Latest / The Path Went Chilly / Teresita Basa Pt. Two

Transcript

Teresita Basa Pt. Two · The Path Went Chilly

0:00
Speaker 1: Thank you.
0:29
Speaker 2: Welcome back to part two of our series about the
0:31
Speaker 2: murder of Teresita Bossa. Let's continue discussing it. And it
0:35
Speaker 2: is kind of surprising that this is the only murder
0:37
Speaker 2: that he's been linked to. I know that he had
0:39
Speaker 2: allegations of rape and burglary in the past, but you've
0:42
Speaker 2: just got to have a different mindset where this woman
0:44
Speaker 2: you work with, you're suddenly going to decide, I'm not
0:46
Speaker 2: only going to rob her, but I'm going to murder
0:48
Speaker 2: her as well and set fire to her body. just
0:50
Speaker 2: to make it look like some sort of sexual assault.
0:52
Speaker 2: I mean, like, how do you get that mentality where
0:55
Speaker 2: someone that you see at work every day, you just
0:57
Speaker 2: suddenly decide I'm going to kill her even though she's
0:58
Speaker 2: not overly wealthy and that the reward will definitely not
1:02
Speaker 2: equal the risk? And one person I feel sorry for
1:05
Speaker 2: was his girlfriend, Yonka, because by all accounts, she had
1:08
Speaker 2: no idea that he was going to do this. And
1:11
Speaker 2: she's probably thinking, oh, that's very nice. Alan, like, brought
1:13
Speaker 2: me this jewelry home that she bought, only to discover
1:16
Speaker 2: he got it from a woman that he murdered. And
1:18
Speaker 2: she's learning this when she's eight months pregnant with his
1:20
Speaker 2: child and then is finding out that, yeah, I'm going
1:22
Speaker 2: to be alone now because my boyfriend is going to
1:25
Speaker 2: prison for murder.
1:27
Speaker 1: Yeah, that is literally so much to take on, to
1:31
Speaker 1: be alone. a woman so heavily pregnant like Yonka, and
1:35
Speaker 1: to grapple with this idea that your partner's going away
1:40
Speaker 1: for murder, the father of your child isn't going to
1:43
Speaker 1: be present to help raise that child. And also, how
1:46
Speaker 1: would you feel if he was, given what he did?
1:49
Speaker 1: And then the idea that he gifted her that jewelry.
1:51
Speaker 1: And we've heard this in other cases, too. When a
1:54
Speaker 1: man kills a woman and then gifts their partner their jewelry.
1:58
Speaker 1: And you've got to wonder, is there some... sick component
2:01
Speaker 1: of that where they get off on the idea of
2:05
Speaker 1: being able to see that jewelry on their partner and
2:08
Speaker 1: it's a little reminder of what they've.
2:10
Speaker 2: Done yeah it's just uh so sad and just so
2:14
Speaker 2: senseless So following Showery's confession, he was finally charged with
2:19
Speaker 2: Teresita's murder, and one theory that the skeptics will bring
2:22
Speaker 2: up is that perhaps Remy and Jose Chua were complicit
2:25
Speaker 2: in the murder. I don't know why that they would
2:28
Speaker 2: accompany Showery, this doctor and an inhalation technician with no
2:32
Speaker 2: criminal record would suddenly decide to murder one of their co-workers.
2:35
Speaker 2: And they suspected that that could have been the logical
2:38
Speaker 2: reason that Remy knew so much information about the crime
2:41
Speaker 2: and the jewelry and then came up with this weird
2:43
Speaker 2: way in order to turn in Shaori to the police.
2:46
Speaker 2: But Detective Stahula said that he thoroughly investigated the Chua's
2:49
Speaker 2: backgrounds and found nothing to indicate that they were involved
2:52
Speaker 2: in the crime. They just seemed like upstanding citizens who
2:55
Speaker 2: had no history of criminal activity, so he was convinced
2:58
Speaker 2: that Shaori did this on his own and that the
3:01
Speaker 2: Chua's had nothing to do with it.
3:03
Speaker 1: Well, I'm glad that he landed on that conclusion because
3:06
Speaker 1: I really would have felt for the Chua's if what
3:09
Speaker 1: happened in plenty of other cases where somebody came forward
3:12
Speaker 1: with a psychic vision and that investigators are like, oh, well,
3:16
Speaker 1: if you know that, then obviously you had something to
3:18
Speaker 1: do with the murder. So it was very brave for
3:21
Speaker 1: them to come forward and to share that information and
3:24
Speaker 1: to attempt to get justice for Teresita.
3:27
Speaker 2: Yes, I'm glad that the internet was not around back
3:29
Speaker 2: in 1977, because I'm sure all the amateur sleuths would
3:32
Speaker 2: have been yelling at Remy and Jose, accusing them of
3:35
Speaker 2: being involved in the murder, and they would have probably
3:37
Speaker 2: had to go dark to avoid social media and being
3:40
Speaker 2: harassed all the time. So shortly after his arrest, Chowri
3:44
Speaker 2: suddenly recanted his confession, and this is complicated because the police,
3:48
Speaker 2: technically Detective Stuhula, had not told him ahead of time
3:51
Speaker 2: that we found out about the jewelry and your involvement
3:54
Speaker 2: in this because a ghost possessed a witness and shared
3:57
Speaker 2: that information, and I think that if he had known
3:59
Speaker 2: that ahead of time, he wouldn't have been in such
4:01
Speaker 2: a hurry to confess. I think he was under the
4:03
Speaker 2: impression that the police had him dead to rights, and
4:06
Speaker 2: that's why he was so anxious to tell them everything
4:09
Speaker 2: that he knew. but he would claim that the police
4:12
Speaker 2: had fed him all this information about the jewelry and
4:15
Speaker 2: threatened to arrest both him and his pregnant girlfriend, so
4:18
Speaker 2: the only way to ensure that he wouldn't get charged
4:20
Speaker 2: was to confess. Showery wound up pleading not guilty to
4:23
Speaker 2: the murder, and at a pre-trial hearing, his defense team
4:26
Speaker 2: demanded that his arrest and confession be suppressed... because of
4:30
Speaker 2: the unusual way it was obtained, as they did not
4:32
Speaker 2: think that being implicated by a ghost was probable cause
4:36
Speaker 2: to bring him in. But because Shaori had accompanied the
4:38
Speaker 2: police to the station of his own free will, and
4:41
Speaker 2: was not formally arrested until after his confession, the judge
4:44
Speaker 2: ruled that yes, this is sufficient evidence, and he will
4:47
Speaker 2: stand trial. But you can kind of see the complications, though,
4:50
Speaker 2: about bringing this to trial, because how are you going
4:53
Speaker 2: to explain this to a jury?
4:55
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't know how you get 12 jurors that
5:00
Speaker 1: are your peers who at least some of them are
5:03
Speaker 1: going to have to accept that it is possible that
5:06
Speaker 1: Teresita's ghost came back and she's the one who's serving
5:10
Speaker 1: justice here. Because if you have all 12 people shut
5:14
Speaker 1: off to the possibility that that's what happened, you're going
5:18
Speaker 1: to have a hell of a time trying to persuade
5:20
Speaker 1: that jury and even give information on how Alan became
5:26
Speaker 1: a person of interest, why he was brought in. Because
5:30
Speaker 1: like you said, it's super problematic when you're looking for
5:33
Speaker 1: probable cause. But thank God the investigators didn't arrest him
5:37
Speaker 1: until after his confession, because if he was arrested prior,
5:41
Speaker 1: then it likely would have all got thrown out.
5:44
Speaker 2: Yeah, it is crazy to think like we've done so
5:46
Speaker 2: many cases on this podcast about innocent people who have
5:49
Speaker 2: been coerced into making false confessions. And we always talk
5:52
Speaker 2: about how the police are allowed legally to lie to
5:55
Speaker 2: you and withheld information so that you sometimes will confess
5:58
Speaker 2: to something that you didn't do because the police give
6:01
Speaker 2: you this false impression that they have all this evidence
6:03
Speaker 2: and that you're going to be charged anyway. So you
6:05
Speaker 2: better just get it all off your chest just to
6:07
Speaker 2: make yourself feel better. Well, here's a case where the
6:10
Speaker 2: confessor was actually guilty, but did not know ahead of
6:13
Speaker 2: time that, uh, all the stuff about the ghost and
6:16
Speaker 2: that this is how they obtained the evidence against them. And, uh,
6:19
Speaker 2: I do think it was smart on Stahula's part not
6:21
Speaker 2: to mention this, because I think if Showery heard the
6:24
Speaker 2: full story about Remy and the ghostly possession and Teresita
6:27
Speaker 2: coming back from the brave, he probably would have just
6:29
Speaker 2: laughed it off and walked out. So I have to
6:32
Speaker 2: say that I think that the cops just got incredibly
6:34
Speaker 2: lucky that they were able to get this confession and
6:36
Speaker 2: that it was able to hold up in court.
6:39
Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree with you. I think it could have
6:41
Speaker 1: gone a completely different way. And if that was the case,
6:44
Speaker 1: we would be having a completely different discussion. about this,
6:48
Speaker 1: I think it would still be out there because it's
6:50
Speaker 1: so fascinating with all of the details and just how
6:54
Speaker 1: granular you can get with the information that Teresita provided
6:58
Speaker 1: and the family members, jewelry, everything. And then it landing
7:03
Speaker 1: on Alan and Alan confessing. So even if they weren't
7:07
Speaker 1: able to charge him or bring it to trial, I
7:09
Speaker 1: still think we'd be talking about this, but just not
7:12
Speaker 1: to the degree that we are today.
7:15
Speaker 2: Yeah, like there doesn't seem to be any debate about
7:17
Speaker 2: his innocence or guilt, but it's just the circumstances of
7:20
Speaker 2: how they were able to obtain this evidence against him
7:22
Speaker 2: to begin with. And I remember I researched this case
7:25
Speaker 2: on a Patreon-exclusive bonus episode that I did for The
7:28
Speaker 2: Trail Went Cold several years ago, and it was interesting
7:31
Speaker 2: to go through the archives at newspapers.com Because back in
7:34
Speaker 2: February of 1977, when Teresita's murder took place, like, I
7:38
Speaker 2: think it only got, like, one newspaper article about it, like,
7:41
Speaker 2: it didn't get any coverage at all. But then when
7:43
Speaker 2: Showery got arrested, this became a media sensation in Chicago,
7:47
Speaker 2: and you started seeing headlines on the Chicago Tribune, which read, quote,
7:53
Speaker 2: And this got, like, mainstream media coverage all over North America.
7:58
Speaker 2: And even though Detective Stuhula was commended for, like, solving
8:01
Speaker 2: a murder, he also got a lot of practical jokes
8:03
Speaker 2: and ribs from it because he said he would find
8:06
Speaker 2: messages in his mailbox asking him to call people who
8:09
Speaker 2: were dead and that his co-workers would often flick the
8:12
Speaker 2: lights on and off while he was inside the office
8:14
Speaker 2: pretending a ghost was in there. So as you can imagine,
8:16
Speaker 2: it was kind of a bittersweet feeling because you solved
8:19
Speaker 2: the case, only it's under such unusual circumstances that you're
8:22
Speaker 2: being ridiculed all over the place.
8:24
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think there's a satisfaction in knowing that you
8:28
Speaker 1: solved it. But I think you're going to get harassed,
8:31
Speaker 1: especially by your co workers and by probably everybody that
8:35
Speaker 1: you know, because there's a lot of people out there
8:37
Speaker 1: who are skeptics. And they're going to make fun of
8:40
Speaker 1: somebody who's in a situation where you're part of investigating
8:45
Speaker 1: murder and bringing someone to justice. And the information came
8:49
Speaker 1: from not even just a psychic vision, but an individual
8:53
Speaker 1: who knew they were acquaintances, the decedent Teresita, but they
8:59
Speaker 1: weren't close and her body was taken over and then
9:02
Speaker 1: her partner Jose witnesses all this and they obtain a
9:05
Speaker 1: lot of information, information that is damning for Alan. So yeah,
9:11
Speaker 1: a lot of people are going to be uncomfortable with
9:13
Speaker 1: this and they're going to take out or exercise their
9:16
Speaker 1: discomfort by making fun of him.
9:19
Speaker 2: Yeah, like, I can totally understand, and I think there
9:21
Speaker 2: are some detectives out there who probably would say, forget
9:24
Speaker 2: all this, I'm just putting this case to the side. Like,
9:26
Speaker 2: I don't want to get it out there on the
9:28
Speaker 2: record that I helped solve the case through the involvement
9:30
Speaker 2: of a ghost and wouldn't want to get that kind
9:32
Speaker 2: of negative publicity. But to credit Stuhula, he embraced it,
9:35
Speaker 2: and many years later, he was still giving interviews on
9:38
Speaker 2: TV shows like Unsolved Mysteries, where... He said that, yeah,
9:41
Speaker 2: I was a skeptic when I started out getting all
9:43
Speaker 2: this information about Teresita coming back from the grave, but
9:47
Speaker 2: in retrospect, I'm really glad that I took it seriously
9:49
Speaker 2: because it led to this crime being solved. So the
9:53
Speaker 2: trial would start in January of 1979, and the media
9:56
Speaker 2: would dub it the Voice from the Grave Trial, and
9:59
Speaker 2: as far as I can tell, this is the only
10:01
Speaker 2: murder trial from the past 50 years or so where
10:03
Speaker 2: they have actually introduced paranormal involvement into evidence in front
10:07
Speaker 2: of a jury. But there are actually other cases like
10:11
Speaker 2: this which took place in previous centuries. Have you ever
10:13
Speaker 2: heard the story of the Greenbrier ghost?
10:16
Speaker 1: Yes, I've heard that story.
10:18
Speaker 2: Yeah, and to recap it for anyone who isn't familiar
10:20
Speaker 2: with it, it took place in 1897, where a woman
10:23
Speaker 2: named Zona Heaster Shue died in Greenbower County, West Virginia,
10:27
Speaker 2: in what was believed to be natural causes, but shortly
10:29
Speaker 2: after she was buried, her mother died. Mary Jane Heaster
10:33
Speaker 2: went to the local prosecutor claiming that Zona's ghost had
10:36
Speaker 2: visited her from the grave on four separate occasions and
10:39
Speaker 2: revealed that she had been murdered by her husband, who
10:42
Speaker 2: went by the name Erasmus Stribbing Shoe, though his nickname
10:45
Speaker 2: was Trout. So Trout Shoe is another great name that
10:48
Speaker 2: I just want to share on this podcast.
10:49
Speaker 1: Erasmus is also a great name.
10:53
Speaker 2: Yes, I love late 19th century names. But apparently, like,
10:58
Speaker 2: Zona's ghost had told her mother that Trout had broken
11:00
Speaker 2: her neck after attacking her, so this motivated the authorities
11:04
Speaker 2: to exhume Zona's body, and a new autopsy revealed that
11:07
Speaker 2: her neck had indeed been broken, and Trout's shoe was
11:10
Speaker 2: charged with the murder and put on trial. And even
11:13
Speaker 2: though the case against him was very circumstantial, Mary Jean
11:17
Speaker 2: took the witness stand in order to testify about her
11:20
Speaker 2: encounters with Zona's ghost, and the jury found her to
11:23
Speaker 2: be so believable that Trout was actually found guilty and
11:26
Speaker 2: received a life sentence before he died in prison. Two
11:29
Speaker 2: and a half years later. I mean, I can't see
11:32
Speaker 2: a trial like this happening today or even in the
11:34
Speaker 2: 20th century, but in the 19th century, people were a
11:37
Speaker 2: lot more superstitious and open-minded about ghosts, so this was
11:41
Speaker 2: strong enough to get a conviction. But the crazy thing
11:43
Speaker 2: about the Teresita Bossa case is that this is 1979,
11:47
Speaker 2: and here you are bringing an actual murder case to
11:49
Speaker 2: trial where you actually have to mention the intervention of
11:52
Speaker 2: the victim's ghost.
11:54
Speaker 1: Yeah, back then they were all about seances and spiritualists
11:59
Speaker 1: and communicating with the dead. So I could see it
12:03
Speaker 1: being more widely accepted by a jury that this information
12:08
Speaker 1: came from a ghost. I mean, it's compelling. but like
12:11
Speaker 1: slightly less compelling than what we've got with Teresita's case
12:15
Speaker 1: because we have a lot more evidence to go off
12:18
Speaker 1: of and a lot more information given than her neck
12:22
Speaker 1: being broken. But I can understand how Trout was convicted
12:27
Speaker 1: because autopsies weren't what they are today. So they're not
12:31
Speaker 1: going to look at the body in the same way
12:33
Speaker 1: that they would now. And when you're giving that information,
12:36
Speaker 1: it probably almost feels like magic, like a psychic thing. Like,
12:39
Speaker 1: how would you know this?
12:41
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I'm sure this would never happen today
12:43
Speaker 2: and that they would need far more evidence besides Mary
12:46
Speaker 2: Jane's testimony, even if they discovered that Zona's neck was broken.
12:49
Speaker 2: But this has always been cited as one of the
12:51
Speaker 2: very few cases on the record where the so-called ghostly
12:55
Speaker 2: intervention from the victim led to a murder conviction.
12:58
Speaker 1: I feel like this could take place in another country. Like,
13:02
Speaker 1: I just think back to the Amanda Knox trial and
13:05
Speaker 1: like the prosecutor there, like how he went to many
13:09
Speaker 1: psychics and brought up.
13:10
Speaker 2: Oh, yeah.
13:11
Speaker 1: It was very supernaturally laced, that whole trial, which was wild.
13:16
Speaker 1: So I feel like in other countries it could take place,
13:19
Speaker 1: but definitely not in Canada or the United States.
13:22
Speaker 2: No, definitely not. So when Alan Showery went on trial,
13:26
Speaker 2: the prosecution didn't decide to ignore the supernatural elements. They
13:30
Speaker 2: wanted to embrace it and introduce it as much as possible,
13:33
Speaker 2: fearing that if we get the jury to think that
13:35
Speaker 2: this whole case is just ridiculous, then they're going to
13:37
Speaker 2: find Alan not guilty. So in an ironic turn of events,
13:41
Speaker 2: Remy and Jose Juul would be called upon to testify
13:44
Speaker 2: as witnesses for the defense, as they hoped that the
13:47
Speaker 2: Chua's testimony would shatter the credibility of the prosecution's case.
13:51
Speaker 2: It turned out that Remy and Alan Showery did not
13:54
Speaker 2: have a great relationship at the hospital, and that he
13:56
Speaker 2: had complained about the quality of her work. And, in fact,
13:59
Speaker 2: Remy admitted that one day before her first so-called possession occurred,
14:03
Speaker 2: she had received a prank phone call from someone whom
14:06
Speaker 2: she was convinced was Showery. And if that wasn't enough,
14:09
Speaker 2: on the very same day of this alleged possession, Remy
14:12
Speaker 2: had learned that her job at the hospital was being abolished.
14:15
Speaker 2: So the defense presented a theory that Remy was faking
14:18
Speaker 2: these possessions because she was bitter about losing her job
14:22
Speaker 2: and wanted to orchestrate some sort of bizarre revenge scheme
14:25
Speaker 2: against Showery by claiming that the ghost of one of
14:27
Speaker 2: his victims had come back to accuse him of murder.
14:30
Speaker 1: This feels like a vast overreach to me. This is
14:33
Speaker 1: a pretty detailed plan for somebody that wants revenge against
14:37
Speaker 1: the hospital. She's going to pick a very specific person
14:40
Speaker 1: to target. I just don't really see how that directly
14:44
Speaker 1: affects the hospital.
14:46
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly. And they also came up with another ridiculous
14:49
Speaker 2: theory where they said that the reason that Showery had
14:52
Speaker 2: Teresita's jewelry in his possession and gave it to his
14:54
Speaker 2: girlfriend was because Remy was the one who stole it
14:57
Speaker 2: and sold it to Showery in order to frame him
15:00
Speaker 2: by claiming that you have a murder victim's jewelry in
15:02
Speaker 2: your possession, that's going to get you caught by the police.
15:05
Speaker 2: I mean, of course, that's absolutely ridiculous, but I think
15:08
Speaker 2: that this whole supernatural element was too much on some
15:11
Speaker 2: of the jury members because there was enough to create
15:13
Speaker 2: reasonable doubt So they were unable to reach a verdict,
15:16
Speaker 2: so a mistrial wound up being declared.
15:19
Speaker 1: Well, that's not surprising, because, yeah, this is a lot
15:22
Speaker 1: for people to accept. And when people are ardently skeptic,
15:27
Speaker 1: and they truly don't want to receive any of the
15:30
Speaker 1: information that could prove that there is something supernatural, that
15:34
Speaker 1: there are ghosts or aliens or fill in the.
15:37
Speaker 2: Blank, then.
15:39
Speaker 1: they will go very hard in the other direction and
15:41
Speaker 1: come up with ridiculous theories like what you just mentioned.
15:45
Speaker 1: Like such, both of those, such an overreach. There's no
15:49
Speaker 1: evidence to support that. And it doesn't even make sense logically.
15:53
Speaker 1: You basically have to abandon logic in order to wrap
15:56
Speaker 1: your head around that as being an option. So yeah,
15:59
Speaker 1: I can completely understand how there was a mistrial.
16:03
Speaker 2: Yeah, I really would have loved to have seen jury
16:05
Speaker 2: selection for this because I'd be curious to see, like,
16:08
Speaker 2: if they asked each jury member, do you believe in ghosts?
16:11
Speaker 2: Or if they even told them ahead of time that
16:13
Speaker 2: this trial was going to have all these paranormal elements
16:15
Speaker 2: because that could be a major obstacle if a jury
16:17
Speaker 2: member says, no, I don't believe in ghosts because you're
16:20
Speaker 2: going to think that, well, no matter what evidence I present,
16:23
Speaker 2: this person is going to be a skeptic. and vote
16:25
Speaker 2: not guilty. So I can understand why this would have
16:27
Speaker 2: been a challenge, and I would have loved to have
16:29
Speaker 2: been a fly on the wall in the jury room
16:31
Speaker 2: to hear the deliberations about this, because I'm sure a
16:33
Speaker 2: lot of the debates were more about the supernatural elements
16:37
Speaker 2: rather than the actual evidence.
16:39
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, and I'm sure it was pretty heated too,
16:42
Speaker 1: because a lot of these things, like a lot of
16:44
Speaker 1: beliefs that we hold, whether they're about the supernatural or
16:47
Speaker 1: religion or anything existential, We can very much integrate that
16:51
Speaker 1: as part of our identity. So when somebody calls that
16:54
Speaker 1: into question or information threatens that which we believe to
16:59
Speaker 1: be like who we are at our core, then that
17:03
Speaker 1: can be a dangerous thing. And it can cause people
17:05
Speaker 1: to be very verbose or very aggressive. And so I
17:08
Speaker 1: can only imagine what deliberations were like. It must have
17:11
Speaker 1: been really heated.
17:13
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly. Like, even though the explanations for, like, the
17:16
Speaker 2: alternate explanations for how Showery came into possession of Teresita's
17:19
Speaker 2: jewelry were pretty ridiculous, I can see people having a
17:23
Speaker 2: hard time overlooking that because of their skepticism about the paranormal.
17:27
Speaker 2: So as you can imagine, I'm sure Showery thought that
17:29
Speaker 2: if he went on trial again, his chances might be
17:31
Speaker 2: pretty good that it would be another hung jury or
17:34
Speaker 2: an odd guilty verdict. But before the second trial began,
17:37
Speaker 2: he surprised everyone by changing his mind against attorney's advice
17:40
Speaker 2: where he elected to plead guilty to second-degree murder, aggravated robbery,
17:45
Speaker 2: and arson. He wound up receiving a sentence of 14
17:48
Speaker 2: years for the murder. as well as concurrent sentences of
17:51
Speaker 2: four years each for the aggravated robbery and arson. And
17:54
Speaker 2: I don't think Showery ever publicly said why he decided
17:57
Speaker 2: to plead guilty and change his mind, but part of
17:59
Speaker 2: me hopes that maybe he was visited in his jail
18:02
Speaker 2: cell by Teresita's ghost or something, and it terrified him
18:05
Speaker 2: so much that he decided, I have to plead guilty
18:08
Speaker 2: in order to save my soul.
18:10
Speaker 1: I mean, I wouldn't be surprised, because why else would you?
18:13
Speaker 1: I think you'd be better to roll the dice and
18:16
Speaker 1: just take a chance, but it does seem like he
18:19
Speaker 1: was waffling a bit, like he confessed and then recanted,
18:24
Speaker 1: and now he's confessing again, so I feel like he's
18:28
Speaker 1: got an inner conflict where potentially there is some guilt,
18:31
Speaker 1: but also he doesn't want to be confined or incarcerated,
18:36
Speaker 1: which I don't think anybody does, so... It's a good thing,
18:39
Speaker 1: and who knows, maybe Teresita did haunt him. Maybe she
18:43
Speaker 1: did say, hey, you better confess or I will haunt
18:46
Speaker 1: you for your whole life. And he acquiesced.
18:50
Speaker 2: I always think of the climax of Ghost where the
18:52
Speaker 2: bad guys are killed and those demons from hell come
18:55
Speaker 2: up and then make those scary noises and then drag
18:58
Speaker 2: them into the bowels of hell. And I'd like to
18:59
Speaker 2: think that maybe Showery saw some demons like this and said, oop,
19:02
Speaker 2: I better plead guilty or this is where I'm going
19:04
Speaker 2: when I die.
19:05
Speaker 1: Yeah.
19:06
Speaker 2: But it's a good news, bad news situation because even
19:08
Speaker 2: though he was sent to prison, for reasons I still
19:10
Speaker 2: don't understand, he only had to serve four years of
19:13
Speaker 2: that 14-year sentence before he was paroled in July of 1983.
19:18
Speaker 2: And that's shocking to me because... This was just such
19:20
Speaker 2: a brutal, senseless crime where he murdered a woman for
19:23
Speaker 2: $ 30 in some jewelry and set her body on fire
19:27
Speaker 2: after stabbing her to death. So I have no idea
19:30
Speaker 2: why the parole board decided to let him out after
19:33
Speaker 2: serving that little time. I've never seen any explanation for that,
19:37
Speaker 2: and I know that Showery did live for a long
19:39
Speaker 2: time afterwards. I don't think he re-offended, but it's like,
19:42
Speaker 2: when you find out that he only served like four
19:44
Speaker 2: years in total, it hardly seems worth it to go
19:46
Speaker 2: through this whole thing.
19:48
Speaker 1: The motive felt so weird. and senseless, like you've said.
19:52
Speaker 1: It's just incredibly senseless. So to think of a parole
19:56
Speaker 1: board hearing the details of this case... Hearing what Showery
20:00
Speaker 1: did and then being like, okay, yeah, four years, that
20:04
Speaker 1: feels adequate. I don't know what they were contending with.
20:07
Speaker 1: Maybe they had overcrowding in the prisons. Maybe it was
20:10
Speaker 1: a funding thing. But I feel like there had to
20:13
Speaker 1: have been other people. And I mean, I don't know
20:15
Speaker 1: what his behavior was like while he was incarcerated. Maybe
20:18
Speaker 1: he was inspirational. Maybe he found God. Maybe he was
20:20
Speaker 1: teaching other prisoners. I can't know. But also... I don't
20:25
Speaker 1: care how great he was behind bars. Four years is
20:28
Speaker 1: not adequate for the type of brutal murder that he
20:31
Speaker 1: committed for $ 30 and some jewelry and then staging it
20:35
Speaker 1: to look like it was a sexual assault and then
20:38
Speaker 1: burning her body. It's egregious. It's so inhuman. It's subhuman,
20:45
Speaker 1: that type of behavior. And to be like, yeah, four
20:47
Speaker 1: years is adequate. Like 14 years doesn't feel like enough,
20:50
Speaker 1: but four?
20:52
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's pretty ridiculous, and it's one of the big
20:54
Speaker 2: unsolved mysteries of this case, because there's a lot of
20:56
Speaker 2: decisions that were made that just do not make any sense.
21:00
Speaker 2: And I do know, though, that over the years, the
21:03
Speaker 2: media would publish a whole bunch of anniversary articles about
21:05
Speaker 2: the crime, and they would try to reach Alan Showery.
21:07
Speaker 2: They'd figure out that he was still living somewhere and
21:09
Speaker 2: working a job, but of course he would decline to
21:12
Speaker 2: comment on it. But after he went to prison, a
21:15
Speaker 2: book was published about this case by author Carol Mercado
21:19
Speaker 2: titled A Voice from the Grave, And like I mentioned earlier,
21:22
Speaker 2: it would be featured on Unsolved Mysteries in April of 1990,
21:25
Speaker 2: just a few months before the release of the hit
21:27
Speaker 2: blockbuster movie Ghost. And one thing I find interesting about
21:31
Speaker 2: the Unsolved Mysteries segment is that they did not use
21:33
Speaker 2: Remy and Jose Chua's real name. They instead referred to
21:37
Speaker 2: them by the pseudonyms Enrico and Alicia Borda, and the
21:40
Speaker 2: Chua's were not interviewed. And for those who say that
21:43
Speaker 2: they fabricated this story for, like, fame and fortune because
21:46
Speaker 2: they wanted attention... This seems to go against it, because
21:49
Speaker 2: it seems like after the trial was over, they just
21:51
Speaker 2: wanted their privacy back and go on living their lives.
21:54
Speaker 2: So the fact that they weren't going around doing interviews
21:57
Speaker 2: and appearing on TV shows to, like, flaunt the publicity
22:00
Speaker 2: shows me that they felt like they were being completely
22:03
Speaker 2: sincere about this story and were not doing it just
22:05
Speaker 2: to get money.
22:07
Speaker 1: It didn't feel like this was for monetary gain, because
22:10
Speaker 1: how would they even know that they would get any
22:13
Speaker 1: kind of monetary gain? It just baffles me that people
22:17
Speaker 1: would think that that was their objective. And I guess
22:21
Speaker 1: it's sort of like the Ed and Lorraine Warren of
22:23
Speaker 1: it all, right? Where people think that there's certain cases
22:27
Speaker 1: that they would take on and that they would, you know,
22:30
Speaker 1: fabricate certain details or put some zhuzh on it because
22:33
Speaker 1: they wanted to sell books and eventually movies that became
22:38
Speaker 1: hugely successful. So of course, there is a market for that.
22:42
Speaker 1: But I have a hard time believing that Remy and
22:45
Speaker 1: Jose's objective was to make money. I feel like it's
22:49
Speaker 1: an embarrassing thing going to law enforcement. If they had
22:52
Speaker 1: information like this, they could have just gone to the
22:55
Speaker 1: press with it if that was what they were trying
22:58
Speaker 1: to achieve. But it doesn't feel like that, in my opinion.
23:02
Speaker 2: No, definitely not. It sounds like this whole thing escalated
23:05
Speaker 2: into like a bigger story than they ever would have dreamed.
23:08
Speaker 2: and that when the trial was done, they were glad
23:09
Speaker 2: it was over and just wanted to go on living
23:11
Speaker 2: their lives. But Cosgrove Mirror Productions, the same folks who
23:16
Speaker 2: were behind Unsolved Mysteries, it sounds like they wanted to
23:19
Speaker 2: milk this story for all it was worth, because in
23:21
Speaker 2: the 1990s, they decided to make a couple of made-for-TV
23:24
Speaker 2: movies that were inspired by some of the cases they
23:27
Speaker 2: featured on Unsolved Mysteries. And in 1996, they did that
23:30
Speaker 2: with this story, where they released a made-for-TV movie called
23:33
Speaker 2: Voice from the Grave, But what's funny is that they
23:36
Speaker 2: changed the names of all the characters. The only character
23:38
Speaker 2: who went by the real name was Detective Joe Stahula.
23:42
Speaker 2: And they also did not make Teresita and the Chua's
23:44
Speaker 2: Filipino anymore. They changed them into white people. So in
23:48
Speaker 2: the movie, Teresita is a white woman named Terry Devereaux,
23:51
Speaker 2: and the Chua's are a white couple named Bill and
23:53
Speaker 2: Renee Perkins.
23:55
Speaker 1: Of course, they literally whitewashed it. They took away the
23:59
Speaker 1: shared cultural component, which could have been one of the
24:02
Speaker 1: underlying reasons why Teresita chose Remy to be the vessel
24:06
Speaker 1: for this information. So that's disappointing, but not surprising.
24:11
Speaker 2: No, not at all. And of course, they're all like
24:13
Speaker 2: really attractive looking people in their 30s and stuff, very
24:16
Speaker 2: photogenic people to be in a made for TV movie.
24:19
Speaker 2: But I have watched this. It is available on YouTube.
24:22
Speaker 2: But what's kind of funny is that at the ending,
24:24
Speaker 2: they do show a scene where the character based on
24:27
Speaker 2: Alan Showery is inside his jail cell and starts hearing
24:30
Speaker 2: weird noises and seeing a ghost and becomes terrified. And
24:33
Speaker 2: then they have a big dramatic scene in the courtroom
24:35
Speaker 2: right afterwards where, like, Showery suddenly says in the middle
24:39
Speaker 2: of the trial, I want to change my plea to
24:42
Speaker 2: not guilty. And then the courtroom starts cheering, which is
24:44
Speaker 2: not what happened in real life. It was done more
24:46
Speaker 2: behind the scenes. But I do hope that there is
24:49
Speaker 2: some truth to that, that Alan Showery just became so
24:52
Speaker 2: terrified about the situation that that was the reason he
24:54
Speaker 2: decided to change his plea.
24:56
Speaker 1: Yeah, we can only hope that he was haunted by
24:59
Speaker 1: Teresita and that was the impetus for him choosing to confess.
25:04
Speaker 1: But I'm not surprised they made a TV movie out
25:06
Speaker 1: of this. And I do want to like harken back
25:09
Speaker 1: to what you said at the beginning about Ghost and
25:12
Speaker 1: if they were inspired by any of the events that
25:15
Speaker 1: happened here, because... it seems like there is a real
25:19
Speaker 1: potential that there could have been some type of inspiration.
25:23
Speaker 1: But instead, what.
25:25
Speaker 1: You know, Teresita and Remy and Jose got was a
25:28
Speaker 1: made for TV movie where they were turned into white people.
25:31
Speaker 1: So that is disappointing. And I mean, even if Ghost
25:34
Speaker 1: was inspired by them as well, obviously, you take out
25:38
Speaker 1: the cultural component there. But I think it's just loosely inspired.
25:42
Speaker 1: Whereas here, you've got somebody who's not Teresita, but they're what, Tara?
25:48
Speaker 1: Did you say her Terry?
25:49
Speaker 2: Terry. Terry. Yeah. Terry. Yeah. So you'd make it.
25:52
Speaker 1: Just a very white lady name, but it's still adjacent
25:55
Speaker 1: to her initial name. So yeah, it's a lot, but
26:00
Speaker 1: I'm not surprised, especially given the time period. If something
26:03
Speaker 1: like this were to happen today, I think they would
26:05
Speaker 1: be much more likely to honor the fact that they
26:09
Speaker 1: were from the Philippines and the cultural component that is
26:13
Speaker 1: obviously neglected there. But It's easy when we look back
26:17
Speaker 1: to Monday Morning Quarterback, but I do think it's important
26:20
Speaker 1: to acknowledge the fact that they whitewashed that.
26:24
Speaker 2: Oh, one thing I also want to mention is Teresita
26:26
Speaker 2: Boss's character was played by Kim Dickens, who went on
26:29
Speaker 2: to have a successful career. She actually played the detective
26:32
Speaker 2: in Gone Girl many years later.
26:33
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, I haven't seen Gone Girl in so long,
26:37
Speaker 1: but that's such a good movie.
26:38
Speaker 3: It was a good book, too.
26:40
Speaker 2: It was, yeah. And Kim Dickens has appeared in a
26:42
Speaker 2: lot of stuff, Fear the Walking Dead, and I know
26:44
Speaker 2: that she was also in Deadwood and Sons of Anarchy.
26:47
Speaker 2: So kind of funny that she started out playing a
26:49
Speaker 2: Filipino character in this made-for-TV movie about ghosts.
26:54
Speaker 1: Always interesting when you see how certain celebrities get their start. Like,
26:59
Speaker 1: didn't you just say the other day that, like, Simu Lee, like,
27:02
Speaker 1: started off doing, like, um, still photography for, or stock
27:06
Speaker 1: photography for, Simu, the guy, the Marvel guy.
27:11
Speaker 2: Did we talk about this? I don't even know who
27:12
Speaker 2: that is. Maybe we didn't.
27:13
Speaker 1: Maybe I talked about this with somebody else.
27:15
Speaker 2: Oh, okay. Yeah. I don't know who that is.
27:17
Speaker 1: But yeah, he started off while he's in the Marvel movies.
27:20
Speaker 1: Let me just look up his name and make sure
27:21
Speaker 1: that I've got it right. But he started off doing
27:25
Speaker 1: like stock photography. Hold on. Simu Liu. So he's Canadian.
27:32
Speaker 1: And yeah, he was on, he's been in a bunch
27:36
Speaker 1: of Marvel movies. And he was on that TV show,
27:39
Speaker 1: The Copenhagen Test. And he was on Kim's Convenience. He
27:43
Speaker 1: was in the Barbie movie.
27:44
Speaker 2: Oh, okay.
27:45
Speaker 1: Like Avengers Doomsday. Lots of movies. Super, super successful. And yeah,
27:50
Speaker 1: he started off doing like stock photography images.
27:53
Speaker 2: Oh, yeah, that's cool. I think John Boyega from the
27:56
Speaker 2: Star Wars trilogy started off in stock photos as well.
27:58
Speaker 2: You can find some of them on the internet.
28:01
Speaker 1: I have no idea who that is, but I'm not
28:03
Speaker 1: really a big Star Wars head, so I wouldn't know.
28:06
Speaker 2: Okay. But the ultimate example, of course, is Matthew McConaughey
28:09
Speaker 2: starting out by being a murder victim on an Unsolved
28:11
Speaker 2: Mysteries reenactment. That's the granddaddy of them all.
28:14
Speaker 1: That is the granddaddy. I will acknowledge that.
28:17
Speaker 2: Yeah. So since you just mentioned the cultural thing, I
28:21
Speaker 2: do know that the Filipino term for ghost is multo.
28:24
Speaker 2: And the way it's defined is considering the soul of
28:26
Speaker 2: a dead person who has returned to the moral world
28:29
Speaker 2: to finish an incomplete task or take revenge, and I
28:32
Speaker 2: think that would apply to Teresita's, where Remy probably thought
28:36
Speaker 2: that her spirit was a malto, where she felt that
28:38
Speaker 2: there was unfinished business, and so that's why she had
28:41
Speaker 2: to return to Earth to make sure that it got
28:43
Speaker 2: resolved before she could move on, and that's the way
28:45
Speaker 2: it is in the movie Ghost, where Patrick Swayze's character
28:48
Speaker 2: can't go to heaven unless his murder gets solved and
28:51
Speaker 2: he is able to ensure that his girlfriend is safe.
28:53
Speaker 2: So that might have inspired Remy, if this was fake,
28:56
Speaker 2: to concoct a story about Teresa's Molto communicating through her
29:00
Speaker 2: in order to seek justice for her murder. But if
29:02
Speaker 2: she didn't concoct it, maybe this is what actually happened,
29:05
Speaker 2: where Teresita came back from the grave because she wanted
29:08
Speaker 2: to resolve this business. Because I keep asking myself, If
29:11
Speaker 2: it is possible for like a ghost to come back
29:14
Speaker 2: from the grave to solve their own murder, why doesn't
29:17
Speaker 2: this happen more often? Like, why is this one of
29:19
Speaker 2: the only documented cases from the modern era? But maybe
29:22
Speaker 2: like you said, it's a cultural thing because she was
29:24
Speaker 2: from the Philippines. Maybe that's why Teresita's spirit did that.
29:29
Speaker 1: Yeah, you can look at this through multiple lenses. You
29:32
Speaker 1: could look at it through a lens of skepticism where
29:36
Speaker 1: Teresita used it, not Teresita, where Remy used Yeah.
29:58
Speaker 2: Yeah, that would make sense to me, and it's like,
29:59
Speaker 2: I know I've seen skeptics come up with logical explanations.
30:03
Speaker 2: One thing that they bring up is the fact that
30:04
Speaker 2: Remy was let go by the hospital, like, the day
30:07
Speaker 2: before she had her first so-called possession, and even though
30:11
Speaker 2: I don't believe that she did it as a revenge
30:13
Speaker 2: scheme against, like, Alan Showery, it does make me wonder
30:16
Speaker 2: if that's too much of a coincidence, and maybe it's
30:18
Speaker 2: a thing where... I have my own personal suspicions about him,
30:21
Speaker 2: but I don't have any evidence, so, like, that's why
30:24
Speaker 2: I'm going to, like, concoct this whole, like, elaborate hoax
30:27
Speaker 2: about being possessed with Teresita's spirit before I go to
30:30
Speaker 2: the police. But the big hole in that theory, of course,
30:33
Speaker 2: is that she knew about the jewelry and the relatives
30:36
Speaker 2: of Teresita who would be able to identify the jewelry,
30:38
Speaker 2: and I don't think someone would have been capable of
30:40
Speaker 2: brainstorming a hoax based around that back in 1977.
30:44
Speaker 1: Ah, that's like, in my opinion, that's wild work to
30:48
Speaker 1: say that that is the hoax that she would come
30:51
Speaker 1: up with. I don't believe that for a second. If
30:53
Speaker 1: you wanted to truly hurt the hospital, you would say
30:56
Speaker 1: that something happened to you while you were on shift
30:58
Speaker 1: at that hospital, which would make the hospital somehow negligent.
31:03
Speaker 1: That could cost them money or it could cause the
31:06
Speaker 1: public to look at them very differently. But what Remy
31:10
Speaker 1: is doing here is, I have a hard time believing
31:13
Speaker 1: that she thought that that would actually affect the hospital.
31:15
Speaker 1: There's a way more direct route to go. And that's
31:18
Speaker 1: not what Remy did. And one thing I will say
31:21
Speaker 1: is that she was let go from her job. And
31:24
Speaker 1: that puts her in a very vulnerable emotional place. And
31:27
Speaker 1: sometimes when we're very vulnerable emotionally, we're more receptive to energies,
31:32
Speaker 1: good or bad.
31:34
Speaker 2: Yes. And also the fact that her husband went along
31:37
Speaker 2: with it, because I don't think she's putting on an
31:39
Speaker 2: elaborate charade in front of her husband in order to
31:41
Speaker 2: fool it, so you would have to assume that her
31:43
Speaker 2: husband would have to go along with this, even though
31:45
Speaker 2: he's still got a job, like he's a doctor, a
31:48
Speaker 2: very well-respected doctor who could do considerable damage to his
31:51
Speaker 2: reputation if he comes forward to law enforcement, so, uh,
31:54
Speaker 2: If she was faking the whole thing, she was somehow
31:57
Speaker 2: so convincing that she was able to speak in a
31:59
Speaker 2: completely different accent with a language that she barely knew
32:03
Speaker 2: in order to fool her own spouse.
32:05
Speaker 1: You really have to abandon all logic to think that
32:09
Speaker 1: somehow Remy was concocting this as some revenge scheme and
32:13
Speaker 1: that she just happened upon the details about the relatives
32:16
Speaker 1: and the jewelry and somehow was able to convince Jose
32:19
Speaker 1: to to at what could be great peril to his
32:21
Speaker 1: career to go forward to law enforcement and to say
32:24
Speaker 1: that like, this is what is actually happening. It's too
32:28
Speaker 1: much for me to accept what is supposed to be
32:31
Speaker 1: like the quote unquote rational explanation. It feels incredibly irrational
32:35
Speaker 1: to me.
32:37
Speaker 2: So I guess the final question I have about this
32:39
Speaker 2: case is, do you think that something like this could
32:41
Speaker 2: happen today where if someone came forward to the police
32:44
Speaker 2: with like a ghost story and and they actually got
32:46
Speaker 2: the perpetrator to confess, and they charged him with murder.
32:48
Speaker 2: Do you think they'd even be able to bring this
32:50
Speaker 2: to trial? Because it would just be an absolute circus.
32:53
Speaker 2: It was pretty much a circus in Chicago back in
32:56
Speaker 2: the 1970s, but today with the internet and social media,
32:59
Speaker 2: it would just be so hard to get an impartial
33:01
Speaker 2: jury in order to bring this to trial and secure
33:04
Speaker 2: a conviction, and there'd be so many jokes about it
33:06
Speaker 2: and memes, it would be just so hard to take
33:08
Speaker 2: it seriously. So it makes me wonder, like, even if
33:11
Speaker 2: like this thing is legitimate, could something like this happen
33:14
Speaker 2: in today's like true crime obsessed world?
33:17
Speaker 1: I think it's possible. I don't think it's very likely.
33:21
Speaker 1: But I think if you got the right investigator, the
33:25
Speaker 1: right person coming forward with the information and the right location,
33:29
Speaker 1: like if it was somewhere like New Orleans. where they're
33:31
Speaker 1: very spiritual, they're very into like ghosts and things like that.
33:35
Speaker 1: And so I think you'd be more likely to get
33:37
Speaker 1: an investigator who could be accepting of that, and a
33:40
Speaker 1: jury who could be accepting of that. Whereas you go
33:43
Speaker 1: to a state like New York, I just don't see
33:47
Speaker 1: you being able to bring something like that to trial.
33:50
Speaker 1: There would be way too many skeptical, logical people who
33:53
Speaker 1: might have a hard time accepting that. So I think
33:57
Speaker 1: location matters. I think the individual coming forward matters and
34:01
Speaker 1: how credible are they? And also the investigator who's receiving
34:04
Speaker 1: the information, how open are they to this being a possibility?
34:09
Speaker 1: And also what is their standing at their work? Will
34:12
Speaker 1: they be laughed out of the police station if they
34:16
Speaker 1: bring this to their superiors or do they have superiors
34:19
Speaker 1: that are accepting of something like this? So there are
34:23
Speaker 1: a lot of variables that come into play Would we
34:26
Speaker 1: be able to go forward with a case like this?
34:28
Speaker 1: And that's just before we even get to the trial.
34:31
Speaker 1: But once you get to the trial, you can't avoid
34:33
Speaker 1: all the things that you said, where it would become
34:36
Speaker 1: like this true crime trope. We would have all these
34:39
Speaker 1: jokes and memes, and it would just take off because
34:43
Speaker 1: of that. So I think that the way the public
34:45
Speaker 1: consumed it would be very different. I mean, it depends
34:48
Speaker 1: on the details. and how brutal the murder was, but
34:52
Speaker 1: you will always have that side of the internet that
34:54
Speaker 1: will make a joke of it regardless.
34:56
Speaker 2: Yeah, definitely. So I'd like to be tested. I would
35:00
Speaker 2: like to see this for real, see if something like
35:02
Speaker 2: this could happen. And I always like to joke that
35:05
Speaker 2: if there go some more murder victims coming back from
35:07
Speaker 2: the grave and naming their killers, then our jobs as
35:10
Speaker 2: podcasters would end, because that seems like such a simple
35:12
Speaker 2: way to solve crimes. But unfortunately, the real world doesn't
35:15
Speaker 2: work like this, and I do think that if Alan
35:17
Speaker 2: Showery hadn't confessed, it would have been really difficult to
35:21
Speaker 2: build a case against him and file charges against him
35:23
Speaker 2: and bring him to trial, so this is an anomaly,
35:26
Speaker 2: but I would be fascinated to see if something like
35:28
Speaker 2: this could ever happen again. So that about brings an
35:31
Speaker 2: end to our series about the murder of Teresita Bossa,
35:34
Speaker 2: an unusual case to talk about right before Halloween, where
35:37
Speaker 2: we know who did the murder, we know what happened,
35:39
Speaker 2: but the big question is, how did this one wind
35:42
Speaker 2: up being solved? Did a victim's ghost actually intervene and
35:45
Speaker 2: lead to the apprehension of their killer? So any final
35:48
Speaker 2: thoughts on the murder of Teresita Bossa? Yes.
35:51
Speaker 1: So for one, Alan Showery did not get a long
35:55
Speaker 1: enough sentence. He did not stay in jail long enough.
35:57
Speaker 1: This is a man who admitted to murdering a woman.
36:01
Speaker 1: for $ 30 and some jewelry. He set her body on fire,
36:05
Speaker 1: and he confessed to it twice. Once he recanted, then
36:07
Speaker 1: again he confessed. But either way, he said that he
36:11
Speaker 1: was guilty of what he was being accused of, regardless
36:14
Speaker 1: of how the information got to investigators. And so I'm
36:18
Speaker 1: very thankful that at least Teresita got her message across,
36:22
Speaker 1: and that she was able to get that justice, however
36:26
Speaker 1: that looked, even if it isn't ideal in the way
36:28
Speaker 1: that we're looking at the time frame. that Alan Showery
36:32
Speaker 1: was in jail or that he was incarcerated. I'm hoping
36:37
Speaker 1: that Teresita was able to find some peace. And I'm
36:39
Speaker 1: also hoping that Remy and Jose got some peace after
36:43
Speaker 1: this as well, because I can only imagine that the
36:46
Speaker 1: scrutiny from the public would have been all consuming and
36:51
Speaker 1: everything associated with it. And I also hope that Teresita's
36:54
Speaker 1: family found peace in what happened and that Alan Showery confessed.
36:58
Speaker 1: So I truly hope that Everybody attached to the story,
37:02
Speaker 1: except for Alan Showery, were able to find some kind
37:07
Speaker 1: of resolution and were able to move forward.
37:11
Speaker 2: Well, I know that you are 100% believer on this one,
37:14
Speaker 2: that Teresita Abasa did come back from the grave to
37:16
Speaker 2: solve her murder, and I'm usually a skeptic. I try
37:19
Speaker 2: to look for logical explanations to explain all paranormal activity,
37:24
Speaker 2: but I have a really hard time doing it with
37:25
Speaker 2: this one, and that's why I find this case so fascinating, because,
37:28
Speaker 2: like we've said many times before, I don't think Remy
37:31
Speaker 2: Chua would have been able to feed this information to
37:33
Speaker 2: the police if she was orchestrating an elaborate hoax. So
37:36
Speaker 2: this will remain a very interesting anomaly. I don't know
37:39
Speaker 2: if we'll ever have another case like it, but even
37:41
Speaker 2: though it was technically solved, it certainly gave us a
37:44
Speaker 2: lot of material to talk about. So before we conclude,
37:48
Speaker 2: I just wanted to mention that our next series of
37:50
Speaker 2: episodes were going to do something a little different from
37:52
Speaker 2: the norm. You might recall that a couple weeks ago,
37:55
Speaker 2: we did a series about the unsolved disappearances of Shannon
37:59
Speaker 2: Green and Dwayne Bell, which took place within five days
38:02
Speaker 2: of each other in 1986. And you might also recall
38:05
Speaker 2: that over a year ago, Jules did a statement analysis
38:08
Speaker 2: about another case that we covered, the Martha Jean Lambert case.
38:12
Speaker 2: And we're going to do this again because we were
38:14
Speaker 2: able to find a transcript of the statement between John
38:17
Speaker 2: Rainier and Dwayne Bell before he disappeared. And Jules has
38:22
Speaker 2: written out a full analysis, is going to give her opinion.
38:25
Speaker 2: about whether Dwayne Bell's so-called confession to Shannon Green's murder
38:29
Speaker 2: and the murder of some other individuals is legitimate. So
38:32
Speaker 2: that's what we'll be talking about on our next series
38:34
Speaker 2: of episodes, and we're looking forward to it. So until then,
38:37
Speaker 2: everyone have yourselves a great week, and we will be
38:39
Speaker 2: back again next week to do this statement analysis.
38:43
Speaker 3: Robin, do you want to tell us a little bit
38:44
Speaker 3: about the Trail Went Cold Patreon?
38:47
Speaker 2: Yes, the Trail Went Cold Patreon has been around for
38:49
Speaker 2: three years now, and we offer the standard... bonus features
38:53
Speaker 2: like early ad-free episodes, and I also send out stickers
38:56
Speaker 2: and sign thank you cards to anyone who signs up
38:59
Speaker 2: with us on Patreon. If you join our $ 5 tier,
39:02
Speaker 2: Tier 2, we also offer monthly bonus episodes in which
39:06
Speaker 2: I talk about cases which are not featured on the
39:09
Speaker 2: Trail Went Cold's original feed, so they're exclusive to Patreon.
39:13
Speaker 2: And if you join our highest tier, Tier 3, the
39:15
Speaker 2: $ 10 tier, one of the features we offer is an
39:19
Speaker 2: audio commentary track over classic episodes of Unsolved Mysteries, where
39:23
Speaker 2: you can download an audio file and then boot up
39:26
Speaker 2: the original Unsolved Mysteries episode on Amazon Prime or YouTube.
39:30
Speaker 2: and play it with my audio commentary playing in the background,
39:33
Speaker 2: where I just provide trivia and factoids about the cases
39:36
Speaker 2: featured in this episode. And incidentally, the very first episode
39:40
Speaker 2: that I did a commentary track over was the episode
39:43
Speaker 2: featuring this case. So If you want to download a
39:45
Speaker 2: commentary track in which I make more smart-ass remarks about
39:48
Speaker 2: Jewel Kaler, then be sure to join Tier 3.
39:52
Speaker 3: So I want to let you know a little bit
39:53
Speaker 3: about the Jewels and Ashley Patreon. So there's early ad-free
39:56
Speaker 3: episodes of The Path Went Chili. We've got our Path
39:59
Speaker 3: Went Chili minis, which are always over an hour. So
40:02
Speaker 3: they're not very mini, but they're just too short to
40:04
Speaker 3: turn into a series. And we're really enjoying doing those.
40:07
Speaker 3: So we hope you'll check out those Patreons. We'll link
40:10
Speaker 3: them in the show notes.
40:11
Speaker 2: So I want to thank you all for listening. And
40:13
Speaker 2: any chance you have to share us on social media
40:16
Speaker 2: with a friend or to rate and review is greatly appreciated.
40:19
Speaker 2: You can email us at thepathwentchili at gmail.com. You can
40:22
Speaker 2: reach us on Twitter at thepathwentchili. So until next time,
40:26
Speaker 2: be sure to bundle up because cold trails and chilly
40:28
Speaker 2: paths call for warm clothing.
40:30
Speaker 3: Music by Paul Rich from the podcast Cold Callers Comedy.