a wall. That's chilling.
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: And another neighbor remembered seeing a car parked outside around
• 5:10
  Speaker 2: the time of the murders, and they saw its headlights
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: just click off.
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: But no screams, no sounds of a struggle.
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: None at all. No screams heard.
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: That is so unsettling. So Detective Coy Cox arrives just
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: before three in the afternoon.
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: And he walks through that sliding glass door and immediately
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: realizes what kind of monster he's dealing with.
• 5:29
  Speaker 2: Because of the scene itself.
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Bill and Peggy are dead in separate rooms of
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: their four bedroom condo. One is near the sliding back
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: door and the other is back in a bedroom.
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: And the level of violence was extreme.
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: The overkill is staggering. There are multiple devastating wounds on
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: both victims.
• 5:46
  Speaker 2: And, uh, At least one of those wounds was inflicted post-mortem.
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: Wait, after they were already dead?
• 5:51
  Speaker 2: Yes. After death. But honestly, the overkill wasn't even the
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: most alarming aspect of this crime scene for the detectives. Oh,
• 5:59
  Speaker 2: it was. It was the staging. Look, when you evaluate
• 6:04
  Speaker 2: a robbery gone wrong, there's a certain chaotic logic to
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: the mess, right?
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: Sure, like things are tossed everywhere looking for a safe.
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Valuables are missing, drawers are dumped out in a
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: frenzy to find cash or jewelry. But here... Nothing of
• 6:18
  Speaker 2: value was taken.
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: So not a robbery.
• 6:20
  Speaker 2: No. Instead, completely ordinary household objects were moved, marked and
• 6:26
  Speaker 2: arranged around the bodies in these highly specific, deliberate ways.
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: Staging is just such a bizarre concept to wrap your
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: head around.
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: It really is.
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: It's like, OK, it's like opening your refrigerator, right? And
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: sitting directly on top of the butter dish is a
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: pair of bloody gardening shears.
• 6:42
  Speaker 2: That is a great analogy.
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: It's an object completely devoid of context for that environment.
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: It's deliberately wrong. Right.
• 6:48
  Speaker 2: It's designed to force investigators to decode a language the
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: killer just invented on the spot.
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: But the awful part is when the family is brought
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: in to look at descriptions of these posed items, they
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: can't even help.
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: Because they don't know what belongs there.
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: Exactly. They can't tell the police what genuinely belongs in
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: the house. And what the killer might have brought with them.
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: I mean, nobody memorizes every plastic pitcher or trinket in
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: their parents' cabinet.
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: No, of course not. The family is just paralyzed by
• 7:15
  Speaker 2: the mundane details of the staging.
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: But investigators do catch a break, right?
• 7:18
  Speaker 2: Yeah, they find a piece of hard forensic data that
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: actually anchors the timeline.
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: Okay, what was it?
• 7:24
  Speaker 2: They look at a medical device worn by one of
• 7:26
  Speaker 2: the victims. And this wasn't just... Like a generic health monitor.
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: Oh, like a Fitbit or something.
• 7:31
  Speaker 2: No, we are talking about a device like a pacemaker
• 7:34
  Speaker 2: that continuously records cardiac electrical activity. Oh, wow. Yeah. So
• 7:38
  Speaker 2: when a heart stops, the device logs the exact minute
• 7:43
  Speaker 2: the electrical rhythms cease.
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: That's incredible.
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: It is. This data pinpointed the time of death to
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: the early morning hours. But right alongside that concrete data,
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: investigators find a timed device in the home.
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: A timed device. Like an alarm clock.
• 7:58
  Speaker 2: Well, the family confirmed it wasn't a security alarm system.
• 8:02
  Speaker 2: But whatever this device was, its settings indicated that the
• 8:05
  Speaker 2: killer was comfortably inside that condo for up to eight hours.
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: Wait, eight hours?
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: Yeah, up to eight hours. They either stayed there the
• 8:12
  Speaker 2: entire time curating this nightmare or they left and came back.
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: See, I have to push back on that because spending
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: eight hours inside a bloody, chaotic crime scene, just moving
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: household items around like some kind of morbid interior decorator.
• 8:26
  Speaker 2: It sounds crazy.
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: It does. How do you not leave a piece of
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: yourself behind? I mean, Locard's exchange principle says every contact
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: leaves a trace.
• 8:34
  Speaker 2: Right. It's forensic science 101.
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: Exactly. It completely defies the laws of forensics to be
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: there that long and leave nothing behind.
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: Well, here's the thing. They did leave something behind.
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: They did.
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Investigators actually found a substantial amount of DNA and
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: a partial fingerprint.
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: Oh, well, that changes everything.
• 8:51
  Speaker 2: You'd think so. But Detective Cox looked at the eight
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: hours of post-mortem staging... and introduced a really chilling theory.
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: What do you think?
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: He believed he didn't walk into a crime scene at all.
• 9:04
  Speaker 2: He believed he walked into a stage play.
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: Oh, man.
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: Think about it. If a predator spends eight hours meticulously
• 9:11
  Speaker 2: arranging objects and leaving deliberate markings, they likely curated the
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: forensics as well.
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: So you're saying.
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: The DNA and the fingerprint could have been intentionally planted
• 9:21
  Speaker 2: to frame someone else.
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: A completely manufactured reality. That is terrifying.
• 9:26
  Speaker 2: It really is the ultimate misdirection.
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: But even if it is a stage play, police still
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: have to track down where those props came from, right? Right.
• 9:33
  Speaker 2: They have to follow the physical evidence.
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: And Bill and Peggy were beloved. The family is completely
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: stumped on a motive. So investigators decide to look at
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: the one area of Bill's life where he interacted with
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: total strangers.
• 9:46
  Speaker 2: The truck stop ministry. Yes.
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: Just two days before the murders, on Friday, May 27th,
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: Witnesses saw a man walk up to that semi-trailer chapel.
• 9:56
  Speaker 2: And what was he doing?
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: Banging furiously on the door, just yelling for business.
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: That is extremely suspicious.
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: And security cameras at the truck stop actually catch an
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: image of a man matching that exact description.
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: But the inherent problem with a truck stop is transience.
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: Yeah, people are constantly moving.
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: A trucker can be three states away by the next morning.
• 10:15
  Speaker 2: And despite launching a massive nationwide manhunt, And checking weigh
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: station logs in 18 different states, that man just vanished
• 10:22
  Speaker 2: into the wind.
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: Gone.
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: Completely. And police knew they couldn't just look at random
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: transients forever. Yeah. Because the extreme, highly personal staging at
• 10:30
  Speaker 2: the crime scene implies a really intimate connection to the victims.
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: It feels personal.
• 10:35
  Speaker 2: Exactly. So the family finally gives police one name to
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: look into.
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: Who?
• 10:41
  Speaker 2: Charles Stevenson. He goes by Stevie. And he's the victim's nephew.
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: Okay, but Stevie had a pretty weak motive, right?
• 10:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, he was cut out of a 2006
• 10:49
  Speaker 2: will when his uncle died, and he owed some people
• 10:52
  Speaker 2: some money.
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: That doesn't exactly scream overkill double homicide.
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: No, and his alibi was literally just that he was
• 10:59
  Speaker 2: home alone asleep in his bed.
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: Which is convenient, but here is where the story takes
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: just a wild turn.
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: Oh, a very dark turn.
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: Almost a year later, in April 2012, Stevie is arrested
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: in neighboring Indiana.
• 11:12
  Speaker 2: For what?
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: He beat his 67-year-old girlfriend to death inside her home.
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: Oh, my God.
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: And the weapons he used. A pepper grinder and a skillet.
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: The behavioral echo there is just deafening. Using domestic household
• 11:25
  Speaker 2: items to commit a brutal murder. Right.
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: It sounds way too similar to ignore.
• 11:29
  Speaker 2: Exactly. And while he's in custody in Indiana, Stevie refuses
• 11:32
  Speaker 2: to talk about his girlfriend's murder, but he desperately tries
• 11:35
  Speaker 2: to broker a deal.
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: Wait, a deal for what?
• 11:38
  Speaker 2: He offers to talk to Detective Cox about Bill and
• 11:40
  Speaker 2: Peggy in exchange for leniency. Oh, wow.
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: So he's basically inserting himself into the investigation.
• 11:46
  Speaker 2: Yes, but the physical evidence stops that theory dead in
• 11:51
  Speaker 2: its tracks.
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: Because of the DNA.
• 11:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Stevie voluntarily gives his DNA and a full set
• 11:57
  Speaker 2: of fingerprints, and they are a 0% match to the
• 12:01
  Speaker 2: evidence found at the condo.
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: Okay, but if Stevie is desperate for money and he's
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: clearly capable of extreme violence, couldn't he have hired a hitman?
• 12:09
  Speaker 2: A lot of people wonder that. Right.
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: And then the hitman just left their own DNA behind.
• 12:14
  Speaker 2: Well, if we look closely at the psychology of a
• 12:16
  Speaker 2: contracted killing, the hitman theory falls apart really rapidly.
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: How so?
• 12:20
  Speaker 2: Contract killings are entirely transactional. The goal is to get in,
• 12:24
  Speaker 2: minimize risk, get the target, and get out as fast
• 12:27
  Speaker 2: as possible.
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: A lingering.
• 12:28
  Speaker 2: Exactly. A hired professional does not spend eight hours inside
• 12:32
  Speaker 2: a house post-mortem.
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: That makes total sense.
• 12:34
  Speaker 2: They do not meticulously move deeply personal mundane objects to
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: create a bizarre tableau. That level of overkill and staging
• 12:42
  Speaker 2: points to a highly emotional, intensely personal connection.
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: So they were trying to say something.
• 12:47
  Speaker 2: Yes. The killer was interacting with the memory of Bill
• 12:51
  Speaker 2: and Peggy, using their own environment to make a statement.
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: So to figure out what that statement actually meant, Detective
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: Cox takes the evidence to Philadelphia.
• 13:00
  Speaker 2: To the VDoc Society.
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: Right. And for those who don't know, this is a
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: room filled with elite... Former law enforcement experts who consult
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: on unsolvable cold cases.
• 13:11
  Speaker 2: It's like a real world Sherlock Holmes club.
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: It really is. So Cox presents all the bizarre markings
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: and the posed objects to them. And the experts, including
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: specialists in symbolic crimes, come back with a definitive verdict.
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: Yeah. They concluded it was not a genuine ritual killing.
• 13:26
  Speaker 1: Not at all.
• 13:27
  Speaker 2: No. Because in a real ritualistic crime, there is a
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: strict internal consistency.
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: What does that mean exactly?
• 13:34
  Speaker 2: Well, the symbols, the location, the positioning of the bodies,
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: they all adhere to a specific coherent belief system. Okay.
• 13:40
  Speaker 2: The scene in the Stevenson condo lacked that framework completely.
• 13:44
  Speaker 2: It was a staged attempt to mimic a ritual engineered
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: by someone deliberately trying to throw the police off their trail.
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: It's exactly like someone trying to forge a document in
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: a language they don't actually speak.
• 13:55
  Speaker 2: Oh, that's a perfect way to put it. Right.
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: Like to a layman looking at the strange characters and
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: It looks terrifying and authentic. You think, wow, this is
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: some dark, ancient curse.
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: But an expert knows better.
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: Exactly. The second you hand it to a linguist, they
• 14:10
  Speaker 1: immediately recognize it as complete gibberish. Just random shapes drawn
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: by someone trying to confuse you.
• 14:16
  Speaker 2: But the contradiction here is just glaring.
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: How so?
• 14:20
  Speaker 2: Engineering a fake ritual requires sheer sophistication. Confidently spending eight
• 14:25
  Speaker 2: hours in a bloody crime scene, manipulating the environment?
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: I mean.
• 14:29
  Speaker 2: A novice panics and flees.
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: Right. I don't stick around.
• 14:32
  Speaker 2: But this offender lingered. They were comfortable. Yet, when investigators
• 14:36
  Speaker 2: entered the specifics of this crime into VCAP, the National
• 14:40
  Speaker 2: Database for Violent Crimes.
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: Let me guess. Nothing.
• 14:43
  Speaker 2: Zero connected crimes anywhere in the entire country.
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: That contradiction is exactly why this case sat frozen for
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: over a decade. The trail just completely evaporated.
• 14:53
  Speaker 2: It's so frustrating for the family.
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: Oh, I can't even imagine. So for 12 years, that
• 14:57
  Speaker 1: partial fingerprint down at the scene just sits in an
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: evidence box.
• 15:01
  Speaker 2: Waiting for a hit. Yeah.
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: Detective Cox had actually mailed physical copies of it to
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: crime labs in all 50 states back in 2011.
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: Which is great old school police work. It is.
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: And then finally, in June 2023, the phone rings.
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: Wow.
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: It's a lab tech in a Western state.
• 15:18
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: And she is the definition of an unsung hero.
• 15:22
  Speaker 2: Because of what she did with the card?
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: Yes. She had kept a physical copy of that fingerprint
• 15:26
  Speaker 1: card on her desk for over a decade. Every single
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: time a new print came into her system, she compared
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: it to the Stevenson print.
• 15:33
  Speaker 2: Manually?
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: Manually. Year after year, until finally she got a 100% match.
• 15:38
  Speaker 2: It is so crucial to understand why she had to
• 15:41
  Speaker 2: do this manually.
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: Why couldn't a computer just do it?
• 15:43
  Speaker 2: Well, the Automated Fingerprint Identification System, or AFIS, relies on
• 15:48
  Speaker 2: algorithms mapping out what they call minutiae points.
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: Okay, like the lines on the finger.
• 15:53
  Speaker 2: Right, the specific ridges and bifurcations of a print. A
• 15:56
  Speaker 2: partial print often lacks enough of those anchor points for
• 16:00
  Speaker 2: a computer to orient it and confidently declare a match.
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: So it kicks it back as an error.
• 16:05
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It requires the painstaking geometric analysis of a human
• 16:09
  Speaker 2: expert staring through a loop, matching it ridge by ridge.
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: And her hard work paid off.
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: It really did.
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 16:15
  Speaker 2: And the profile of the man she matched it to,
• 16:19
  Speaker 2: we'll just call him Western State Guy, is absolutely fascinating.
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: Because he wasn't just some random drifter, right?
• 16:24
  Speaker 2: No, this wasn't a transient trucker. He actually knew Bill
• 16:27
  Speaker 2: and Peggy. He had lived right there in Boone County, Kentucky. Wow.
• 16:30
  Speaker 2: And he conveniently packed up and moved out west immediately
• 16:34
  Speaker 2: after the murders.
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: Okay, that is beyond suspicious. So Detective Cox sets a trap.
• 16:39
  Speaker 2: Oh, this part is tense.
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: He calls Western State Guy under the guise of just
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: updating loved ones on a cold case. He says, you know, hey,
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: we know you were close to the Stevenson's. We're just
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: touching base.
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: Playing it super casual.
• 16:51
  Speaker 1: Exactly. And the guy plays the part perfectly. He says
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: he loved Bill and Peggy. He'd do absolutely anything to
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: help solve their murders.
• 16:58
  Speaker 2: Of course he does.
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: So Cox says, great, we just need a routine DNA
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: swab and some prints to officially rule you out. We're
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: getting them from everyone in their inner circle.
• 17:07
  Speaker 2: Smart.
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: And they schedule the swab for 10 a.m. the very
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: next day.
• 17:12
  Speaker 2: But at 9.45 a.m. Exactly 15 minutes before the appointment,
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: Western State Guy calls back.
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: And I bet his tune changed.
• 17:21
  Speaker 2: Completely. The cooperative, loving friend is just gone. He flat
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: out refuses to show up and demands that any further
• 17:29
  Speaker 2: communication go through his lawyer.
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: Okay, I have to play devil's advocate for you listening
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: right now because getting a lawyer is a smart constitutional right.
• 17:36
  Speaker 2: It is.
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: If the police suddenly ask for your DNA in a
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: double homicide, lawyering up is just self-preservation. So why do
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: investigators view this as an immediate indicator of guilt?
• 17:46
  Speaker 2: It's a fair question. But investigators do not view the
• 17:49
  Speaker 2: invocation of rights in a vacuum. They analyze the behavioral
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: baseline shift.
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: The baseline shift?
• 17:55
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Police are looking at how a person's behavior suddenly
• 17:58
  Speaker 2: deviates under pressure. In this specific investigation... Detective Cox had
• 18:04
  Speaker 2: already swabbed roughly 200 people who knew the Stephensons.
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: 200?
• 18:08
  Speaker 2: Yes. And out of those 200, only three ever asked
• 18:12
  Speaker 2: for an attorney. Oh, wow. But the real red flag
• 18:15
  Speaker 2: here is the drastic pivot. Western state guy went from
• 18:19
  Speaker 2: aggressively accommodating like, I love them, I'll do anything, to
• 18:23
  Speaker 2: completely barricaded.
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: The exact moment things got real.
• 18:26
  Speaker 2: Yes. The moment he realized his physical forensics were going
• 18:30
  Speaker 2: to be permanently on the record. That sudden shift right
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: before the physical swab is what signals deception.
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: Well, Cox doesn't wait around to find out. He flies
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: out to this western state, marches into a local judge's office,
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: and secures a warrant.
• 18:43
  Speaker 2: He was not letting this go.
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: Definitely not. He drives to the suspect's house and knocks.
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: No answer.
• 18:48
  Speaker 2: But he knows he's in there.
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: Oh, he knows the guy is in there, but he
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: just refuses to open the door or pick up the phone.
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: So what happens?
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: Cox goes back to the judge, gets a second warrant
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: for forced entry, and law enforcement physically breaches the house.
• 19:00
  Speaker 2: They break the door down. Yep.
• 19:02
  Speaker 1: And they extract this man's DNA and fingerprints right then
• 19:06
  Speaker 1: and there.
• 19:06
  Speaker 2: Which brings to light the ultimate forensic paradox of this
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: entire investigation.
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: This part is just mind-blowing. They run the samples. The
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: fingerprint they pull from Western State Guy is a 100%
• 19:18
  Speaker 1: match to the partial print found at the crime scene.
• 19:20
  Speaker 2: Undeniable.
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: But the DNA is a 0% match.
• 19:23
  Speaker 2: It doesn't match at all.
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: It doesn't match the DNA found at the condo whatsoever.
• 19:27
  Speaker 2: And to make it infinitely more complicated... Investigators had actually
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: found a second DNA sample at a completely different location
• 19:36
  Speaker 2: within the crime scene.
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 19:38
  Speaker 2: When they tested that second sample, it perfectly matched the
• 19:42
  Speaker 2: first unknown DNA profile.
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: How does that actually work scientifically? I mean, we have
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: a fingerprint belonging to a man who knew the victims,
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: who moved immediately after the murder. and who barricaded himself
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: in his house to avoid giving a sample.
• 19:53
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: And Detective Cox stated that this fingerprint was found in
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: a specific location that only the killer could have left it.
• 20:01
  Speaker 1: But the DNA belongs to someone else entirely.
• 20:03
  Speaker 2: Well, it comes down to the mechanics of touch DNA
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: versus bodily fluids.
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: Can you explain that a bit?
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: Sure. A fingerprint is essentially just sweat and natural oils
• 20:13
  Speaker 2: mapping the ridges of your skin. It is entirely possible
• 20:17
  Speaker 2: to leave a pristine fingerprint on a surface without shedding
• 20:21
  Speaker 2: enough epithelial skin cells to generate a viable DNA profile.
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: Oh, okay. That makes sense.
• 20:27
  Speaker 2: Conversely, a killer could leave blood or saliva, which are
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: very rich sources of DNA in two different rooms, without
• 20:34
  Speaker 2: leaving a fingerprint.
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: So they could have had an accomplice. Maybe.
• 20:37
  Speaker 2: Maybe. But it also opens up a darker possibility. We
• 20:41
  Speaker 2: know the killer brought items into the house to stage it.
• 20:45
  Speaker 2: What if the true killer somehow acquired an object that
• 20:48
  Speaker 2: Western State Guy had handled in the past, an object
• 20:51
  Speaker 2: bearing his fingerprint, and purposefully placed it inside that condo
• 20:54
  Speaker 2: to frame him?
• 20:55
  Speaker 1: That is just maddening.
• 20:56
  Speaker 2: It's diabolical.
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: So where do we stand right now? The physical and
• 20:59
  Speaker 1: circumstantial evidence keeps Western State Guy firmly in the suspect pool.
• 21:03
  Speaker 2: Definitely.
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: And nephew Stevie is technically still in the mix due
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: to his violent behavioral history.
• 21:09
  Speaker 2: Even without the DNA match.
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: Right. But the Boone County Sheriff's Office knows they cannot
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: close this loop until they identify that unknown DNA.
• 21:17
  Speaker 2: They need a name.
• 21:18
  Speaker 1: They are actively working this case, utilizing new DNA technology,
• 21:22
  Speaker 1: just trying to give a name to that ghost.
• 21:25
  Speaker 2: And they're still searching for that truck stop man, too.
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: Yes, the unidentified man who banged on Bill's trailer door.
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: So if you are listening and have any insight at all,
• 21:34
  Speaker 1: the Boone County tip line is 859-334-8496.
• 21:37
  Speaker 2: And I just want you to consider this final, really
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: unsettling thought.
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: What's that?
• 21:43
  Speaker 2: We know, based on the medical device and the time device,
• 21:47
  Speaker 2: that the killer spent up to eight hours inside that condo.
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: An eternity in a crime scene.
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Eight hours moving items, marking objects, and curating a
• 21:56
  Speaker 2: deeply confusing staged reality. We naturally assume that conflicting forensics
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: like a perfectly matching fingerprint paired with completely mismatched DNA
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: is a mistake the killer made.
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: Because nobody's perfect.
• 22:08
  Speaker 2: Right. But what if it isn't a mistake? What if
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: this paradox is the ultimate intentional puzzle that they spent
• 22:14
  Speaker 2: those eight hours designing specifically for the police to find?
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: A masterpiece of misdirection just left sitting there in the
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: humidity of a Kentucky Sunday. Thank you for joining us
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: on this investigation. Keep digging, keep questioning the evidence, and
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: we'll see you on the next Deep Dive.