Latest / The Path Went Chilly / Michael Sullivan and Camden Sylvia Pt. Two

Transcript

Michael Sullivan and Camden Sylvia Pt. Two · The Path Went Chilly

• 0:29
  Speaker 1: Welcome back to the Path Went Chile for part two
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: of our series about the disappearance of Michael Sullivan and
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: Camden Sylvia. Robin, do you want to catch everyone up
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: when we talked about in our previous episode.
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: Well, Michael Sullivan and Camden Sylvia were a couple who
• 0:43
  Speaker 2: had been living together for several years out of loft
• 0:46
  Speaker 2: in Manhattan. Because Michael had moved in there during the
• 0:49
  Speaker 2: nineteen seventies. It was much cheaper than usual because I
• 0:52
  Speaker 2: think he was only being charged like three hundred dollars
• 0:54
  Speaker 2: per month, and since there was rent control, he was
• 0:57
  Speaker 2: paying far less than the other tenants in the building.
• 1:00
  Speaker 2: This was nineteen ninety seven November, and Michael and Camden
• 1:04
  Speaker 2: at some point went missing. No one can really pinpoint
• 1:08
  Speaker 2: the exact moment they went missing. We know that they
• 1:10
  Speaker 2: rented a movie at a video store brought it back
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: to their apartment, but at some point they left their
• 1:15
  Speaker 2: apartment again and just vanished without a trace. So at
• 1:19
  Speaker 2: first no one really knew what to make of this,
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: But it turned out that on the same day they
• 1:22
  Speaker 2: went missing, they had been confronting their building's landlord, Robert Rodriguez,
• 1:27
  Speaker 2: because he had been very neglectful. He had not been
• 1:30
  Speaker 2: implementing heat in the apartment and it was a very
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: cold winter, so they presented a letter informing him that
• 1:37
  Speaker 2: they were not going to pay any more rent until
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: he fixed the problem. But it was right after that
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: when Michael and Camden vanished without a trace, and when
• 1:44
  Speaker 2: police wanted to bring Rodriguez to the station to question him,
• 1:48
  Speaker 2: he just decided to disappear for several days without even
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: telling his own family where he was going before he resurfaced.
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: But by that point he had hired an attorney and
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: would not cooperate with the investigation, so they began to
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: suspect that he might have been involved in that Perhaps
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: he wanted Michael and Camden out of the loft so
• 2:07
  Speaker 2: he could rent it out again at it much higher prices,
• 2:10
  Speaker 2: And when they looked into Rodriguez's background, they found out
• 2:13
  Speaker 2: that another man named David King, who was one of
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: his former co workers in business Associates, had also went
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: missing back in nineteen ninety. At first, they just kind
• 2:24
  Speaker 2: of thought that King disappeared on his own, but since
• 2:26
  Speaker 2: so many people connected to Rodriguez seemed to be going
• 2:30
  Speaker 2: missing under his watch, they began to wonder if he
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: might have had something to do with King's disappearance as well.
• 2:36
  Speaker 2: Puerto Riguz eventually got indicted on several charges of fraud
• 2:40
  Speaker 2: because he was suffering from financial problems and doing chicane
• 2:43
  Speaker 2: rey to try to cover it up, so he served
• 2:46
  Speaker 2: some time in prison before he was released. But at
• 2:49
  Speaker 2: one point he could have attained early parole if he
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: had readed to a request to turn over some guns
• 2:54
  Speaker 2: he owned, but he said he no longer had them,
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: and as retribution, he was forced to finish serving his
• 2:59
  Speaker 2: full sentence, which has created speculation that these guns may
• 3:02
  Speaker 2: have played a role in Michael and Camden's disappearance. Rob
• 3:06
  Speaker 2: Rodriguez was eventually released, and they have never found any
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: the victim's bodies or any evidence of foul play, so
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: it remains up in the air what actually happened to
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: Michael and Camden. So this is an unsolved mystery which
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: seems to be based around a very identifiable situation, as
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: I'm sure that many of us have been through a
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: situation where we've had a dispute with a landlord, but
• 3:27
  Speaker 2: it's not often that these situations escalate to the point
• 3:30
  Speaker 2: where they potentially lead to murder, even though this case
• 3:33
  Speaker 2: does have a very promising potential suspect in Robert Rodriguez,
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: law enforcement is never officially named of as a suspect
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: and the disappearances of Michael Sullivan and Camden Sylvia, and
• 3:43
  Speaker 2: there's a very good reason for that. Well, Rodriguez definitely
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: displayed some suspicious behavior. There is no evidence here that
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: a crime has even been committed, let alone that Rodriguez
• 3:54
  Speaker 2: harmed these two missing individuals. If he was responsible for this,
• 3:58
  Speaker 2: he did a very thorough job at covering his tracks.
• 4:01
  Speaker 2: We do know that on the day that Michael and
• 4:03
  Speaker 2: Camdo went missing, Rodriguez have been presented with a signed
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: letter in which the couple and a number of the
• 4:08
  Speaker 2: other tenants announced their intention to go on a red
• 4:11
  Speaker 2: strike unless he provided them with adequate heating for their apartments.
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: But I'd hardly call that a strong motive to commit murder,
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: as it sounds like this issue popped up every single
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: year since Rodriguez was known for taking his sweet time
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: to heat up the building at the start of the
• 4:26
  Speaker 2: winter season. Even if you're a major penny pincher trying
• 4:29
  Speaker 2: to save money by any means possible, it seems like
• 4:32
  Speaker 2: quite an overreaction to decide you're going to kill two
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: people rather than simply turn on the furnace. But if
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: you put aside the why for Rodriguez committing this crime,
• 4:42
  Speaker 2: the how, when, and where are still complete head scratchers. Theoretically,
• 4:47
  Speaker 2: let's just say that there was some sort of confrontation
• 4:50
  Speaker 2: which escalated into murder. If this took place inside the
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: apartment building, not only would Rodriguez have to kill two people,
• 4:57
  Speaker 2: but he would have to do so in a fashion
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: which he didn't attract the attention of any of the
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: other tenants, as I don't believe they ever reported seeing
• 5:05
  Speaker 2: or hearing anything unusual all that day. He would then
• 5:08
  Speaker 2: somehow have to get their bodies out of the building
• 5:11
  Speaker 2: and dispose of them. But it's very difficult to be
• 5:13
  Speaker 2: inconspicuous about doing something like that in downtown Manhattan.
• 5:18
  Speaker 3: Right, and it's such a populated area. There's you know,
• 5:21
  Speaker 3: I'm sure there's not much sound proofing and things like
• 5:25
  Speaker 3: that in these older apartment buildings, and so it would
• 5:28
  Speaker 3: be very difficult to murder two people. You have a
• 5:32
  Speaker 3: man and a woman. You have to think about the
• 5:34
  Speaker 3: way that he would have to approach and defend himself
• 5:37
  Speaker 3: against two people who would react to him coming into
• 5:40
  Speaker 3: their space or confronting them. When you do back up though,
• 5:44
  Speaker 3: and you think about the idea that he was charging
• 5:46
  Speaker 3: these people three hundred and some odd dollars for rent
• 5:49
  Speaker 3: because of rent control, but in you know, then now
• 5:54
  Speaker 3: he would have been able to collect three thousand and
• 5:57
  Speaker 3: some odd dollars a month if a new tenant were
• 5:59
  Speaker 3: to move in in that rent control was no longer honored,
• 6:01
  Speaker 3: and so there is a significant financial reason for him
• 6:05
  Speaker 3: to need these two people gone, in addition to the
• 6:07
  Speaker 3: fact that they were causing social issues and possibly legal
• 6:11
  Speaker 3: issues for him as well. But like you said, if
• 6:14
  Speaker 3: we can understand, okay, he has the motive to do it,
• 6:17
  Speaker 3: how when and where did he do it? I'm just
• 6:20
  Speaker 3: as clueless as you.
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: I think when it comes to the why. If we
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: are to believe that he's killed before, it just seems
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: like whenever he has a problem, his go to solution
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: is I'm going to eliminate that problem. But then there
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: is a problem with the how, because if it was
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: in the apartment, how do you subdue to people. Perhaps
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: he had a firearm or something like that, and he
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: was able to keep them quiet, But then if you
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: murdered them in the apartment, what do you do, like
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: in the movies, roll them into a rug and put
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: them in a truck. Do you have a vehicle for transport?
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: Or did you hold a gun to their head and
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: take them into a van or something and then take them,
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: you know, to New Jersey or something like that where
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: there might be somewhere you could easily dispose of the bodies.
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: There's a lot of questions surrounding how you could do
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: that with two individuals. Like with one individual, I would say, yeah,
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: it would be a lot easier, especially if it was
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: a woman who was just Camden. But when you've got
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: two people, it's just the degree of difficulty goes up exponentially.
• 7:24
  Speaker 3: Is there any way that he could have asked them
• 7:27
  Speaker 3: to meet with him, saying, Hey, I'm going to talk
• 7:29
  Speaker 3: to you about this issue. I don't want this to
• 7:31
  Speaker 3: have to go to a legal place. I don't want
• 7:34
  Speaker 3: you guys to have to go on a rent strike.
• 7:35
  Speaker 3: Can you meet me? But if he did that, it's
• 7:38
  Speaker 3: not just Camden and Michael who are involved in this issue.
• 7:41
  Speaker 3: There's multiple tenants who are supporting them and behind them.
• 7:45
  Speaker 3: It's almost like something that the community bonds over so
• 7:48
  Speaker 3: if they were going to go try to argue on
• 7:51
  Speaker 3: behalf of the other tenants or their building or something
• 7:54
  Speaker 3: like that, in a meeting with him, I feel like
• 7:56
  Speaker 3: they would have disclosed that to somebody.
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: I think there's a dam in being like, let's set
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: a meeting. I think if he did do it, it
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: had to have been spontaneous, like he showed up at
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: their door. Maybe he convinced them to go somewhere with him,
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: and then he was able to get the jump on them.
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: But it almost seems like there would have to be
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: somebody else involved because if it was like, Hey, we're
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: going to go somewhere and he's driving, how do you
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: get the jump on them? Do you have a firearm somewhere?
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: And then you pull into like this undisclosed location. But
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: I feel like there'd be a lot of questions that
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: would be being asked, and because there's two of them,
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: I think that they would have been able to overpower
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: the drivers. So I don't know, Robin, what's your take.
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: Well, he did have a locksmith shop that he ran
• 8:40
  Speaker 2: on the ground floor of his apartment, which I think
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: function is his office, and I know that on the
• 8:44
  Speaker 2: day that Camden and Michael went missing. That's where they
• 8:47
  Speaker 2: met him to present him with the letter about the
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: rent strike. So it's reasonable to assume that if he
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: asked the two of them to meet him somewhere, that
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: they would do so at the locksmith shop, which is
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: still in the building and is still going to attract
• 8:59
  Speaker 2: a lot of time if you shoot them there or something,
• 9:02
  Speaker 2: and it would be difficult to smuggle their bodies out
• 9:05
  Speaker 2: because it's in the middle of a crowded neighborhood. And
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: I'd like to think that if he told them, oh,
• 9:09
  Speaker 2: why don't you meet us off site somewhere, like at
• 9:11
  Speaker 2: a different place, They're probably going to get really suspicious
• 9:14
  Speaker 2: and wonder why is our landlord asking us to meet
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: him elsewhere instead of at his locksmith shop. So yeah,
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: it's really hard to figure out. It just seems that
• 9:22
  Speaker 2: if he killed them in the apartment building, it would
• 9:24
  Speaker 2: have been very difficult to do it without attracting attention
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: from someone.
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: Here's a question for you. Did he have a van
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: because oftentimes if there's a locksmith shop, you're going to
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: get calls to apartments where people have locked themselves out,
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: So you would have to have some kind of transportation,
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: and oftentimes you would see a locksmith getting around in
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: a van or a car of some sort with maybe
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: like the logo for their locksmith shop emblazoned on the side.
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: I don't have that information if he had a van,
• 9:54
  Speaker 2: but it would make sense to me. I know that
• 9:56
  Speaker 2: he had a car that he used when he disappeared
• 9:58
  Speaker 2: for a few days when he did want to talk
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: to the police, But maybe he had a separate van
• 10:03
  Speaker 2: for business purposes that he would use on the job.
• 10:05
  Speaker 2: And like you said, that would be much easier to
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: use to dispose of two bodies.
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: So I think another issue with figuring out what happened
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: here is that it's really hard to pin down the
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: last time that Michael and Camden were confirmed to be alive.
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: Some sources, like the victim's profile pages at the Charlie Project,
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: make it sound like they left their apartment to go jogging,
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: which is something they frequently did. If they managed to
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: exit the building and jog somewhere, then they could have
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: crossed paths with an unknown third party besides Rodriguez, who
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: proceeded to abduct and murder them. But from what we've
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: read in most of the news articles about this case,
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: it was only theorized that they went jogging because their
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: running shoes were missing from the apartment. As far as
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: I can tell, I don't believe there were any eyewitnesses
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: that could actually confirm having seen them out jogging that day,
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: which would mean that the last verified sighting of the
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: couple was when they rented the movie Addicted to Love
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: from the video store. Since the video was found inside
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: the apartment, they obviously returned there at some point, and
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: given that one set of keys and Michael's wallet were
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: also left behind, it seems likely that the couple left
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: together but weren't planning to be out all that long.
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: So the big question is did they cross paths with
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: Rodriguez and have some sort of confrontation with him before
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: they exited the building. Well, searches of the building failed
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: to turn up any evidence of foul play, but the
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: problem is that it was six days before the couple
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: were actually reported missing, so Rodriguez would have had ample
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: time to cover his tracks. Now, according to Camden's mother,
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: Laurie Sylvia, when she first met Rodriguez, he couldn't have
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: been any nicer, as he gave Laurie a new set
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: of keys for the apartment and said, quote, let me
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: know if there's anything else I can do to help. So,
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: at the very least, this suggests Rodriguez was not too
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: concerned about Laurie finding anything incriminating inside the laft. It
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: sounds like Rodriguez was very cooperative during the early stages
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: of the investigation until police ask him to come in
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: for a formal interview, which led to him suddenly taking
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: off and disappearing for ten days. However, did Rodriguez do
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: this because he was involved in Michael Incambenen's disappearances or
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: was he paranoid that the police might find some other
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: skeletons in his closet?
• 12:26
  Speaker 3: Okay, exactly when you look at this, there's a couple
• 12:29
  Speaker 3: of things that I want to ask you about. One,
• 12:31
  Speaker 3: I don't have a pair of quote running shoes. Judge
• 12:35
  Speaker 3: me if you will. Shoes are not my thing. I
• 12:37
  Speaker 3: have a pair of sneakers, and I have dress shoes,
• 12:40
  Speaker 3: and I have boots. So if I am not going
• 12:43
  Speaker 3: to want to wear dress shoes or my boots, I'm
• 12:46
  Speaker 3: wearing my quote sneakers and that's if I'm running or working.
• 12:50
  Speaker 3: It doesn't matter. So is it possible that these two
• 12:53
  Speaker 3: simply wore their quote jogging shoes as every day wear.
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: I'm a fashion girl, Like I love fashion, and you
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: go and look at street style, and like the streets
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: of Paris or New York. Today, everybody's wearing runners with everything.
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: But at that time, I don't know if it was
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: as much the fashion. But I think it is possible
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: that somebody might have just one pair of runners, and
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: like you call them runners, but like really they're just
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: sneakers and you could wear them for a multitude of
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: different occasions. It doesn't have to be just for the
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: express purpose of exercise.
• 13:30
  Speaker 3: Right, So when people are like, Okay, well they're jogging
• 13:32
  Speaker 3: shoes are missing, I'm like, God bless them. I don't exercise.
• 13:35
  Speaker 3: So if my running shoes are missing, don't think I
• 13:37
  Speaker 3: went running because I did not. Okay, so note that down.
• 13:42
  Speaker 3: But so that was one of the things, you know,
• 13:44
  Speaker 3: this is a idea of should we be looking for
• 13:46
  Speaker 3: a jogging route or something. I think I wouldn't put
• 13:49
  Speaker 3: my sneakers on to go rent the movie, and maybe
• 13:52
  Speaker 3: when I came home I didn't take them off yet,
• 13:54
  Speaker 3: And so I'm not sure that that's even a lead.
• 13:57
  Speaker 3: But when we go down to the other idea, Rodriguez,
• 14:01
  Speaker 3: and the idea that initially he's very cooperative and then
• 14:04
  Speaker 3: all of a sudden he becomes very elusive and goes
• 14:07
  Speaker 3: on the run and becomes really shut off to police.
• 14:11
  Speaker 3: When Robin and Jules describe his background to me, I'm
• 14:15
  Speaker 3: sitting there thinking, wait a minute, is he so friendly
• 14:19
  Speaker 3: and nice at first because he has nothing to do
• 14:21
  Speaker 3: with it? And then when he realizes this is not
• 14:24
  Speaker 3: just going to be these two people that wandered off
• 14:26
  Speaker 3: and aren't home yet, this is going to be a
• 14:28
  Speaker 3: criminal investigation. They want to keep talking to me. If
• 14:32
  Speaker 3: they start to run my name, they're going to find
• 14:33
  Speaker 3: all of these things I'm wanted for issues I'm having,
• 14:36
  Speaker 3: or you know, these scams I'm running. And could he
• 14:40
  Speaker 3: have simply panicked and shut down and said I cannot
• 14:43
  Speaker 3: cooperate or else so much of my life is at stake.
• 14:47
  Speaker 2: Well, not only was he committing fraud at that point,
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: but we also have the disappearance of David King, which
• 14:52
  Speaker 2: took place years earlier, and that would be the wildest twist.
• 14:55
  Speaker 2: I don't know if that's what happened. If he was
• 14:57
  Speaker 2: completely innocent and Michael and Cambden's just disappearance, but was
• 15:01
  Speaker 2: guilty of the disappearance of David King. So he doesn't
• 15:04
  Speaker 2: cooperate in this case because he figures, well, if they
• 15:07
  Speaker 2: delve into my background, this whole thing with David King
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: is going to pop up again and they might find
• 15:11
  Speaker 2: some incriminating against evidence against me in that case. I mean,
• 15:15
  Speaker 2: I don't think that's a likely scenario, but it could
• 15:17
  Speaker 2: be an alternate explanation for why he was acting so dodgy.
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: Here refreshed my memory, Robin. We spoke about this in
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: our last episode. But wasn't there a bag of Camden's
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: that was missing as well? And wasn't it like a
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: large bag that could have been like a briefcase size,
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: or like a very large purse that would have been
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: able to carry documents or something of the sort.
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: Yeah, the only details about it were that was a
• 15:44
  Speaker 2: bag that Camden normally carried when she took work home
• 15:47
  Speaker 2: from the office and it happened to be missing, And
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: obviously that's not something she would ordinarily take out if
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: she was simply going for a jog.
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: No, I'm not going to go jogging, I think I
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: said in the first episode with a giant purse. For one,
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: if you're a jogger, even if you bring any kind
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: of purse that isn't strapped to you, it will bang
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: up against your butt, so and if you're you're not
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: gonna hold it in your hand. So like if you've
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: got a cross body purse or whatever, it's going to
• 16:12
  Speaker 1: hit your body with every stride that you take is
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: going to be so uncomfortable. So it's inexplicable that they
• 16:18
  Speaker 1: could have just gone out for a jog and then
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: taken that bag with them. I mean, I guess you
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: could say that they went out for a jog, something
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: happened and then the bag got stolen, But like that
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: seems entirely improbable.
• 16:30
  Speaker 3: So she would take that big bag, but he wouldn't
• 16:33
  Speaker 3: take his wallet.
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: I mean, if it's a thing where they had documentation,
• 16:38
  Speaker 2: like theoretically they're going downstairs to present Rodriguez with some
• 16:42
  Speaker 2: paperwork while he's in his locksmith shop, that would make
• 16:45
  Speaker 2: sense why they would take the bag but not Michael's wallet.
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: And maybe just because they were going downstairs, Like I
• 16:51
  Speaker 1: don't know how you guys are when you get home,
• 16:53
  Speaker 1: Like as soon as I get home in like a
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: comfy space, I put on like my sweats and I
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: get into my comfy clothes. So maybe because it was
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: sort of informal with Rodriguez, they if they were going
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: downstairs to the locksmith's shop, maybe they were just in
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: their sweats at home and they were like, well, obviously
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: I'm not gonna put on dress shoes. I'm just gonna
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: put on whatever sneakers i've got kicking around. Doesn't mean
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: they're going for a jog. But maybe they're just going
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: downstairs to talk to Rodriguez and they bring the bag
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: and they're also wearing their sneakers. That would be the
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: only scenario that would make sense to me.
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: I think so because I think one of the sticking
• 17:28
  Speaker 2: points with the sneakers it was early November, a lot
• 17:31
  Speaker 2: colder than usual, So I think that's why people thought, well,
• 17:33
  Speaker 2: if they were going outside to do something besides jogging,
• 17:37
  Speaker 2: there shouldn't be any logical reason for them to wear
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: their sneakers. It would make more sense for them to
• 17:41
  Speaker 2: wear heavier footwear. But if they were just going downstairs
• 17:44
  Speaker 2: in the apartment and not going outside, then yes, it
• 17:47
  Speaker 2: makes sense they would put their sneakers on.
• 17:49
  Speaker 1: Was there any snow or rain or anything.
• 17:51
  Speaker 2: I don't think so. No, but they just described that
• 17:54
  Speaker 2: it was a colder than usual November and that's why
• 17:57
  Speaker 2: they were so anxious to get the heating turned on.
• 18:00
  Speaker 2: So one ironic detail about Rodriguez is that he kept
• 18:02
  Speaker 2: a newspaper article about himself on the wall of his
• 18:05
  Speaker 2: office because in nineteen eighty four there was an incident
• 18:08
  Speaker 2: where he returned a loss nine hundred thousand dollars checked
• 18:11
  Speaker 2: to its rightful owner and was hailed as a hero
• 18:13
  Speaker 2: by the press. But it seems like Rodriguez might have
• 18:16
  Speaker 2: been over compensating a little bit, considering the numerous acts
• 18:19
  Speaker 2: of fraud he committed over the years. I think it
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: says something that Rodriguez originally bought the building with insurance
• 18:25
  Speaker 2: money he received from his house burning down. Yes, I
• 18:28
  Speaker 2: guess they technically never proved that he committed our sin.
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: But when you're the type of person who uses the
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: identity of a dead guy to obtain credit cards, I
• 18:36
  Speaker 2: think it's safe to say that there's no limit to
• 18:38
  Speaker 2: the type of scamshi'll pull. And of course there's the
• 18:41
  Speaker 2: fact that another person connected to him, David King, happened
• 18:45
  Speaker 2: to go missing while they were both embroiled in a
• 18:47
  Speaker 2: civil lawsuit. We'll talk more about David King in a
• 18:50
  Speaker 2: little while, But regardless of whether or not Rodriguez was
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: involved in his disappearance, the fact that he was allegedly
• 18:56
  Speaker 2: using King to provide him with confidential information from a
• 18:59
  Speaker 2: rio I have a fire alarm company really says a
• 19:02
  Speaker 2: lot about his character.
• 19:03
  Speaker 3: Okay, let's back up a little bit. He has this
• 19:07
  Speaker 3: newspaper article that he returns a lost nine hundred thousand
• 19:10
  Speaker 3: dollars check to its rightful owner. What are you going
• 19:13
  Speaker 3: to do with a nine hundred thousand dollars check written
• 19:15
  Speaker 3: out to somebody else, Because it's not like it's a
• 19:18
  Speaker 3: forty dollars check, and you might be able to run
• 19:21
  Speaker 3: to the bank and try to cash it. And if
• 19:24
  Speaker 3: they said, hey, I need your idea to make sure
• 19:26
  Speaker 3: this is you, you'd be like, oh, I forgot my idea.
• 19:28
  Speaker 3: I'm so sorry. I'll be back, and you don't get
• 19:31
  Speaker 3: your forty dollars. Or because it's a small check, they
• 19:33
  Speaker 3: just cash it. Because you know, I'll pull into a
• 19:36
  Speaker 3: bank here and I don't think they know me. And
• 19:38
  Speaker 3: if I try to cash a small amount, they cash it.
• 19:41
  Speaker 3: If it's a larger amount, they need proof of identification.
• 19:45
  Speaker 3: He was never going to be able to do anything
• 19:46
  Speaker 3: with that nine hundred thousand dollars check. So the idea
• 19:50
  Speaker 3: that I just said, hey, I found this check written too,
• 19:53
  Speaker 3: you know, Robin, And I'm like, hey, Robin, I found
• 19:57
  Speaker 3: this check of yours? Is that really heroic?
• 20:00
  Speaker 2: Probably not? No, Like he if he had been able
• 20:03
  Speaker 2: to figure out a way to use the money for himself,
• 20:05
  Speaker 2: I'm sure he probably could have. But like you said,
• 20:08
  Speaker 2: you're not going to cash a nine hundred thousand dollars
• 20:10
  Speaker 2: check under someone else's name unless you have a fake
• 20:12
  Speaker 2: ID or something like that, or concoct an elaborate scheme.
• 20:16
  Speaker 3: Right. I guess it was nice he returned it, but
• 20:18
  Speaker 3: I mean, it just it doesn't seem like a heroic
• 20:20
  Speaker 3: thing that a newspaper would write something up about. But
• 20:23
  Speaker 3: I guess it is. I don't know.
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: I think that we can bet that he went through
• 20:27
  Speaker 1: every possible scenario to see if he could get away
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: with keeping that money. It's not like his first impulse
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: was like, oh, I better return the money. I think
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: that was just the last resort when he realized, shoot,
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: I'm going to get caught here if I try to
• 20:40
  Speaker 1: deposit this into my account, or if I try to
• 20:43
  Speaker 1: like fake this in some way, So why don't I
• 20:46
  Speaker 1: come out looking like, you know, smelling like roses and
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: look like the hero. But I agree, it's not really heroic.
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: It's like the only option.
• 20:53
  Speaker 3: Yes, and if it was nine hundred thousand dollars cash
• 20:55
  Speaker 3: and you returned it hero here, Yes, Okay, this is
• 21:00
  Speaker 3: a check written as somebody else, Like you don't just
• 21:02
  Speaker 3: walk up to the bank and like cash this baby
• 21:04
  Speaker 3: for me, you know, No, No, we're gonna go ahead
• 21:07
  Speaker 3: and need some some proof of identification. So I don't know.
• 21:10
  Speaker 3: I think it kind of shows this narcissism that he
• 21:14
  Speaker 3: has this newspaper article framed about himself while he's actively
• 21:17
  Speaker 3: committed fraud. Is it something that almost provides him this
• 21:21
  Speaker 3: illogical comfort of I'm a good person, I do good things,
• 21:25
  Speaker 3: and he has a frame to look at because honestly,
• 21:28
  Speaker 3: in his everyday life, he's not able to do that consistently.
• 21:31
  Speaker 2: Baby, it's an entitlement thing saying I heroically returned nine
• 21:34
  Speaker 2: hundred thousand dollars, so therefore I deserve to make nine
• 21:37
  Speaker 2: hundred thousand dollars through other means. So what I'm doing
• 21:40
  Speaker 2: is not illegal.
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: Yeah, So by the time Rodriguez resurface after disappearing for
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: ten days, he hired himself the services of an attorney
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: named Michael Rosen, and this was a very prominent, high
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: priced guy, as Rosen once represented Thomas Gambino of the
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: infamous Gambino crime family. Since Rodriguez lied to his family
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: about going in for a police interview before he took off,
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: this suggests that he was incredibly paranoid about something. But
• 22:08
  Speaker 1: was it because he had knowledge or involvement in the
• 22:11
  Speaker 1: disappearances of Michael and Camden Well. It's easy to take
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: his actions as a sign of guilt, but Rodriguez had
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: spent the past several years committing numerous acts of fraud,
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: so even if he was completely innocent of any role
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: in the disappearances, he might have feared that if the
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: police started interviewing him and investigating him, they were going
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: to turn up his other financial indiscretions, which is why
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: he panicked and got himself a lawyer. If this was
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: Rodriguez's intention all along, then it didn't really do him
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: any good, since it only provided further motivation for authorities
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: to look into his background and that's when they uncovered
• 22:49
  Speaker 1: enough evidence to arrest him on all those other charges
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: and send him to prison. Well, it's undeniable that Rodriguez
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: is a criminal. Does this necessarily mean that he's a murderer?
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: If Michael and Camden had somehow uncovered evidence of Rodriguez's
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: history of fraud, that might have given him a motive
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: to kill them, But there's nothing to indicate that they
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: knew about it.
• 23:12
  Speaker 3: Also, when you think about the idea that these two
• 23:14
  Speaker 3: people were murdered, and you know, we had this knowledge
• 23:18
  Speaker 3: that they went to the video store and run in
• 23:19
  Speaker 3: a video, we have knowledge that he left his wallet there.
• 23:24
  Speaker 3: If they voluntarily left their apartment and were victims of
• 23:28
  Speaker 3: some kind of random act, do most random double murders
• 23:34
  Speaker 3: result in someone hiding two bodies so well? Or would
• 23:38
  Speaker 3: it be more like, Hey, if I was robbing these two,
• 23:40
  Speaker 3: or I was trying to confront these two, wouldn't you
• 23:42
  Speaker 3: have just found their body in the park or wherever
• 23:45
  Speaker 3: they had just been attacked? So I don't know. I
• 23:48
  Speaker 3: just keep thinking like, was this a targeted killing? But
• 23:53
  Speaker 3: how did they get them out of their apartment for
• 23:55
  Speaker 3: a temporary moment when everything inside their apartment shows that
• 23:59
  Speaker 3: they were going to be coming back and spending the
• 24:01
  Speaker 3: evening there.
• 24:03
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I agree. Like if they went out and were
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: the victims of random mugging, I think whoever killed them
• 24:07
  Speaker 2: would just leave them there rather than going to the
• 24:09
  Speaker 2: trouble of transferring their bodies and getting rid of them,
• 24:12
  Speaker 2: which is why it seems likely that they were murdered
• 24:15
  Speaker 2: by someone they knew who had a lot to hide,
• 24:17
  Speaker 2: And of course Rodriguez seems like the most logical suspect
• 24:20
  Speaker 2: to do that. But once again, the logistics of him
• 24:24
  Speaker 2: pulling off are the part that we just can't figure out.
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: What do we know about his associates? Did he have
• 24:30
  Speaker 1: any other criminal friends that he hung out with, because
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: if this happened, it seems likely to me that there
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: could have, or maybe potentially was a second person who
• 24:42
  Speaker 1: was assisting Rodriguez.
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: I mean, that's what I'm thinking. I haven't heard about
• 24:47
  Speaker 2: him having any associates who helped him with his criminal activities.
• 24:50
  Speaker 2: As far as I know, he worked alone, and I
• 24:53
  Speaker 2: don't know if he had anyone else closer to him
• 24:55
  Speaker 2: who would have helped him dispose of two bodies. I
• 24:58
  Speaker 2: guess is that another possibility as he could have gotten
• 25:00
  Speaker 2: members of his family to help out, because they were
• 25:03
  Speaker 2: described as not being very cooperative with the police whence
• 25:06
  Speaker 2: Rodriguez went missing. But that depends like, do you want
• 25:10
  Speaker 2: to protect a family member that you think who has
• 25:13
  Speaker 2: committed fraud. I'm sure they would be willing to do that,
• 25:15
  Speaker 2: But would they go to that length to help protect
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: him if they knew that he had committed two murders.
• 25:21
  Speaker 2: So another potential motive which has been pushed forward, is
• 25:23
  Speaker 2: that Rodriguez wanted the couple out of the way so
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: we could finally rent out their loft to someone for
• 25:28
  Speaker 2: a much larger sum of money. I mean, even in
• 25:31
  Speaker 2: nineteen ninety seven, paying a monthly rent of only three
• 25:34
  Speaker 2: hundred and four dollars for a fourteen hundred square foot
• 25:37
  Speaker 2: loft in Manhattan is a pretty mind blowing deal. Even
• 25:41
  Speaker 2: if there were issues with the heating or Rodriguez in general.
• 25:44
  Speaker 2: I can definitely understand why Michael and Candon would have
• 25:47
  Speaker 2: wanted to hold onto this place. At the time, New
• 25:50
  Speaker 2: York City had very strict rent control and stabilization, and
• 25:54
  Speaker 2: since Michael had originally rented the place over twenty years earlier,
• 25:58
  Speaker 2: he did not have to worry too much about him.
• 26:01
  Speaker 2: We know that Rodriguez was suffering from financial problems and
• 26:04
  Speaker 2: over thousands of dollars in back taxes on the building,
• 26:07
  Speaker 2: so yes, it would have been in his best interest
• 26:09
  Speaker 2: to have Michael and Camden out of the loft so
• 26:12
  Speaker 2: that he could rent it to a new tenant at
• 26:14
  Speaker 2: three thousand dollars per month. That might seem like a
• 26:17
  Speaker 2: compelling motive, but the problem is that Rodriguez really didn't
• 26:20
  Speaker 2: gain anything from the couple's absence in the long run.
• 26:24
  Speaker 2: I know that until Rodriguez's arrest, there was a dispute
• 26:27
  Speaker 2: between him and Camden's mother, Laurie Sylvia, because she wanted
• 26:31
  Speaker 2: to pay the three hundred and four dollars monthly rent
• 26:33
  Speaker 2: to hold on to the loft, but he refused to
• 26:35
  Speaker 2: accept the money. Rodriguez's attorney did make a public statement
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: that he had no intention of renting out the loft
• 26:41
  Speaker 2: while Michael and Camden were missing, but it's possible that
• 26:45
  Speaker 2: Rodriguez was advised to do this for pr purposes in
• 26:48
  Speaker 2: order to make himself look less suspicious. But the ironic
• 26:51
  Speaker 2: thing is that the publicity surrounding the disappearances actually drew
• 26:55
  Speaker 2: interest in the loft from a number of curiosity seekers
• 26:58
  Speaker 2: who wanted to rent it. Rodriguez could have made himself
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: a good chunk of money if he let this happen,
• 27:04
  Speaker 2: but he never did, and the loft did not go
• 27:06
  Speaker 2: on the market again until after Rodriguez was arrested and
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: sold the building to new owners. So yes, Campden and
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: Michael's disappearances did not financially benefit Rodriguez in any way
• 27:18
  Speaker 2: until Rodriguez's arrest. I cannot imagine how awkward it must
• 27:22
  Speaker 2: have been for the other residents of that building to
• 27:24
  Speaker 2: be living with a landlord who was under suspicion for
• 27:27
  Speaker 2: potentially causing the disappearances of two tenants, even if they
• 27:31
  Speaker 2: didn't believe he was guilty. How weird would it have
• 27:34
  Speaker 2: felt to bring an issue to this guy's attention. I
• 27:37
  Speaker 2: wonder if anyone ever complained about the heat again?
• 27:41
  Speaker 3: Yeah you know, I mean for me when you look
• 27:43
  Speaker 3: at this idea, would it have benefited him to get
• 27:47
  Speaker 3: rid of them? I think in the long run, yes,
• 27:51
  Speaker 3: short term no, because again he denies that he's willing
• 27:54
  Speaker 3: to take payment for the rent. But remember he's only
• 27:57
  Speaker 3: getting three hundred dollars a month. When is three thousand
• 28:01
  Speaker 3: a month. So is he really going to be made
• 28:05
  Speaker 3: or broken because of the three hundred dollars a month
• 28:07
  Speaker 3: he's missing? Probably not. It almost makes me wonder does
• 28:11
  Speaker 3: he not fix things in the building hoping that these
• 28:15
  Speaker 3: people who have been there for a long time get
• 28:18
  Speaker 3: fed up and they want to leave. But I think
• 28:20
  Speaker 3: when you're being held at a three hundred and four
• 28:23
  Speaker 3: dollars a month rent, I would put up with a
• 28:25
  Speaker 3: heck of a lot, and I would fuss and fight,
• 28:28
  Speaker 3: but I would have zero intention of leaving. But I
• 28:31
  Speaker 3: wonder if he thinks in his head, if I can
• 28:33
  Speaker 3: just hold out long enough, they'll get so miserable that
• 28:36
  Speaker 3: they'll want out, and then he could start running those
• 28:38
  Speaker 3: other loss out for the three thousand dollars a month.
• 28:41
  Speaker 3: Does he think he's gonna go by and kill every
• 28:43
  Speaker 3: single one of the residents that's paying three hundred and
• 28:46
  Speaker 3: seven dollars a month? No? Probably not. But like we
• 28:50
  Speaker 3: talked about earlier, is it possible that a confrontation went
• 28:54
  Speaker 3: sour even when it wasn't intended to result in their
• 28:57
  Speaker 3: deaths and that's what happened? Or is this just simultaneously
• 29:02
  Speaker 3: existing with a really bad guy being their landlord and
• 29:06
  Speaker 3: they also go missing because of nothing he did. I
• 29:09
  Speaker 3: don't like Rodriguez. He has so many arrows and neon
• 29:13
  Speaker 3: signs pointing to him. But again, I'm trying to figure
• 29:16
  Speaker 3: out how and how did he hide it so good,
• 29:20
  Speaker 3: And the police did really explore and examine his life
• 29:24
  Speaker 3: and they didn't find any evidence or anything to link
• 29:27
  Speaker 3: him to Michael and Camden. So I'm just torn.
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: And it's like, if a crime had taken place in
• 29:34
  Speaker 2: the apartment building, and if any of the other tenants
• 29:36
  Speaker 2: like heard or saw anything unusual, I don't think they
• 29:39
  Speaker 2: keep their mouth shuts about it because they disliked Rodriguez too.
• 29:42
  Speaker 2: It would have been more than happy to see him
• 29:44
  Speaker 2: removed his landlord if he was a suspect and a murder.
• 29:47
  Speaker 2: But the fact that they didn't report anything suspicious just
• 29:50
  Speaker 2: seems so odd to me and makes me wonder if
• 29:52
  Speaker 2: murders took place they took if they occurred at another location.
• 29:57
  Speaker 1: Now we mentioned earlier that we cannot possible the pinpoint
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: the last time Michael and Camden were confirmed to be alive,
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: and we can't even be one hundred percent certain that
• 30:06
  Speaker 1: they interacted with Rodriguez. According to their neighbor Check Delaney,
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: He did see Camden in the building that morning and
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: she told him she was heading to Rodriguez's locksmith shop
• 30:17
  Speaker 1: to present him with a signed letter about the rent strip.
• 30:20
  Speaker 1: We know this letter did wind up in the office,
• 30:23
  Speaker 1: but it's unclear if Camden just dropped it off there
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: or if she interacted with Rodriguez. Since Rodriguez declined to
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: discuss the case publicly, he never did confirm or deny
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: if he spoke with her. The transaction at the video
• 30:37
  Speaker 1: store confirmed that Camden did visit other locations that day,
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: and the primary theory, which has been presented by her mother, Laurie,
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: is that after renting the video, Camden returned to the
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: apartment and both she and Michael decided to go out
• 30:51
  Speaker 1: and confront Rodriguez together. This is when things could have
• 30:55
  Speaker 1: gone horribly wrong and they both wound up dead. But again,
• 30:59
  Speaker 1: if Rodriguez committed murder inside the building, how did he
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: manage to do so without attracting attention and how did
• 31:05
  Speaker 1: he dispose of the two bodies?
• 31:08
  Speaker 3: And remember, police do start to explore and examine Rodriguez
• 31:12
  Speaker 3: as someone who's a person of interest, So do we
• 31:16
  Speaker 3: know if they ever investigated or went in and explored
• 31:20
  Speaker 3: the locksmith shop. Did they go in and look at
• 31:23
  Speaker 3: vehicles of his and do any kind of luminol testing
• 31:26
  Speaker 3: or look for evidence or find anything of theirs. I
• 31:28
  Speaker 3: don't think they did. But remember it's weeks later that
• 31:32
  Speaker 3: we're starting to get all this information about Rodriguez, So
• 31:35
  Speaker 3: I I don't know. I sit there and I think, well,
• 31:37
  Speaker 3: if police had immediately known, could he have maybe not
• 31:42
  Speaker 3: been able to dispose of something that would have linked him.
• 31:45
  Speaker 3: But once they identified him, did they go and start
• 31:48
  Speaker 3: to investigate and explore spaces that he could have possibly
• 31:52
  Speaker 3: done something to them?
• 31:54
  Speaker 2: I think they did. They did use cadab or sniffing
• 31:56
  Speaker 2: dogs and tore up the flooring in Rodriguez's locksmith shop,
• 31:59
  Speaker 2: but this didn't take place until I think over a
• 32:02
  Speaker 2: year after the fact, when Rodriguez was arrested on the
• 32:04
  Speaker 2: fraud charges. So they didn't get to do it immediately.
• 32:07
  Speaker 2: So if there was any evidence there a foul play,
• 32:10
  Speaker 2: he would have had ample time to dispose of it
• 32:12
  Speaker 2: and cover it up.
• 32:13
  Speaker 3: Oh the two people being killed and the blood that
• 32:16
  Speaker 3: could have resulted from that, there's a lot of cases
• 32:18
  Speaker 3: that years later they go and they pull flooring up,
• 32:21
  Speaker 3: and while the surface might be clean and you might
• 32:24
  Speaker 3: not be able to get information, there is DNA and
• 32:28
  Speaker 3: there is biological evidence that's on the undersides or through
• 32:32
  Speaker 3: the cracks of the floor. So it's kind of fascinating
• 32:36
  Speaker 3: to me that there was nothing if they went to
• 32:38
  Speaker 3: that extent to tear the floors up, I would assume
• 32:41
  Speaker 3: it did not take place in the locksmith shop.
• 32:43
  Speaker 1: But that's the assumption that the way that they were
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: killed was a way that drew blood. True could have
• 32:51
  Speaker 1: been blunt force trauma, could have been strangulation. There could
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: have been different ways in which they were killed, especially
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: if there was two people in They wouldn't necessarily have
• 33:02
  Speaker 1: to be a gun because you're right in the middle
• 33:04
  Speaker 1: of the city center, and if it's right by all
• 33:07
  Speaker 1: of these units, then you run the risk of somebody
• 33:10
  Speaker 1: hearing that gunfire unless you have a silencer or you
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: you make like a homemade silencer. Seems like it's very
• 33:17
  Speaker 1: risky to use a gun, and even if it is
• 33:19
  Speaker 1: a head injury, like you can't guarantee there won't be
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: blood because often there is. But I think there are
• 33:24
  Speaker 1: different scenarios where he could have carried this out at
• 33:27
  Speaker 1: the locksmith's shop, and there might not have been very
• 33:30
  Speaker 1: much biological evidence that at the time they would have
• 33:33
  Speaker 1: been able to maybe gather, whereas today if they would
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: have gone in and assessed it, it might have been
• 33:39
  Speaker 1: a different story.
• 33:40
  Speaker 3: Very true. And if there was blood, who's to say
• 33:42
  Speaker 3: they weren't on some area rug or something like that.
• 33:44
  Speaker 3: That or but if he grabbed him and broke one
• 33:48
  Speaker 3: of their necks, and you know who knows. You're right,
• 33:50
  Speaker 3: there's many many causes of death that would not have
• 33:54
  Speaker 3: resulted in a substantial amount of blood. You're right. I
• 33:57
  Speaker 3: was thinking stabbing or shooting. But there's a million options
• 34:00
  Speaker 3: that could have happened. And like you said, especially two people,
• 34:03
  Speaker 3: there wouldn't have had to be such a violent struggle
• 34:06
  Speaker 3: or movement of the bodies to incapacitate them or to
• 34:11
  Speaker 3: kill them.
• 34:13
  Speaker 2: So now we have to go back and explore the
• 34:15
  Speaker 2: second unsolved missing person's case in this story, and that's
• 34:18
  Speaker 2: the disappearance of David King. This case has gotten nowhere
• 34:22
  Speaker 2: near as much publicity as the disappearances of Michael and Camden,
• 34:25
  Speaker 2: and there's even less evidence to suggest what happened. All
• 34:29
  Speaker 2: we know is that King left his house in January
• 34:31
  Speaker 2: of nineteen ninety one to go to work and subsequently disappeared,
• 34:35
  Speaker 2: but no one even attempted to file a missing person's
• 34:37
  Speaker 2: report until July the seventeenth of that year, when King's mother,
• 34:41
  Speaker 2: Emma Toppin, learned from his wife and children that they
• 34:44
  Speaker 2: had not seen him in nearly six months. Back in
• 34:47
  Speaker 2: nineteen ninety one, the New York Police Department had a
• 34:49
  Speaker 2: policy that unless there was strong evidence that foul play
• 34:53
  Speaker 2: had taken place where the victim had a serious medical
• 34:55
  Speaker 2: or mental condition, they cannot accept missing persons reports for
• 34:59
  Speaker 2: anyone between the ages of seventeen and sixty five. This
• 35:03
  Speaker 2: policy has since changed, but I think it was likely
• 35:06
  Speaker 2: in place because New York City had an insanely high
• 35:08
  Speaker 2: crime rate in nineteen ninety one, so the police just
• 35:12
  Speaker 2: did not have the resources to search for every missing person.
• 35:15
  Speaker 2: And besides, since King was a co defendant and a
• 35:18
  Speaker 2: thirteen million dollars civil lawsuit, it wasn't hard to imagine
• 35:22
  Speaker 2: him running off on his own to escape his legal troubles,
• 35:24
  Speaker 2: so his disappearance got zero media coverage at that time.
• 35:28
  Speaker 2: Of course, once Robert Rodriguez got linked to another missing
• 35:31
  Speaker 2: person's case, six years later, King's case finally got a
• 35:35
  Speaker 2: proper investigation, but Emma Toppin did not hesitate to publicly
• 35:39
  Speaker 2: express or frustration that it took the disappearance of two
• 35:42
  Speaker 2: white people for the disappearance of her African American son
• 35:46
  Speaker 2: to finally receive any attention.
• 35:49
  Speaker 3: What is so sad is we've talked about this before.
• 35:52
  Speaker 3: She is not alone in her frustration that we know
• 35:56
  Speaker 3: families of color that missing people of color that you
• 35:59
  Speaker 3: often do not have a media attention sometimes, you know,
• 36:04
  Speaker 3: depending on where you are, the police attention is also
• 36:07
  Speaker 3: very limited. And so you look at poor Emma and
• 36:11
  Speaker 3: she's saying, okay, now you're paying attention now that these
• 36:15
  Speaker 3: two white kids are this white couple got has also disappeared.
• 36:21
  Speaker 3: Now my son matters. It's very, very heartbreaking because a
• 36:25
  Speaker 3: human being is a human being. And I do believe
• 36:30
  Speaker 3: when you start looking at homicide investigations, homicide coverage that
• 36:35
  Speaker 3: things like wealth, race, gender, those things significantly matter in
• 36:40
  Speaker 3: the energy that is sometimes put forth. And it's horrific.
• 36:44
  Speaker 3: But for Emma, she's saying, you know, at least someone's looking,
• 36:48
  Speaker 3: but why did it take so long? Incredibly complex grief there.
• 36:52
  Speaker 3: It makes me very very sad.
• 36:55
  Speaker 2: And it's also sad to think that if Rodriguez did
• 36:58
  Speaker 2: have something to do with King's disappearance they had investigated
• 37:00
  Speaker 2: from the start, would things have turned out differently from
• 37:03
  Speaker 2: Michael and Canden, Like, would Rodriguez possibly have been arrested,
• 37:06
  Speaker 2: have gone to prison before they went missing, and the
• 37:09
  Speaker 2: course of their lives would have been completely different exactly.
• 37:12
  Speaker 3: And when you look at the way the media and
• 37:14
  Speaker 3: law enforcement and the community also puts value or a
• 37:18
  Speaker 3: lack of value on the victim, they aren't thinking that
• 37:22
  Speaker 3: a victim also means there's an offender. And so whether
• 37:25
  Speaker 3: you value that victim or not, when you start to
• 37:29
  Speaker 3: look at the bigger picture of what it means to
• 37:32
  Speaker 3: not put the energy towards, not put media coverage towards
• 37:36
  Speaker 3: every homicide, then you also say, oh, well, this offender
• 37:40
  Speaker 3: maybe isn't as important. There's someone who's capable of killing. So,
• 37:44
  Speaker 3: like you said, Robin, if there is someone who is
• 37:47
  Speaker 3: killed and their case is not viewed as a place
• 37:50
  Speaker 3: to place resources, then there's also a community at risk
• 37:55
  Speaker 3: because an offender's living amongst them. So it's a very
• 37:59
  Speaker 3: small mind reality that we live with in the criminal
• 38:02
  Speaker 3: justice field.
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: The information about King's disappearance is fairly limited, but it
• 38:08
  Speaker 1: sounds like Rodriguez had promised him a partnership in his
• 38:11
  Speaker 1: business after luring him away from his previous employer, and
• 38:15
  Speaker 1: this failed to materialize. The two men were reportedly seen
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: having an argument a short time before King went missing,
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: so it's easy to assume that Rodriguez might have been
• 38:25
  Speaker 1: involved in what happened. In the long run. I guess
• 38:28
  Speaker 1: King's disappearance did benefit Rodriguez and his potential culpability in
• 38:32
  Speaker 1: the civil lawsuit, because even though King wound up being
• 38:35
  Speaker 1: ordered to pay ninety thousand dollars in damages, Rodriguez pretty
• 38:39
  Speaker 1: much got off scot free by pinky swearing that he
• 38:42
  Speaker 1: would not use any of the confidential information that King
• 38:45
  Speaker 1: gave him for his own personal gain. I guess technically
• 38:49
  Speaker 1: they could not prove that Rodriguez new King was providing
• 38:52
  Speaker 1: him with material that was stolen, But if King had
• 38:55
  Speaker 1: been around to provide testimony, things might have turned out differently.
• 39:00
  Speaker 1: Perhaps Rodriguez would have had more liability. So this gave
• 39:03
  Speaker 1: Rodriguez a potential motive to make King disappear. But since
• 39:07
  Speaker 1: no investigation was performed until after Rodriguez hired an attorney,
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: he was never formally interviewed about his potential role in
• 39:14
  Speaker 1: this case. Now, there have been some confusion about an
• 39:18
  Speaker 1: unidentified John Doe who was found in the East River
• 39:21
  Speaker 1: in nineteen ninety one. He supposedly bore a striking resemblance
• 39:26
  Speaker 1: to King, but it's unclear if DNA testing was ever performed.
• 39:30
  Speaker 1: It's been reported that King's family refused to provide blood
• 39:34
  Speaker 1: samples for DNA testing, but since his mother has always
• 39:37
  Speaker 1: been an outspoken advocate for him, I find it hard
• 39:40
  Speaker 1: to imagine her not cooperating with this. The last media
• 39:44
  Speaker 1: coverage I've seen about King is in an article from
• 39:47
  Speaker 1: Newsday in August of two thousand and four, and since
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: it makes no mention of the John Doe, I can
• 39:52
  Speaker 1: only assume that he was.
• 39:54
  Speaker 3: Not a match.
• 39:55
  Speaker 1: It sounds like they were unable to determine the exact
• 39:58
  Speaker 1: cause of death for the decedent. So even so, even
• 40:02
  Speaker 1: if it was so, even if it was King, that
• 40:05
  Speaker 1: doesn't necessarily mean he was murdered. For all we know,
• 40:08
  Speaker 1: King may have been overcome by the stress of the
• 40:11
  Speaker 1: civil lawsuit and decided to take his own life by
• 40:14
  Speaker 1: jumping off the bridge. Into the East River. With so
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: little information, it's tough to make a conclusive determination about
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: what happened to King.
• 40:23
  Speaker 3: So this is the DNA testing that we were talking
• 40:25
  Speaker 3: about last time, that they were hoping it would match King,
• 40:28
  Speaker 3: but it resulted in an inconclusive result. Is that correct?
• 40:33
  Speaker 2: Yeah? Like, there are differing sources, one that says that
• 40:36
  Speaker 2: the results were inconclusive, and other sources say that his
• 40:38
  Speaker 2: family refused to provide their own blood for a comparison.
• 40:42
  Speaker 2: But like I said, I find that hard to believe.
• 40:44
  Speaker 2: Given how outspoken his mother was for him, I think
• 40:47
  Speaker 2: she would have been more than happy to provide her DNA.
• 40:50
  Speaker 3: Yeah, no way. If she's if she's strong enough to
• 40:52
  Speaker 3: stand there and say, hey, you didn't investigate my son's
• 40:55
  Speaker 3: investigation or my son's disappearance until these two other people
• 40:58
  Speaker 3: went missing, and she's willing to be vocal, she's desperate
• 41:03
  Speaker 3: to know what happened to her son. I will move mountains,
• 41:06
  Speaker 3: and I guarantee you everyone else in that family looked
• 41:08
  Speaker 3: at her and said she deserved to know what happened
• 41:11
  Speaker 3: to him, And so I cannot imagine that everyone in
• 41:14
  Speaker 3: his lineage would have said no way. And so it
• 41:17
  Speaker 3: is very interesting when you look at the idea that
• 41:19
  Speaker 3: there was a deceased individual that they thought possibly could
• 41:24
  Speaker 3: be King, there's inconclusive evidence of who this person is,
• 41:29
  Speaker 3: so there if that's true, and that is the ultimate outcome,
• 41:33
  Speaker 3: there is a small percentage that he could be King,
• 41:38
  Speaker 3: but we just don't know that. It's also possible it's
• 41:41
  Speaker 3: not King, and that his body it has never been discovered,
• 41:45
  Speaker 3: And so is it possibly he took his own life? Absolutely?
• 41:48
  Speaker 3: Is it possible he was murdyreed? Absolutely? Is it possible
• 41:51
  Speaker 3: something else happened. Anything's possible when you don't have an answer.
• 41:55
  Speaker 3: So while it looks like King needed to disappear, either
• 42:01
  Speaker 3: for Rodriguez or to avoid his own criminal charges in
• 42:06
  Speaker 3: those kinds of things, I think this is a very
• 42:09
  Speaker 3: very difficult case to look at because we simply have
• 42:14
  Speaker 3: zero information. There's a motive for him to disappear on
• 42:18
  Speaker 3: his own and there's a motive to get rid of him,
• 42:20
  Speaker 3: but we have no evidence of which way that went.
• 42:25
  Speaker 3: So again, for Rodriguez, looks like neon signs pointing to him,
• 42:30
  Speaker 3: But is her responsible? Is it possible for someone to
• 42:33
  Speaker 3: have that bad of luck that you are a criminal,
• 42:35
  Speaker 3: but you're not a murderer. You seem to be associated
• 42:38
  Speaker 3: with these people that go missing. It's so illogical to
• 42:42
  Speaker 3: think that someone could have that bad of luck, But
• 42:46
  Speaker 3: that is a possible outcome.
• 42:48
  Speaker 2: I mean, that's the thing. I mean, he looks awfully suspicious,
• 42:51
  Speaker 2: but they just don't have any hard evidence of foul play.
• 42:54
  Speaker 2: And well, it seems unlikely that three separate people at
• 42:57
  Speaker 2: different time periods could go missing under his wall. They've
• 43:01
  Speaker 2: just never been able to prove that he actually was
• 43:03
  Speaker 2: personally involved. All that being said, it still seems like
• 43:08
  Speaker 2: quite a coincidence that Rodriguez would be linked to otherwise
• 43:11
  Speaker 2: completely unrelated missing persons cases. I think the key difference
• 43:15
  Speaker 2: between them is that we know for a fact that
• 43:17
  Speaker 2: Rodriguez and King colluded together to do unethical things, so
• 43:21
  Speaker 2: King might have known some incriminating information which put his
• 43:24
  Speaker 2: life in danger. And what we also know for a
• 43:27
  Speaker 2: fact that Rodriguez was doing a ton of illegal things
• 43:29
  Speaker 2: at the time Michael and Camden went missing. We don't
• 43:32
  Speaker 2: know if they knew anything about that. But if the
• 43:35
  Speaker 2: couple did learn something incriminating and Rodriguez decided to get
• 43:38
  Speaker 2: rid of them, how would these events have unfolded? Well,
• 43:42
  Speaker 2: One detail about this case which I've always found interesting
• 43:45
  Speaker 2: is this cash of licensed guns, which Rodriguez supposedly owned
• 43:49
  Speaker 2: and could not be accounted for. As you recall, Rodriguez
• 43:53
  Speaker 2: was originally going to be paroled two years before his
• 43:55
  Speaker 2: scheduled release date, but the parole Board changed their minds
• 43:59
  Speaker 2: when the question Rodriguez about these guns, and he was
• 44:02
  Speaker 2: unable to provide conclusive answers about what happened to them.
• 44:05
  Speaker 2: In fact, it's been reported that Rodriguez could have received
• 44:08
  Speaker 2: a lighter sense than two to six years if he
• 44:11
  Speaker 2: had turned in these guns at the time he pled guilty,
• 44:13
  Speaker 2: but he never did. Now, I think the only reason
• 44:16
  Speaker 2: this questioning even took place was because the Board's decision
• 44:20
  Speaker 2: to parole Rodriguez was met with considerable backlash, and they
• 44:24
  Speaker 2: probably were looking for any loophole they could find to
• 44:26
  Speaker 2: reverse their decision without admitting me had screwed up. Given
• 44:30
  Speaker 2: that a number of years had passed, I guess it's
• 44:32
  Speaker 2: possible that Rodriguez legitimately had no idea where the guns were,
• 44:36
  Speaker 2: but he was apparently quite a vasive with his answers,
• 44:39
  Speaker 2: and to me, the biggest red flag is that he
• 44:42
  Speaker 2: invoked his fifth Amendment privilege to avoid self incrimination. I mean,
• 44:47
  Speaker 2: pleading the fifth can be a necessary tactic when you're
• 44:49
  Speaker 2: questioned under oath in a courtroom. But this is honestly
• 44:53
  Speaker 2: the first time I've ever heard of anyone pleading the
• 44:55
  Speaker 2: fifth at a parole hearing. Parole boards expect inmates to
• 44:59
  Speaker 2: be on honest and take accountability for their actions. But
• 45:02
  Speaker 2: if you decline to answer questions on the grounds of
• 45:05
  Speaker 2: self incrimination, that comes across like you have something to
• 45:08
  Speaker 2: add and pretty much guarantees you're not getting out of prison.
• 45:12
  Speaker 3: Absolutely. This is why when we talk about cases of
• 45:15
  Speaker 3: wrongful convictions and there's people who are in prison who
• 45:18
  Speaker 3: are here, I didn't do it, I didn't do it,
• 45:20
  Speaker 3: and they are up for parole and they say, guys,
• 45:23
  Speaker 3: I didn't do this, like I need my name cleared
• 45:26
  Speaker 3: because I didn't do it. A parole board says, if
• 45:29
  Speaker 3: you can't take accountability for why you're here, then clearly
• 45:31
  Speaker 3: you're not remorseful, and clearly you can't be released. So
• 45:35
  Speaker 3: then not only do you have an offender sitting there
• 45:38
  Speaker 3: saying you know, I didn't do this, or well that's
• 45:41
  Speaker 3: not how it happened. No, this man is saying I
• 45:44
  Speaker 3: will not answer your questions because I might incriminate myself.
• 45:48
  Speaker 3: If you're worried about incriminating yourself, you clearly have other
• 45:52
  Speaker 3: issues going on and you need to stay behind bars.
• 45:55
  Speaker 3: Very very fascinating that this person would have a collection
• 45:59
  Speaker 3: of guns, cannot account for them, cannot provide information about them,
• 46:03
  Speaker 3: and there's a possibility that three people are missing as
• 46:07
  Speaker 3: a result of your actions. Very very interesting. I've never heard,
• 46:11
  Speaker 3: like you said, I've never heard of a parole board
• 46:13
  Speaker 3: interviewing someone that they're planning to release back into the
• 46:16
  Speaker 3: community who says, ah, I can't answer your questions, I
• 46:18
  Speaker 3: plead the fifth. Normally, you're begging for them to see
• 46:20
  Speaker 3: you as a human, to see you as someone who's thoughtful,
• 46:23
  Speaker 3: who's going to be an excellent, contributing member of society,
• 46:27
  Speaker 3: who is no longer a risk. He again is making
• 46:31
  Speaker 3: horrific decisions as far as drawing attention to the type
• 46:35
  Speaker 3: of man that he is.
• 46:37
  Speaker 1: So this makes me wonder why did Rodriguez want to
• 46:41
  Speaker 1: avoid talking about this cash of guns. So in spite
• 46:44
  Speaker 1: of his financial crimes, it doesn't sound like he had
• 46:46
  Speaker 1: any known history of violence in his background, So could
• 46:50
  Speaker 1: one of these guns have been used as a murder weapon.
• 46:53
  Speaker 1: If he shot someone and disposed of the gun, then
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: it would be very difficult for him to explain what
• 46:58
  Speaker 1: happened to it and could account for why he elected
• 47:00
  Speaker 1: to plead the fifth Even if this ruined his chance
• 47:04
  Speaker 1: as a parole and meant that he would have to
• 47:06
  Speaker 1: serve two more years in prison for fraud, that's still
• 47:09
  Speaker 1: preferable to spending the rest of your life in prison
• 47:12
  Speaker 1: for murder. But I must provide a disclaimer about this
• 47:15
  Speaker 1: detail about the guns, that it is nothing more than
• 47:18
  Speaker 1: speculation on Robin's part when he initially did his trail
• 47:21
  Speaker 1: and Cold episode. And we both still have issues with
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: the idea that Rodriguez could have shot Michael and Camden
• 47:27
  Speaker 1: inside the apartment building without anybody hearing anything. So we
• 47:32
  Speaker 1: know that all of Rodriguez's financial crimes were eventually uncovered
• 47:35
  Speaker 1: because he got himself in way over his head. So
• 47:39
  Speaker 1: that's why you have to wonder if he was capable
• 47:41
  Speaker 1: of getting away with the perfect murder without leaving any
• 47:44
  Speaker 1: incriminating evidence behind. Anyway, as far as we can tell,
• 47:49
  Speaker 1: Robert Rodriguez is still alive today at the age of
• 47:52
  Speaker 1: eighty four, so if he really was responsible for these crimes,
• 47:55
  Speaker 1: then the clock is ticking to uncover evidence against him.
• 48:00
  Speaker 1: There's my chance. Rodriguez's main motivation for not cooperating with
• 48:03
  Speaker 1: the investigation into Michael and Camden's disappearances was because he
• 48:08
  Speaker 1: was afraid of his financial crimes being uncovered. Well, that
• 48:11
  Speaker 1: wound up happening anyway, and he served his time in prison.
• 48:15
  Speaker 1: If he truly has nothing left to hide, then I
• 48:18
  Speaker 1: wish that he would finally cooperate and speak to the
• 48:20
  Speaker 1: police about what he knows. But then again, even if
• 48:24
  Speaker 1: he's innocent in this case, there may still be things
• 48:26
  Speaker 1: about the disappearance of David King which he does not
• 48:29
  Speaker 1: want to discuss absolutely.
• 48:31
  Speaker 3: And what's really interesting is how would they prove otherwise
• 48:35
  Speaker 3: if you said, you know, I honestly wasn't the most
• 48:38
  Speaker 3: responsible gun owner. Yes, I have a collection of guns.
• 48:42
  Speaker 3: Because I have a collection of guns, I don't really
• 48:44
  Speaker 3: keep track of where they are and what I'm doing
• 48:46
  Speaker 3: with them. So I remember that I have a couple
• 48:50
  Speaker 3: that are in a safe, I have a couple that
• 48:52
  Speaker 3: are under the bed. But for some reason I remember
• 48:57
  Speaker 3: that there's several that I just can't account for. And
• 48:59
  Speaker 3: I was your responsible. I mean, like, they already know
• 49:02
  Speaker 3: you have them and where are they? So what if
• 49:04
  Speaker 3: you were just you know, oh, I recognized a couple
• 49:08
  Speaker 3: of them were missing. I used to loan him out
• 49:10
  Speaker 3: to friends, and I have zero idea who borrowed that
• 49:13
  Speaker 3: weapon from me? I lost them. I don't know, Like,
• 49:18
  Speaker 3: why would you plead the fifth? Why not just make
• 49:20
  Speaker 3: up a story? How could they disprove that?
• 49:23
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that is just what's so weird to me that
• 49:25
  Speaker 2: he didn't even attempt to make up a lie or
• 49:27
  Speaker 2: just say that he lost him or he had no idea.
• 49:29
  Speaker 2: He flat up pleads the fifth, which is the most
• 49:32
  Speaker 2: suspicious looking thing you could do, which kind of indicates
• 49:36
  Speaker 2: to me that there's some sort of desperation at play
• 49:38
  Speaker 2: there and he really really doesn't want anyone finding out
• 49:40
  Speaker 2: where those guns could be. So. As for Laurie Sylvia,
• 49:45
  Speaker 2: at the time her daughter went missing, she was an
• 49:47
  Speaker 2: advocate for the disabled and would pretty much become the
• 49:50
  Speaker 2: official advocate for Camden and Michael. This is not the
• 49:53
  Speaker 2: only family tragedy that Laurie has experienced, as two of
• 49:56
  Speaker 2: her uncles vanished and were lost at sea during the
• 49:58
  Speaker 2: nineteen fifties and in January of twenty fourteen, she lost
• 50:02
  Speaker 2: her forty eight year old son, Matthew, when he passed
• 50:05
  Speaker 2: away after a long battle with pancreatis. While Laurie is
• 50:08
  Speaker 2: still with us today, she is also in her mid eighties,
• 50:11
  Speaker 2: so it would be nice if she finally received some
• 50:13
  Speaker 2: answers about what happened to her daughter. So, if you
• 50:16
  Speaker 2: happen to have any information on the disappearances of Michael
• 50:19
  Speaker 2: Sullivan and Camden Sylvia, as well as the unsolved disappearance
• 50:22
  Speaker 2: of David King, please call the New York Police Department
• 50:26
  Speaker 2: at six four six six one zero six nine one four.
• 50:30
  Speaker 2: That's six four six six one zero six nine one four,
• 50:34
  Speaker 2: Jules Ashley, any final thoughts in this case.
• 50:37
  Speaker 3: Disappearances and missing people are some of the most interesting
• 50:41
  Speaker 3: and heartbreaking cases to me because it's as if someone
• 50:45
  Speaker 3: just disappeared into thin air and no one knows what
• 50:49
  Speaker 3: happened to them. And yet you can't just have a
• 50:53
  Speaker 3: body evaporate that those three people, at some point their
• 50:58
  Speaker 3: body should surface, should be found, they somebody should know
• 51:03
  Speaker 3: what happened to them. Right. It just doesn't really cognitively
• 51:06
  Speaker 3: make sense to me that David King up had disappeared
• 51:11
  Speaker 3: never to be seen again. Camden and Michael up A disappeared,
• 51:14
  Speaker 3: never to be seen again. So in these cases, it's
• 51:17
  Speaker 3: this constant prayer of mine that like, Okay, one day,
• 51:20
  Speaker 3: remains are going to be discovered. These families are going
• 51:22
  Speaker 3: to get answers, and while they might not ever know
• 51:25
  Speaker 3: who the perpetrator was, they would at least have their
• 51:28
  Speaker 3: loved one's remains back to kind of close the idea
• 51:31
  Speaker 3: that my loved one matters and I want to know
• 51:34
  Speaker 3: that they are now safely in a single location and
• 51:37
  Speaker 3: I know where they are, like that just peace of mind.
• 51:40
  Speaker 3: Are these likely to be solved and prosecuted. Probably not.
• 51:44
  Speaker 3: But again, if there was just this ability to have
• 51:47
  Speaker 3: the remains back where people like Glory and these families
• 51:51
  Speaker 3: would say, my baby is is, I know where she
• 51:55
  Speaker 3: is now. I have control over the location of her
• 51:57
  Speaker 3: body and I don't have to wonder what else is happening.
• 52:01
  Speaker 3: I have her back to me as a mother. That's
• 52:04
  Speaker 3: something that would be incredibly important. That the idea of
• 52:07
  Speaker 3: her just disappearing into thin air is one of the
• 52:10
  Speaker 3: most harmful possibilities. I just need her back, no matter
• 52:14
  Speaker 3: what form that's in. And so again, how does a
• 52:18
  Speaker 3: body just disappear. It can happen. I mean, there are
• 52:21
  Speaker 3: methods to make a body disintegrate and disappear, but is
• 52:25
  Speaker 3: that likely, Like we said, to what extent in the
• 52:27
  Speaker 3: middle of Manhattan can you just get rid of things?
• 52:30
  Speaker 3: How easy is it to eliminate one, two, or maybe
• 52:35
  Speaker 3: even three people and no one knows, there's no evidence,
• 52:39
  Speaker 3: there's no trail left behind. So missing persons just so tragic,
• 52:44
  Speaker 3: and I'm my prayer would be at the minimum that
• 52:48
  Speaker 3: these families would be able to one day have their
• 52:50
  Speaker 3: loved ones and have the control over their remains.
• 52:54
  Speaker 1: I totally agree, and I personally think that Rodriguez holds
• 52:58
  Speaker 1: the key to where where the bodies are. And I
• 53:01
  Speaker 1: think that this is like the case of a hidden
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: variable homicide, and that there's so many variables that we
• 53:08
  Speaker 1: just aren't aware of, Like was there another person? It
• 53:11
  Speaker 1: could have been a family member, because like Robin said,
• 53:14
  Speaker 1: the family members weren't cooperative, and so you've got to
• 53:17
  Speaker 1: wonder why when you've got two missing people and they're
• 53:22
  Speaker 1: not trying to help. It's like either they know that
• 53:25
  Speaker 1: he's doing all the fraud stuff and they're just trying
• 53:28
  Speaker 1: not to get involved, or they are scared of him
• 53:30
  Speaker 1: in some capacity, or they're complicit in some way. And
• 53:34
  Speaker 1: I think that because Manhattan is this, you know, small island,
• 53:39
  Speaker 1: and it's so populated, everybody's basically on top of each other,
• 53:43
  Speaker 1: that it's so hard to envision how somebody could carry
• 53:46
  Speaker 1: this out. But if there was a second person, and
• 53:49
  Speaker 1: if he did have a van from his locksmith's shop,
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: there would And Ashley had mentioned like what if there
• 53:54
  Speaker 1: was an area rug on the ground, what if he
• 53:56
  Speaker 1: put their bodies in this van, had the help of somebody,
• 54:00
  Speaker 1: and he drove them to New Jersey. I just think
• 54:02
  Speaker 1: of Rex Hureman, the Long Island serial killer, and how
• 54:06
  Speaker 1: long the bodies of those women are. All those individuals
• 54:09
  Speaker 1: were there. They were only discovered because of Shannon Gilbert's
• 54:13
  Speaker 1: disappearance and her call to nine one one, which was
• 54:17
  Speaker 1: very troubling, and so that kicked off a search which
• 54:20
  Speaker 1: then those bodies were discovered. So it is my hope
• 54:24
  Speaker 1: that Michael and Camden will be discovered at some point
• 54:28
  Speaker 1: and King as well, and that perhaps there is a
• 54:32
  Speaker 1: dumping ground or an area where Rodriguez is disposed of
• 54:36
  Speaker 1: these bodies, because in my gut, I truly believe that
• 54:40
  Speaker 1: he's the one that holds the key to the answers
• 54:43
  Speaker 1: that the families deserve at this point. And the fact
• 54:45
  Speaker 1: that he's like eighty five, now that is so wild
• 54:50
  Speaker 1: to me, because he's gone his whole life with as
• 54:53
  Speaker 1: far as we know, not confessing to anybody, or at
• 54:56
  Speaker 1: least nobody that would come forward, and so we're running
• 54:59
  Speaker 1: out a time. I'm here, this is like a Tommy
• 55:01
  Speaker 1: Zeger thing, not in that he's innocent, just in that
• 55:03
  Speaker 1: he's at an advanced age, and so if we want
• 55:06
  Speaker 1: a resolution, it's going to need to be soon.
• 55:10
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I actually talked about these missing persons cases in
• 55:12
  Speaker 2: which it seems like the victim has just vanished into
• 55:15
  Speaker 2: thin air, and this is definitely an example of one
• 55:17
  Speaker 2: of them. And it's particularly frustrating in the cases where
• 55:21
  Speaker 2: you have a very compelling suspect, but you just don't
• 55:24
  Speaker 2: have any evidence of foul play or any indication what
• 55:27
  Speaker 2: happened to the victims at all. I mean, it would
• 55:29
  Speaker 2: be one thing if Michael and Cannon were last seen
• 55:32
  Speaker 2: going to a meeting with Robert Rodriguez and then they
• 55:34
  Speaker 2: just disappeared, But we don't even have a real pinpoint
• 55:37
  Speaker 2: moment of the last time they were seen to be alive.
• 55:40
  Speaker 2: We know they return to their apartment left at some point,
• 55:43
  Speaker 2: but they don't know where they were going or what
• 55:44
  Speaker 2: happened to them. And no one reported seeing or hearing
• 55:47
  Speaker 2: anything unusual, no gunshots, no suspicious actions of like Rodriguez
• 55:52
  Speaker 2: carrying something into a vehicle. So even though it is
• 55:55
  Speaker 2: compelling to think that Rodriguez killed them because of this dispute,
• 55:58
  Speaker 2: there's just no hard evidence that, and under normal circumstances,
• 56:02
  Speaker 2: I might have been willing to give Rodriguez a break
• 56:04
  Speaker 2: and think that, well, maybe he's acting this way because
• 56:07
  Speaker 2: he was committing fraud on the side, that he had
• 56:09
  Speaker 2: nothing to do with what happened to Michael and Camden.
• 56:12
  Speaker 2: But then you learn the background with David King and
• 56:14
  Speaker 2: how he conveniently went missing in the middle of a dispute,
• 56:17
  Speaker 2: and you're thinking, Wow, I don't think anyone is that unlucky, Like,
• 56:20
  Speaker 2: it's be quite a coincidence if three people connected to
• 56:24
  Speaker 2: this guy all happened to go missing under unrelated circumstances.
• 56:27
  Speaker 2: So he asked to be involved somehow. But if he was,
• 56:30
  Speaker 2: he covered his tracks very well. And like we talked
• 56:32
  Speaker 2: about how does he get rid of two people in
• 56:36
  Speaker 2: downtown Manhattan from an apartment building in the middle of
• 56:39
  Speaker 2: the day without attracting any attention. And this is why
• 56:42
  Speaker 2: it's easy to believe that he might have had accomplices,
• 56:44
  Speaker 2: maybe business associates or family members who helped him dispose
• 56:49
  Speaker 2: of the crime. And like you mentioned, he's now in
• 56:51
  Speaker 2: his eighties, he doesn't have much time left. So I
• 56:54
  Speaker 2: really hope that if he did do something, they can
• 56:57
  Speaker 2: finally uncover some evidence and maybe finally find the victims'
• 57:01
  Speaker 2: bodies and finally get a conclusive resolution, because, like we
• 57:04
  Speaker 2: talked about, Lori, Sylvia has gone without answers for far
• 57:07
  Speaker 2: too long.
• 57:09
  Speaker 4: Robin, do you want to tell us a little bit
• 57:11
  Speaker 4: about the Trail Went Cold Patreon?
• 57:13
  Speaker 2: Yes, the Trail Cold Patreon has been around for three
• 57:16
  Speaker 2: years now, and we offer these standard bonus features like
• 57:19
  Speaker 2: early ad free episodes, and I also send out stickers
• 57:23
  Speaker 2: and sign thank you cards to anyone who signs up
• 57:26
  Speaker 2: with us on Patreon if you join our five dollars
• 57:28
  Speaker 2: tier Tier two. We also offer monthly bonus episodes in
• 57:32
  Speaker 2: which I talk about cases which are not featured on
• 57:36
  Speaker 2: The Trail Went Cold's original feed. So they're exclusive to
• 57:38
  Speaker 2: Patreon and if you join our highest tier, Tier three,
• 57:42
  Speaker 2: the ten dollars tier. One of the features we offer
• 57:45
  Speaker 2: is a audio commentary track over classic episodes of Unsawved Mysteries,
• 57:49
  Speaker 2: where you can download an audio file and then boot
• 57:52
  Speaker 2: up the original Unsolved Mysteries episode on Amazon Prime or
• 57:56
  Speaker 2: YouTube and play it with my audio commentary playing in
• 57:59
  Speaker 2: the background, where I just provide trivia and factoids about
• 58:02
  Speaker 2: the cases featured in this episode. And incidentally, the very
• 58:06
  Speaker 2: first episode that I did a commentary track over was
• 58:08
  Speaker 2: the episode featuring this case. So if you want to
• 58:11
  Speaker 2: download a commentary track in which I make more smart
• 58:14
  Speaker 2: ass remarks about Jewel Kaylor, then be sure to join
• 58:17
  Speaker 2: Tier three.
• 58:18
  Speaker 4: So I want to let you know a little bit
• 58:20
  Speaker 4: about the Jewels and Nashty patreons. So there's early ad
• 58:23
  Speaker 4: free episodes of The Path Went Chili. We've got our
• 58:25
  Speaker 4: Pathwent Chili mini's, which are always over an hour, so
• 58:29
  Speaker 4: they're not very mini, but they're just too short to
• 58:31
  Speaker 4: turn into a series, and we're really enjoying doing those.
• 58:34
  Speaker 4: So we hope you'll check out those patreons.
• 58:36
  Speaker 1: We'll link them in the show notes.
• 58:38
  Speaker 2: So I want to thank you all for listening, and
• 58:40
  Speaker 2: any chance you have to share us on social media
• 58:42
  Speaker 2: with a friend or to rate and review is greatly appreciated.
• 58:45
  Speaker 2: You can email us at the Pathwentchili at gmail dot com.
• 58:49
  Speaker 2: You can reach us on Twitter at the Pathwin. So
• 58:51
  Speaker 2: until next time, be sure to bundle up because cold
• 58:54
  Speaker 2: trails and chili pass call for warm clothing.
• 58:57
  Speaker 1: Music by Paul Rich from the podcast Cold Callers Comedy