Latest / Murder Files Unsealed / The Steve Kruspe Case: Mercy Killing or Manslaughter?

Transcript

The Steve Kruspe Case: Mercy Killing or Manslaughter? · Murder Files Unsealed

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: I want you to imagine just looking right across the
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: kitchen table at the person you've loved for nearly half
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: a century.
• 0:07
  Speaker 2: Yeah, the person you've built your whole life with.
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: Exactly. I mean, you know the exact cadence of their breathing, right?
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: You know those microscopic little shifts in their expression that
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: mean they're amused or anxious or tired?
• 0:19
  Speaker 2: You're completely intertwined. Neurologists actually say your brain maps its
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: own neural pathways entirely around their existence.
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: Right, they are literally a part of your brain's architecture.
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: And then I want you to imagine... a biological intruder
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: just entering that shared space.
• 0:34
  Speaker 2: Just completely invading it.
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Over the course of just a few years, you
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: have to watch the person you built your entire reality
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: around just slowly and fundamentally slip away.
• 0:46
  Speaker 2: It's agonizing.
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: It is. The nurturing person you married is replaced by
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: someone unrecognizable, like someone whose brain is actively mutating their personality.
• 0:55
  Speaker 2: And at the very end of that terrifying road... you're
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: faced with a deadly, just completely irreversible choice.
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: Which brings us to the core of what we're talking
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: about today.
• 1:04
  Speaker 2: Because it forces us to confront this really terrifying question
• 1:08
  Speaker 2: about identity. I mean, if the physical body sitting across
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: from you is the person you married, but the mind
• 1:14
  Speaker 2: inside that body is acting like a hostile stranger, who
• 1:17
  Speaker 2: are you actually looking at?
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: That is the exact question.
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: Right. And when we think of true crime, I mean,
• 1:22
  Speaker 2: the mind naturally gravitates toward easily digestible motives. We look
• 1:27
  Speaker 2: for financial greed or, you know, jilted lovers wanting revenge.
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: We want a clear villain.
• 1:32
  Speaker 2: Exactly. We look for sociopathic malice because we want the
• 1:36
  Speaker 2: comfort of knowing someone did a bad thing for a
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: clear bad reason. Yeah.
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: But the darkest, most enduring nightmares, they often don't start
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: in a place of malice at all.
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: No, they don't.
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: They're born out of circumstances that begin with deep, protective love,
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: and then they warp into a kind of pain that
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: just distorts the fabric of reality. for everyone caught in
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: the blast radius.
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: And we are navigating that exact distortion today.
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: We really are. So this deep dive is an exploration
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: of one of the most morally complex and, frankly, emotionally
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: devastating cases I think we've seen in recent memory. And
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: just to lay out our source material right up front,
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: we are looking at an investigative piece by Jill Sederstrom.
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: It was published by Oxygen True Crime, and it details
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: a case that was featured on their show, Accident, Suicide,
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: or Murder.
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: It's a really thorough look at what happened.
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: It is. We're going to be breaking down the events
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: of March 27, 2017. That's the day a 61-year-old woman
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: named Pam Cruspo died at the hands of her husband,
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: Steve Cruspo.
• 2:39
  Speaker 2: And we need to make the mission of this deep
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: dive crystal clear from the jump.
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: Yes, absolutely. We are not here to play judge or jury. Right.
• 2:47
  Speaker 2: The Florida legal system has already processed this case.
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: Exactly. Our objective is to impartially examine the established facts...
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: to dig really deep into the forensic mechanics, including the
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: agonizing lack of certain evidence, and to understand how the
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: people involved can look at the exact same set of
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: circumstances and see entirely different realities.
• 3:06
  Speaker 2: And that divergence in reality, it starts with the very
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: first piece of evidence in the timeline.
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it does.
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: It's 7.30 p.m., March 27, 2017. A 911 call gets
• 3:13
  Speaker 2: routed to a dispatch center in Florida. The location ping
• 3:21
  Speaker 2: is the Parkside Inn, which is an assisted living facility. Right. Now,
• 3:25
  Speaker 2: if you study emergency dispatch audio, there's a very specific
• 3:29
  Speaker 2: acoustic signature to a shooting call. It is almost always
• 3:32
  Speaker 2: characterized by acoustic chaos.
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: Like total panic.
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: Total panic. The microphone usually picks up high decibel screaming,
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: the erratic footsteps of people scattering. The hyperventilation of the caller,
• 3:45
  Speaker 2: sirens bleeding in from the background.
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: Because your body is freaking out.
• 3:48
  Speaker 2: Exactly. The human nervous system, when it's exposed to sudden
• 3:51
  Speaker 2: legal violence, it just goes into this explosive sympathetic overdrive.
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: But the audio from the Parkside Inn, it lacks all
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: that acoustic signature, like all of it.
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: It's eerie.
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: It really is. The caller is a man, and the
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: frequency of his voice is entirely level. He doesn't have
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: that frantic... you know, breathless edge of someone who has
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: just committed a crime of passion. Nor does he have
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: the hysteria of someone who just watched a loved one
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: die unexpectedly. He speaks to the dispatcher with this clinical calmness.
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: He just says, I just shot my wife.
• 4:23
  Speaker 2: And I want to just think about the psychology of
• 4:25
  Speaker 2: that phrasing for a second.
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: That is a conversational filler, right? It is a hesitation
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: marker you use when you're deciding what to order at
• 4:34
  Speaker 2: a restaurant. You don't use it when you are reporting
• 4:37
  Speaker 2: a homicide.
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: Yeah, that's such a good point.
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: It indicates a resting heart rate. It indicates a brain
• 4:42
  Speaker 2: that is completely oriented to time and place, not one
• 4:45
  Speaker 2: flooded with adrenaline and cortisol.
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: So the dispatcher, who is obviously trying to process this
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: surreal lack of panic, asks a standard triage question to
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: assess the medical emergency. They ask if the woman is awake.
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: And the caller, Steve Crispier, replies with that exact same flat,
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: informative delivery. He just says, no, she's dead.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: He provides his name without being pressured. He doesn't hang up.
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: He doesn't, like, try to formulate an escape plan.
• 5:11
  Speaker 2: Not at all.
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: He simply waits on the property for the authorities to
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: arrive and take him into custody.
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: And that eerie, Brady-Cardick calm on the phone, that is
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: the central enigma of the entire investigation.
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: It really is the thing everything hinges on.
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: It forces law enforcement, the family, and eventually the public—
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: into this years-long struggle to interpret what that calmness actually meant.
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: Right, like, was it the calm of a cold-blooded sociopath
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: who had just successfully executed a plan?
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: Or was it the tragic, exhausted calm of a man
• 5:41
  Speaker 2: who felt he had just neutralized a horrific, unfixable suffering?
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: Okay, let's unpack this. Because you can't just isolate a
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: man standing over his wife's body in a parking lot
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: and pretend you understand the physics of that moment.
• 5:53
  Speaker 2: You really can't.
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: You don't arrive at that quiet, deadly second without decades
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: of history building the road that led there. So to
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: comprehend the architecture of this tragedy, we have to examine
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: the 47-year foundation that preceded it.
• 6:06
  Speaker 2: And the contrast between their history and the culmination of
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: their lives is just staggering.
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: It's unbelievable.
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: Steve and Pam Crosbaugh built what the source material describes
• 6:17
  Speaker 2: as this deeply stable, picturesque life. They were married in 1976.
• 6:22
  Speaker 2: And this is crucial context, right? They had been together
• 6:25
  Speaker 2: through the entirety of their adult lives.
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: They raised three children together.
• 6:29
  Speaker 2: Yeah. And when investigators dig into a spousal homicide, the
• 6:33
  Speaker 2: first thing they pull apart is the domestic history. They
• 6:36
  Speaker 2: look for the red flags.
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: Always. They look for the escalating police visits to the house.
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: They look for, you know... Financial control, whispers from neighbors,
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: those emergency room visits with dubious explanations.
• 6:49
  Speaker 2: Exactly. They look for the blueprint of domestic abuse.
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: But they found none of that here. The source material
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: notes they were admired by their community. There's a friend
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: of the couple, Kent Boland, who was quoted describing their dynamic.
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: Yeah, he said they complimented each other.
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: But the phrase that truly highlights their psychological enmeshment is
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: when he called them two sides of each other's heart.
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: That is so specific.
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: It is. He noted they never operated unless it was together.
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: It was a symbiotic partnership where they were just meticulously
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: thoughtful about the other's internal state.
• 7:20
  Speaker 2: If we connect this to the bigger picture, we really
• 7:22
  Speaker 2: have to zoom in on Steve's background specifically because it
• 7:25
  Speaker 2: operates as the psychological lens through which this entire event
• 7:28
  Speaker 2: is filtered.
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: Right. The military background.
• 7:31
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Steve was a former Marine and he wasn't just
• 7:34
  Speaker 2: in the infantry. I mean... He was an instructor who
• 7:37
  Speaker 2: trained America's most elite soldiers.
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: Which is a huge detail.
• 7:40
  Speaker 2: It's massive. That kind of career physically and neurologically wires
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: a human being differently than, you know, a civilian desk job.
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: Yeah, the military training doctrine, especially for elite tactical units,
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: is heavily reliant on a concept called the OD loop, right?
• 7:56
  Speaker 2: Yes, exactly. Observe, orient, decide, act.
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: It is a cognitive framework completely designed to strip emotion
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: out of high stress situations.
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: Right. When an elite soldier encounters a chaotic, degrading environment,
• 8:11
  Speaker 2: they are trained to not succumb to panic. They observe
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: the data, they orient themselves to the reality of the threat,
• 8:18
  Speaker 2: they make a decisive choice based on efficiency, and they
• 8:21
  Speaker 2: act upon it permanently.
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: They are conditioned to manage violence and neutralize deterioration.
• 8:27
  Speaker 2: That is exactly it.
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: So if you think about the mindset of a fixer,
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: an elite military trainer solving a tactical problem, you are
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: hardwired to look at immense distress and eliminate it.
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: You don't just sit there.
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: Right. You identify the source of the suffering, you formulate
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: a rapid intervention, and you execute it. You do not
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: sit back and let a hostile situation torture your unit.
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: No, you take action.
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: And I want you to hold on to that specific
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: psychological framework. Because a man whose entire identity and professional
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: training revolves around eliminating threats and fixing horrific problems is
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: eventually going to be confronted with an invisible enemy It
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: cannot be shot.
• 9:04
  Speaker 2: It cannot be negotiated with.
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: And it has no medical cure.
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: The collision between that fixer mentality and an incurable disease
• 9:11
  Speaker 2: is the engine of this tragedy.
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: It really is.
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: When we look back at Kent Bolin's description of them
• 9:16
  Speaker 2: being two sides of the same heart, we understand why
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: the eventual accusation of first-degree cold-blooded murder creates such intense
• 9:24
  Speaker 2: cognitive dissonance for the people who knew them.
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: Yeah, like how does a protector, a man trained to defend...
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: put a firearm to the chest of the woman who
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: constitutes the other half of his identity. Right.
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: Something catastrophic has to enter the ecosystem to break a
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: 47-year bond like that.
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: It wasn't a slow drift apart. It was a complete
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: biological hijacking. Exactly.
• 9:45
  Speaker 2: So four years prior to the shooting, this invisible intruder arrived.
• 9:49
  Speaker 2: Pam was diagnosed with frontotemporal dementia, or FTD.
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: And the source describes this as an aggressive form of
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: Alzheimer's disease. But we need to be incredibly precise about
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: what's FTD actually does to a human brain, right?
• 10:03
  Speaker 2: Yes, we do, because it is distinctly different, and in
• 10:06
  Speaker 2: many ways, far more brutal in its initial presentation than
• 10:09
  Speaker 2: standard Alzheimer's.
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: Because standard Alzheimer's usually attacks the hippocampus first, right? Correct.
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: So the initial symptoms are memory-based, like where did I
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: put my keys, what did I have for breakfast?
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: Precisely. But FTD attacks the frontal and temporal lobes of
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: the brain. And the frontal lobe is the seat of
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: human executive function.
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: It's basically who you are.
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It is where your empathy lives. It is where
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: your impulse control, your social filter, and your core personality
• 10:35
  Speaker 2: are generated. Wow. So when toxic proteins begin to accumulate
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: in the frontal lobe and the tissue literally atrophies and shrinks...
• 10:43
  Speaker 2: the patient doesn't necessarily forget who you are.
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: They still know you.
• 10:46
  Speaker 2: Right. But instead, they lose the neurological ability to care
• 10:50
  Speaker 2: about how you feel. They completely lose the filter that
• 10:54
  Speaker 2: dictates appropriate human behavior.
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: And the source illustrates exactly how devastating that functional loss was.
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: I mean, Pam had been working in the clerk of courts.
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: Which is a demanding job.
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: Let's think about the mechanics of that job. It requires
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: massive amounts of executive function, intense organization, continuous communication, and
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: the ability to process complex sequences of information.
• 11:16
  Speaker 2: Yeah, you have to be sharp.
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: And suddenly she just can't.
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: Her son, Matt Crespi, noted that his mother rapidly lost
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: the ability to do the things she loved. She was
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: being stripped of her competence in real time.
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: And that loss of competence is accompanied by the most
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: agonizing symptom of FTD, which is the personality shift.
• 11:33
  Speaker 2: Right. The source highlights that Pam became combative and at
• 11:37
  Speaker 2: times actively violent.
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: Which is just wild to think about.
• 11:41
  Speaker 2: The disease was fundamentally rewriting her. The gentle, nurturing mother
• 11:45
  Speaker 2: and wife was being replaced by someone unpredictable and aggressive.
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: I want to just pause on that reality for a second.
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: If you are the spouse, right? If the person you've
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: known for four decades, the person you raised children with,
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: suddenly becomes violent toward you, how do you even process that?
• 12:01
  Speaker 2: It's almost impossible.
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: Your brain knows intellectually that there are toxic proteins destroying
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: her frontal lobe. You know it's a disease. But your
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: nervous system is experiencing a physical attack from the person
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: you trust most in the universe.
• 12:15
  Speaker 2: The psychological term for what Steve and the children were
• 12:18
  Speaker 2: experiencing is ambiguous loss. It's a concept pioneered by researcher
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: Pauline Boss. And it is a type of grief that
• 12:26
  Speaker 2: occurs when a person is physically present but psychologically gone.
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: It sounds incredibly traumatic.
• 12:34
  Speaker 2: It is profoundly traumatizing because there is no closure. You
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: are trapped in a perpetual state of mourning someone who
• 12:41
  Speaker 2: is sitting right across the table from you, maybe even
• 12:43
  Speaker 2: screaming at you.
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 12:45
  Speaker 2: The caretaker's nervous system is under constant siege. You suffer
• 12:49
  Speaker 2: from intense caregiver burnout, hypervigilance, and this profound isolation because
• 12:54
  Speaker 2: society just doesn't understand why you're grieving a person who
• 12:57
  Speaker 2: is technically still alive.
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: And it gets even darker because the source points out
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: that Pam wasn't entirely gone in a vegetative sense. She
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: had lucid moments.
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: The lucid moments in FTD are arguably the cruelest part
• 13:08
  Speaker 2: of the pathology.
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: I can imagine.
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: Because the memory isn't the primary target initially, Pam would
• 13:14
  Speaker 2: have windows of absolute clarity. She would look around and
• 13:17
  Speaker 2: be horrifyingly aware of her own neurological collapse.
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: That is a distinct type of torture. I mean, to
• 13:23
  Speaker 1: be trapped inside a failing vessel, to realize you are
• 13:26
  Speaker 1: violently attacking the husband you love, to know you are
• 13:29
  Speaker 1: losing your dignity.
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: And to know it won't get better.
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: Exactly. To know with absolute medical certainty... that it is
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: only going to get worse. It's like being locked inside
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: a falling elevator and having perfect clarity about what happens
• 13:42
  Speaker 1: when it hits the ground.
• 13:43
  Speaker 2: And this brings us to the tipping point. According to
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: Steve's interrogation statements, the pressure cooker of this ambiguous loss
• 13:50
  Speaker 2: reached critical mass in the four months leading up to
• 13:53
  Speaker 2: her death.
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: Four months.
• 13:54
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Steve claimed that during this period, Pam was incessantly
• 13:58
  Speaker 2: expressing a desire to end her own life.
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: He described her private anguish as a horror story.
• 14:04
  Speaker 2: A horror story.
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah. He told the authorities that she was desperately begging
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: for an end, telling him, you know, this is not
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: how I want to live the rest of my life.
• 14:12
  Speaker 2: God.
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: He is trapped in a house with a woman mourning
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: her own living death, begging the man who has protected
• 14:18
  Speaker 1: her for 47 years to intervene and stop the suffering.
• 14:22
  Speaker 2: Now, we only have Steve's account of those intimate conversations.
• 14:26
  Speaker 2: But if we apply his military framework, that Oda loop
• 14:28
  Speaker 2: we talked about, we see a man observing an escalating
• 14:32
  Speaker 2: threat to his wife's dignity. Right. He's orienting to the
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: fact that medicine cannot fix it, and he's feeling the
• 14:38
  Speaker 2: crushing demand to make a decisive choice.
• 14:41
  Speaker 1: And that terrifying demand brings us back to the timeline.
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: We are back to the evening of March 27, 2017,
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: the climax of this horror story.
• 14:51
  Speaker 2: The sequence of events that evening appears deceptively mundane.
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: It really does.
• 14:55
  Speaker 2: Steve drives to the assisted living center where Pam now resides.
• 14:59
  Speaker 2: He signs her out, picks her up, and they go
• 15:01
  Speaker 2: out for coffee. It is a snapshot of a completely
• 15:04
  Speaker 2: normal retirement life.
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: Right, but the psychological reality inside that car, according to Steve,
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: was rapidly deteriorating.
• 15:12
  Speaker 2: Steve's account to the authorities is that the drive back
• 15:14
  Speaker 2: from the coffee shop triggered a catastrophic emotional spiral.
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: As the car gets closer to the Parkside Inn, Pam
• 15:20
  Speaker 1: realizes she has to go back inside. She has to
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: go back to the confines of her diminished life.
• 15:25
  Speaker 2: And Steve claims the desperation just peaked. She is weeping profusely.
• 15:30
  Speaker 2: Begging him to kill her, begging him not to make
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: her go back in there.
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: He tells investigators the brokenheartedness simply broke him. He could
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: not witness her agony for another second.
• 15:40
  Speaker 2: So he retrieves a firearm from his vehicle.
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: Which loops us right back to that 911 call.
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: I just shot my wife. The dispatcher asks if she's
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: awake and he replies, no, she's dead.
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: I really want to examine the law enforcement response here
• 15:55
  Speaker 2: because the contrast between their expectations and the physical reality
• 15:59
  Speaker 2: of the scene is jarring.
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: It's completely opposite of what they expect.
• 16:02
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Boynton Beach Police Sergeant Wadey Jean was interviewed for
• 16:06
  Speaker 2: the source material. When a patrol unit gets dispatched to
• 16:09
  Speaker 2: a shots fired call with a confirmed victim, the officers
• 16:13
  Speaker 2: are preparing for a highly volatile tactical situation. Of course.
• 16:17
  Speaker 2: They expect resistance. They expect a perpetrator attempting to flee
• 16:20
  Speaker 2: or a barricade situation or a suspect in the throes
• 16:23
  Speaker 2: of a violent psychological break.
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: So Sergeant Gene arrives at the Parkside Inn. Adrenaline is pumping.
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: Weapons are likely drawn or at the ready. And he
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: finds an empty parking lot.
• 16:32
  Speaker 2: It's just completely empty.
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah. He spots Steve, and his description is incredibly telling.
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: He says, when we laid eyes on him, we didn't
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: see a typical homicidal maniac. We just saw an older
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: man who does not appear that he could hurt a
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: fly just walking out.
• 16:47
  Speaker 2: Steve wasn't pacing. He wasn't hyperventilating. He was entirely cooperative.
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: Sergeant Gene noted he just looked profoundly sad.
• 16:55
  Speaker 2: The adrenaline dump that usually accompanies a murder simply wasn't there.
• 16:59
  Speaker 2: He presented as a man who had completed a grueling,
• 17:02
  Speaker 2: heartbreaking task.
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: And the physical evidence at the rear of the building
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: mirrored that eerie calmness. Officers proceed to the patio area. There,
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: lying on her back in the grass, is 61-year-old Pam Crispy.
• 17:14
  Speaker 2: She has sustained a single gunshot wound to the chest.
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: And the forensic technicians begin processing the area, and what
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: they find, or rather what they don't find, is critical.
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: The scene is pristine.
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: Completely pristine.
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: In a typical homicide involving a firearm at close range,
• 17:30
  Speaker 2: you look for signs of a struggle. You look for
• 17:32
  Speaker 2: scuff marks in the dirt from a panicked retreat. You
• 17:36
  Speaker 2: look for torn clothing, bruised wrists or defensive wounds on
• 17:40
  Speaker 2: the victim's hands and forearms where they tried to block
• 17:42
  Speaker 2: the weapon.
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: Pim had absolutely none of that. Physically, minus the trauma
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: of the gunshot itself. It was a perfectly peaceful scene.
• 17:50
  Speaker 2: But the internal ballistics tell a slightly different story, one
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: that the prosecution immediately keyed in on.
• 17:56
  Speaker 1: Yes. Dave Ehrenberg, the former state attorney for Palm Beach County,
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: pointed out a chilling detail in the source material. He
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: noted that for a wound that directly pierced the heart,
• 18:07
  Speaker 1: there was remarkably little external blood at the scene.
• 18:09
  Speaker 2: And to understand why that matters, we really have to
• 18:12
  Speaker 2: look at the physiology of ballistic trauma.
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: Okay. Lay it out for us.
• 18:15
  Speaker 2: When a projectile penetrates the human heart, particularly the ventricles,
• 18:19
  Speaker 2: it disrupts the internal hydrostatic pressure instantly. Right. If the
• 18:23
  Speaker 2: heart stops pumping immediately, the blood pressure drops to absolute zero.
• 18:27
  Speaker 2: The blood pools internally within the pericardial sac or the
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: chest cavity rather than being actively pumped out of the
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: entrance wound.
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: So it signifies instant catastrophic systemic failure.
• 18:38
  Speaker 2: Exactly. And Ehrenberg used that physiological fact to characterize the shooter.
• 18:43
  Speaker 2: He is quoted saying, it looks like it was done
• 18:45
  Speaker 2: by someone who really knew what he was doing and
• 18:47
  Speaker 2: wanted to end her life right away. This was no
• 18:50
  Speaker 2: ordinary perpetrator. This was a marksman.
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: Here's where it gets really interesting. A marksman. A man
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: who trained elite soldiers. Someone who possesses the technical knowledge
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: to place a single, precisely calculated shot into the center
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: of mass to ensure instantaneous death.
• 19:07
  Speaker 2: No lingering suffering, no secondary shots required, maximum immediate effect.
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: This is the exact moment the timeline fractures into two
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: aggressively competing realities. You have identical physical evidence, a single gunshot,
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: a peaceful scene, a calm shooter being used to construct
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: two entirely different intents.
• 19:26
  Speaker 2: Reality one, Steve's narrative. He is the merciful, heartbroken husband.
• 19:30
  Speaker 2: He couldn't endure the torture of the woman he loved
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: for one more second, so he utilized his training to
• 19:34
  Speaker 2: grant her final wish with swift, clinical perfection. Right.
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: And then you have reality, too. The state's narrative, voiced
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: by Ehrenberg, Steve is a calculated, cold-blooded executioner. He grew
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: exhausted by the burden of caretaking, so he meticulously ended
• 19:50
  Speaker 1: her life and used her disease as the ultimate sympathetic alibi.
• 19:54
  Speaker 2: That collision of narratives is what elevates this from a
• 19:57
  Speaker 2: tragic death to an emotional nuclear explosion.
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: It really is.
• 20:01
  Speaker 2: The blast radius didn't just consume Steve, it incinerated the
• 20:05
  Speaker 2: remaining family structure. The three crispy children... were suddenly thrust
• 20:10
  Speaker 2: into a nightmare where they had to mourn their mother
• 20:13
  Speaker 2: while simultaneously deciding if their father was a savior or
• 20:16
  Speaker 2: a monster.
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: And the prosecution's theory found immediate traction with the children
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: because of a massive cultural and religious roadblock.
• 20:23
  Speaker 2: Oh, absolutely.
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: According to the source, the children were completely blindsided by
• 20:27
  Speaker 1: the concept that their mother wanted to die. They had
• 20:29
  Speaker 1: never heard her utter a single suicidal thought.
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: And we have to factor in the theology here, too.
• 20:33
  Speaker 2: Pam was a devout Catholic.
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: Right, which is huge.
• 20:36
  Speaker 2: It is. In traditional Catholic doctrine, human suffering often holds
• 20:41
  Speaker 2: redemptive value, and the deliberate ending of one's own life
• 20:44
  Speaker 2: is considered a grave sin against the sovereignty of God
• 20:47
  Speaker 2: over life and death.
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: So for her children, the idea that their mother, whose
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: entire moral compass was built on this theology, would beg
• 20:56
  Speaker 1: for assisted suicide was just deeply antithetical to everything they
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: knew about her core identity.
• 21:01
  Speaker 2: It created an impenetrable wall of disbelief. If the woman
• 21:04
  Speaker 2: they knew would never ask for this, then Steve must
• 21:07
  Speaker 2: be lying.
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: The initial unified front among the children completely echoed the
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: state's theory. Steve snapped, he murdered her out of caregiver fatigue,
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: and he fabricated the suicide request.
• 21:18
  Speaker 2: But trauma processes differently in every human brain.
• 21:21
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it does.
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: As the initial shockwave subsided and the months dragged on,
• 21:25
  Speaker 2: the unified front among the siblings began to fracture along
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: the lines of how they individually interpreted their father's psychology.
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: We see a profound divergence between the son, Matt, and
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: the daughter, Stephanie.
• 21:36
  Speaker 2: Matt Kruespe undergoes this grueling internal evolution. He starts in
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: a place of furious betrayal, but slowly navigates toward a
• 21:45
  Speaker 2: highly complex empathy.
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: Matt explicitly states he does not agree with the action,
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: but he begins to deconstruct the why. He looks at
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: the totality of his parents' nightmare, and he points directly
• 21:56
  Speaker 1: back to that military conditioning we discussed.
• 21:59
  Speaker 2: What's fascinating here is how he phrases it. Matt says,
• 22:02
  Speaker 2: my dad's a fixer. If something's wrong, he's going to
• 22:04
  Speaker 2: figure out why and fix it.
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: He synthesizes the immense suffering of the FTD with his
• 22:09
  Speaker 1: father's hardwired compulsion to neutralize pain, and he sees a
• 22:13
  Speaker 1: deeply misguided, tragic act born out of desperate love.
• 22:17
  Speaker 2: I am staggered by the emotional maturity required to hold
• 22:20
  Speaker 2: space for that kind of nuance.
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: Right. To look at the man who killed your mother
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: and see a broken man trying to fix a broken world.
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: But contrast that fragile empathy with the sheer, unadulterated devastation
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: of his sister, Stephanie.
• 22:33
  Speaker 2: Stephanie's perspective is entirely anchored in the threat assessment.
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: At Steve's bond hearing, she delivers a statement that strips
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: away all the nuance of caregiver burnout and focuses purely
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: on the objective action.
• 22:43
  Speaker 2: She tells the court, It is a devastatingly logical conclusion.
• 22:46
  Speaker 2: If his definition of love allows for a bullet to.
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: The chest, His definition of love is a lethal threat
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: to society.
• 23:03
  Speaker 2: You have the exact same man, the man who changed
• 23:05
  Speaker 2: their diapers and taught them how to ride bikes. To
• 23:08
  Speaker 2: his son, he is a tragic figure crushed by an
• 23:11
  Speaker 2: impossible biological reality.
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: And to his daughter, he's a highly trained, cold-blooded threat
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: who belongs in a cage. The family is entirely destroyed
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: from the inside out.
• 23:21
  Speaker 2: And while the family is locked in this emotional warfare...
• 23:24
  Speaker 2: The legal apparatus is grinding toward a murder trial. The
• 23:28
  Speaker 2: state is confident in their first-degree murder charge. They have
• 23:31
  Speaker 2: a confession to the act of shooting. They have a
• 23:33
  Speaker 2: precise center mass wound. And they have a motive rooted
• 23:36
  Speaker 2: in caregiver fatigue.
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: But just as the defense is preparing their counter-narrative, a
• 23:41
  Speaker 1: forensic revelation drops that fundamentally alters the trajectory of the
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: entire case.
• 23:45
  Speaker 2: The forensic lab returns the DNA analysis on the firearm.
• 23:49
  Speaker 1: Pam Crespi's DNA is on the gun.
• 23:51
  Speaker 2: And location is everything in forensic science. It wasn't just
• 23:55
  Speaker 2: on the barrel, which, you know, could happen if it
• 23:57
  Speaker 2: brushed against your chest. The DNA was found specifically on
• 24:00
  Speaker 2: the grip of the weapon.
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: This single piece of microscopic biological material throws a massive
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: wrench into the state's narrative of a unilateral ambush-style execution.
• 24:11
  Speaker 2: The defense immediately jumps on this. They bring in a
• 24:14
  Speaker 2: firearms reconstruction expert.
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: And they take the downward trajectory of the bullet, combine
• 24:19
  Speaker 1: it with the DNA on the grip, and introduce a
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: highly plausible alternative theory. Pam was actively participating.
• 24:25
  Speaker 2: The expert suggests she could have reached out, grabbed the
• 24:28
  Speaker 2: weapon with him, and pulled the gun toward her own
• 24:31
  Speaker 2: chest in that final moment.
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: This revelation exposes a catastrophic failure in the initial police protocol.
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: When you have a suspect standing over a body claiming
• 24:40
  Speaker 1: the victim begged to die, one of the most elementary
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: procedures is to test for gunshot residue, or GSR.
• 24:46
  Speaker 2: Break down the actual chemistry of that for us, because
• 24:49
  Speaker 2: I think people hear GSR on television and think it's
• 24:52
  Speaker 2: just like, A magic glowing dust. But it's a very
• 24:55
  Speaker 2: specific chemical reaction, isn't it?
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: It is. When the firing pin of a gun strikes
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: the primer of a cartridge, it creates a microscopic explosion
• 25:03
  Speaker 1: that ignites the gunpowder.
• 25:05
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: That primer is made of heavy metals, typically lead, barium,
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: and antimony. When it detonates, those metals vaporize into a
• 25:14
  Speaker 1: superheated gas... expand rapidly and blow backward out of the
• 25:18
  Speaker 1: weapon's ejection port or cylinder gaps.
• 25:20
  Speaker 2: Right. And as they hit the cooler air, they instantly
• 25:22
  Speaker 2: condense into microscopic spherical particles that just rain down and
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: settle on the hands, arms and clothing of whoever is
• 25:29
  Speaker 2: holding or in immediate proximity.
• 25:30
  Speaker 1: To the weapon. It is chemical proof of proximity to
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: a discharging firearm. And the source reveals the horrifying oversight.
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: Investigators never swabbed Pan's hands for GSR.
• 25:40
  Speaker 2: It is an almost incomprehensible investigative failure. Because they didn't
• 25:45
  Speaker 2: swab her hands before she was moved and processed by
• 25:47
  Speaker 2: the medical examiner, where those fragile microscopic spheres are easily
• 25:51
  Speaker 2: washed or wiped away, the state permanently lost the only
• 25:55
  Speaker 2: objective chemical method to prove whether Pam's hand was on
• 25:58
  Speaker 2: that grip when the firing pin actually dropped.
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: I have to push back on the defense's DNA theory, though.
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: Sure.
• 26:04
  Speaker 1: I understand reasonable doubt, but let's think about the reality
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: of human instinct. You are sitting in the dark with
• 26:09
  Speaker 1: your husband. He pulls out a handgun.
• 26:12
  Speaker 2: Even if you want to die.
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: Exactly. Or especially if you are terrified and suffering from dementia.
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: Human instinct is to put your hands up. You flail.
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: You grab at the object threatening you.
• 26:23
  Speaker 2: That's true.
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: If a struggling woman grabs at the gun in her
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: husband's hand, couldn't her DNA easily transfer to the grip?
• 26:30
  Speaker 1: Finding touched DNA doesn't definitively prove quiet, consensual participation. It
• 26:34
  Speaker 1: just proves she touched it.
• 26:36
  Speaker 2: That is a brilliant counterpoint. And it is exactly the
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: debate that would have raged in a jury room. Touch
• 26:42
  Speaker 2: DNA simply requires the transfer of epithelial cells. A frantic
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: grab transfers cells just as easily as a willing grip.
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 26:50
  Speaker 2: But legally, your counterpoint highlights the exact problem for the prosecution.
• 26:54
  Speaker 2: Without the GSR to place her hand there at the
• 26:57
  Speaker 2: exact millisecond of discharge, both narratives, the consensual pull and
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: the frantic defensive grab, are theoretically possible.
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: And in the American legal system, if two opposing theories
• 27:09
  Speaker 1: are scientifically plausible... You have the very definition of reasonable doubt.
• 27:12
  Speaker 2: The state attorney's office recognizes they have a major problem.
• 27:16
  Speaker 2: Taking a first-degree murder charge to a jury when you
• 27:18
  Speaker 2: have a sympathetic defendant, an elderly veteran whose wife had
• 27:21
  Speaker 2: a horrific terminal brain disease, is already a massive risk.
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: Juries are human. They feel empathy.
• 27:27
  Speaker 2: Right. Now, add in physical DNA evidence suggesting the victim
• 27:30
  Speaker 2: might have participated, and a botched police investigation missing the
• 27:33
  Speaker 2: crucial GSR test. The risk of an outright acquittal becomes
• 27:37
  Speaker 2: unacceptably high for the state.
• 27:39
  Speaker 1: But the state can't just drop the charges. They can't
• 27:41
  Speaker 1: let them walk away. Because regardless of the FTD, regardless
• 27:44
  Speaker 1: of the begging, there is a hard legal statute standing
• 27:47
  Speaker 1: in the way.
• 27:47
  Speaker 2: Florida law is unequivocal. There is no legal framework for
• 27:51
  Speaker 2: assisted suicide.
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: Under Florida Statute 782.08, assisting in a suicide is explicitly
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: classified as manslaughter.
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: The state does not care about the victim's terminal diagnosis.
• 28:02
  Speaker 2: They do not care about the degree of suffering.
• 28:04
  Speaker 1: The law dictates that an individual cannot consent to being killed.
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: And anyone who facilitates that death is committing a felony.
• 28:11
  Speaker 1: The law is a blunt instrument. It operates in absolute binaries.
• 28:15
  Speaker 1: Lawful or unlawful. Murder or innocence.
• 28:18
  Speaker 2: This forces a high-stakes legal negotiation. The state wants accountability
• 28:22
  Speaker 2: for a homicide. The defense wants to avoid a life
• 28:25
  Speaker 2: sentence for first-degree murder.
• 28:27
  Speaker 1: Which leads to the ultimate resolution. In August of 2023,
• 28:31
  Speaker 1: more than six years after that quiet 911 call, Steve
• 28:34
  Speaker 1: Cruzby agrees to a plea deal. The state drops the
• 28:37
  Speaker 1: first-degree murder charge. Steve pleads guilty to manslaughter by assisted suicide.
• 28:41
  Speaker 2: He is sentenced to 20 years in the Florida Department
• 28:44
  Speaker 2: of Corrections. For a man in his late 60s, a
• 28:47
  Speaker 2: 20-year sentence is essentially a life sentence.
• 28:49
  Speaker 1: It really is.
• 28:50
  Speaker 2: And at that final sentencing hearing, the tragic fracture of
• 28:53
  Speaker 2: his legacy was on full display. The court had to
• 28:56
  Speaker 2: listen as two of his own children stood up and
• 28:59
  Speaker 2: pleaded with the judge to inflict the maximum possible punishment
• 29:02
  Speaker 2: on their father.
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: The family was formally, legally... and permanently broken.
• 29:07
  Speaker 2: Which leaves us standing at the end of the timeline,
• 29:09
  Speaker 2: staring at a massive, unresolved void. We sifted through the forensics,
• 29:14
  Speaker 2: the Marine Corps psychology, the neurology of FTD, and the
• 29:17
  Speaker 2: rigid statutes of Florida law.
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: But we are still left with the central, haunting question
• 29:23
  Speaker 1: of this entire deep dive.
• 29:25
  Speaker 2: Did Steve Crisp perform an act of ultimate, tragic mercy,
• 29:28
  Speaker 2: sacrificing his own freedom to save his wife from a
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: biological torture chamber?
• 29:32
  Speaker 1: Or did he commit a calculated, selfish murder to relieve
• 29:36
  Speaker 1: himself of the burden of an incurably sick woman.
• 29:38
  Speaker 2: The most terrifying aspect of this case is the realization
• 29:41
  Speaker 2: that the objective truth just does not exist. We have
• 29:44
  Speaker 2: a complex matrix of unresolvable variables.
• 29:47
  Speaker 1: We have a man whose entire neurobiology was trained to
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: eliminate suffering and neutralize threats.
• 29:53
  Speaker 2: We have a woman whose brain architecture was actively degrading,
• 29:56
  Speaker 2: fundamentally altering her perception of reality.
• 29:59
  Speaker 1: We have an agonizing lack of forensic certainty because someone
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: forgot to use a cotton swab.
• 30:03
  Speaker 2: And we have a family forced to write two different
• 30:05
  Speaker 2: histories of their own lives.
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: So what does this all mean? It exposes a massive,
• 30:10
  Speaker 1: terrifying gap between the rigid binary nature of our legal
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: system and the messy, visceral reality of human tragedy.
• 30:17
  Speaker 2: The law requires a box to be checked. But when
• 30:19
  Speaker 2: you introduce severe mind-altering conditions like frontotemporal dementia into a
• 30:23
  Speaker 2: 47-year marriage, reality doesn't exist in black and white.
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: It exists in a terrifyingly murky gray area, a landscape
• 30:31
  Speaker 1: where absolute devotion and lethal violence can, horrifyingly, look exactly
• 30:36
  Speaker 1: the same.
• 30:36
  Speaker 2: And it's a gray area that our society is entirely
• 30:39
  Speaker 2: unequipped to navigate. We possess incredible medical technology to keep
• 30:43
  Speaker 2: human bodies alive long after the mind has begun to disintegrate.
• 30:47
  Speaker 2: but we lack the legal, ethical, and emotional frameworks to
• 30:51
  Speaker 2: handle the suffering that creates.
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: The Crespet family was left entirely alone in that dark expanse,
• 30:56
  Speaker 1: and the gravity of it crushed them.
• 30:58
  Speaker 2: It really did.
• 30:59
  Speaker 1: Which brings me to a final thought, a question I
• 31:01
  Speaker 1: wanted to leave directly with you. We've spent a lot
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: of time analyzing Steve's mindset and discussing Pam's desperate pleas
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: for her life to end.
• 31:09
  Speaker 2: But consider the philosophical nightmare of cognitive decline.
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: When a human being is slowly losing the biological hardware
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: required to process reality, at what exact measurable point did
• 31:21
  Speaker 1: they lose the agency to make decisions about their own
• 31:24
  Speaker 1: life and death?
• 31:24
  Speaker 2: If the person Pam used to be, the vibrant mother,
• 31:28
  Speaker 2: the devout Catholic whose theology strictly forbade suicide, would absolutely
• 31:33
  Speaker 2: never want to die this way.
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: Right, but the person Pam was becoming, the frightened, combative
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: woman trapped in a failing, shrinking brain, begged her husband
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: to pull the trigger. Which version of Pam Crespi holds
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: the true authority over her life?
• 31:46
  Speaker 2: Which version gets to decide how the story ends?
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: It is a question that cannot be answered by a judge,
• 31:51
  Speaker 1: a jury, or a forensic lab. It's a question that
• 31:55
  Speaker 1: challenges the very core of what makes us human. And
• 31:58
  Speaker 1: I suspect it is one you will be mulling over
• 32:00
  Speaker 1: long after this deep dive ends. Take care of yourselves,
• 32:03
  Speaker 1: and we'll catch you next time.