Latest / Murder Files Unsealed / Arthur Shawcross' Chilling Motive For Murdering June Stott

Transcript

Arthur Shawcross' Chilling Motive For Murdering June Stott · Murder Files Unsealed

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: You know, usually when we talk about a medical diagnosis,
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: there's this underlying expectation of precision.
• 0:07
  Speaker 2: Right, like a clear-cut answer.
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: Exactly. You break your arm, the x-ray shows that jagged
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: white line on the monitor, and the doctor points right
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: to the fracture.
• 0:16
  Speaker 2: The treatment plan is immediate.
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah, broken or not broken. It's a clean, visible reality.
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: And it's comforting, you know, because we crave categorized, visible parameters.
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: We really do.
• 0:29
  Speaker 2: Especially when we are dealing with a direct threat to
• 0:32
  Speaker 2: our well-being. We want the problem isolated so we can
• 0:35
  Speaker 2: just address it.
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: But then you step into the world of the criminal
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: justice system.
• 0:39
  Speaker 2: Oh, yeah. That is a whole different environment.
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: It really is. And specifically, if we look into the
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: historical landscape of how this country has handled violent repeat offenders,
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: suddenly that x-ray machine is just totally malfunctioning.
• 0:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah. We are looking at a diagnostic landscape that is
• 0:55
  Speaker 2: intentionally murky.
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: Right. Sometimes... The legal system doesn't just fail to see
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: the broken bone. It actively hides the X-ray in a
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: filing cabinet.
• 1:05
  Speaker 2: Locks the drawer.
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: Exactly. Locks the drawer and tells the community that everyone
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: is perfectly healthy.
• 1:11
  Speaker 2: Which is terrifying. It is.
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: And that is the exact diagnostic failure we are unpacking today.
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: If you've been drawn to the resurrected cultural interest in
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: cases like Jeffrey Dahmer, you're not just looking for the
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: shock value.
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: No. Listeners are usually looking for the why. Right.
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: You want to understand how the systems built to protect
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: us can actively participate in their own spectacular failure.
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: We study the darkest anomalies to figure out where the
• 1:37
  Speaker 2: structural guardrails broke down, because those systemic failures, they are
• 1:42
  Speaker 2: rarely accidental.
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: They're choices, right?
• 1:44
  Speaker 2: Yes. They are usually the result of a series of
• 1:47
  Speaker 2: deliberate bureaucratic choices.
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: And those choices are the foundation of our source material today.
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: We are pulling from a deeply unsettling, heavily researched article
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: from Grunge, written by Luke Holden.
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: A really comprehensive piece.
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's titled Arthur Shaw Cross's Chilling Motive for Murdering
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: June Stott.
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: Which is a heavy topic.
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: It's very heavy. Our mission for this deep dive is
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: to explore the terrifying case of a serial killer who
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: slaughtered 14 innocent people.
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: 14. It's just staggering.
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: It really is. But the violence is only half the
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: narrative here. We are going to examine... The profound incompetence
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: of the legal infrastructure that essentially enabled his later reign
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: of terror.
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: The enablers are just as important to look at.
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: Absolutely. And then we are going to unpack the chilling
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: anomaly of one specific victim, June Stott.
• 2:39
  Speaker 2: Her case is so unique in this timeline. It is.
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: Her murder completely defied the killer's own established horrific patterns.
• 2:47
  Speaker 2: And an anomaly like that is incredibly rare in the
• 2:50
  Speaker 2: literature of serial offenses. I mean, these individuals rely on
• 2:53
  Speaker 2: routine to minimize risk. Right.
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: They need that routine.
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: They do.
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 2:57
  Speaker 2: So when that routine shatters, it provides a very specific
• 3:00
  Speaker 2: window into their underlying psychology.
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: Holden's article makes a really astute observation right out of
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: the gate regarding that cultural interest we mentioned earlier.
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: Oh, about the Dahmer series.
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Following the massive 2022 Netflix series on Jeffrey Dahmer,
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: The public conversation really shifted.
• 3:17
  Speaker 2: It did. It wasn't just about the gory, sensationalized details
• 3:21
  Speaker 2: of the crimes anymore.
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: No. People started looking at the historical context. They started
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: asking how the police let it happen.
• 3:27
  Speaker 2: How did the legal system fail so many marginalized victims
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: when the evidence was practically screaming at them?
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: Exactly. And the source points out that Arthur Shawcross's story
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: is a textbook example of that exact same kind of
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: systemic incompetence.
• 3:42
  Speaker 2: The framing is just vital here. This isn't just a
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: biographical recounting of a killer. Right. It is a cautionary
• 3:48
  Speaker 2: tale about what happens when the mechanisms designed to shield society,
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: the courts, the parole boards, the administration of criminal records.
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: When they fail.
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: When they actually become a shield for the predator instead.
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: Okay, let's unpack this. Before we can even begin to
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: understand the bizarre anomalous murder of June Stott in 1989...
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: We have to rewind the clock.
• 4:08
  Speaker 2: We have to go back to the beginning.
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: We do. We have to look at how Arthur Shawcross
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: first entered the justice system in 1972 because the blueprint
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: for the disaster was drafted right there.
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: The genesis of the systemic failure.
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: To understand 1972, you have to understand the sheer physical
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: reality of Arthur Shawcross.
• 4:26
  Speaker 2: He was massive.
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: Yeah, the article is very explicit about his physiology. He
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: became known later as the Genesee River Strangler, but long
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: before he had a moniker, He was a man who
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: stood six feet tall and weighed over 300 pounds.
• 4:40
  Speaker 2: Which is a terrifying physical presence.
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: Think about what that kind of physical mass means in
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: a hostile encounter. Instead of comparing him to a tiger
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: in the wild, think of his physicality as a brute
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: force stress test applied to a physical environment.
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: That's a good way to put it.
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: He wasn't outsmarting his environment. He was simply applying an
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: overwhelming localized pressure to the weakest point in the societal
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: structure until it snapped.
• 5:04
  Speaker 2: Right. He was massive, meaning his victims were at a
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: severe disadvantage.
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: Easily subdued with, as the text notes, little effort at all.
• 5:11
  Speaker 2: That physical disparity guarantees absolute control from the very first
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: second of the encounter.
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: It does.
• 5:17
  Speaker 2: You know, it points to a core cowardice that defines
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: his methodology. He wasn't seeking a challenge. He was seeking
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: a guarantee.
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: And nothing illustrates that horrifying guarantee more clearly than his
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: first victims.
• 5:30
  Speaker 2: The 1972 cases.
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Let's look at April 7th, 1972. According to the source,
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: Shawcross takes a neighborhood boy named Jack Blake, who was
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: just 10 years old, out fishing.
• 5:43
  Speaker 2: Just a normal everyday thing. Right.
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: This is a mundane, inherently trusting neighborhood activity. But Shawcross
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: returns home alone.
• 5:50
  Speaker 2: Which is just awful.
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: Nobody knows what happens to this 10-year-old boy until five
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: months later. That is a five-month purgatory for the family
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: and the community.
• 5:59
  Speaker 2: Five months of just not knowing. Yeah.
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: When Jack is finally found, his corpse is near the
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: spot he went missing. He had been strangled, bloodied, and
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: sexually violated.
• 6:09
  Speaker 2: It establishes his baseline pathology immediately.
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: It really does.
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: Predatory violence against a trusting, vastly weaker target within his
• 6:16
  Speaker 2: own geographical comfort zone.
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: And he didn't stop there. Just a few months later,
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: still in 1972, another child is found.
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: Karen Ann Hill.
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: Yes. Karen Ann Hill, who was only eight years old.
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: Her body is discovered beneath a bridge. She was also
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: strangled and sexually assaulted.
• 6:33
  Speaker 2: But there was a specific detail there, right?
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: Yeah, the specific detail that Holden emphasizes in the text
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: is just awful. Authorities discovered a mass of leaves and
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: dirt that her assailant had literally shoved down her throat. Wow.
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: When analyzing a crime scene, we really have to differentiate
• 6:49
  Speaker 2: between an anti-forensic countermeasure and primitive psychological desecration.
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: What do you mean by that?
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: Well... Shoving leaves and dirt into an airway isn't about
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: hiding evidence. It's not about obscuring the time of death.
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: It's something else entirely.
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It often signifies a profound rage. Or a frantic,
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: chaotic attempt to silence the victim in the most forceful,
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: degrading way imaginable.
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: It's an act of violation.
• 7:15
  Speaker 2: It moves the act beyond the mechanical process of murder
• 7:18
  Speaker 2: and into a realm of deep psychological violation.
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: This second murder, the murder of 8-year-old Karen Ann Hill,
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: was the mistake that ultimately led investigators right to his
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: front door.
• 7:27
  Speaker 2: He got caught.
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: He's arrested. He's brought in for questioning. And this is
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: where the diagnostic x-ray of our justice system starts to
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: flicker and fail.
• 7:36
  Speaker 2: There we go.
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: According to the text... When they bring him in, Shawcross
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: delivers an elaborate confession with shockingly little hindrance at all.
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: He just gave it up.
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: He just lays it all out.
• 7:47
  Speaker 2: No prolonged interrogation tactics, no invoking his right to counsel,
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: no sitting in a holding cell playing games for 48 hours.
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: Just an immediate, elaborate confession.
• 7:58
  Speaker 2: Which brings up a lot of questions.
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: It does. Which brings me to the point where I
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: have to play devil's advocate for a moment. Because I
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: know if you're listening right now, you are probably screaming
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: at your device.
• 8:09
  Speaker 2: I would be.
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: How on earth does a man deliver an elaborate confession
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: to the horrific sexual assault and murder of two young
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: children and only receive a 15-year sentence?
• 8:20
  Speaker 2: It sounds impossible.
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: The immediate reaction is to call the prosecutors cowards who
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: just wanted an easy day in court. But couldn't an
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: argument be made that a 15-year guaranteed sentence is a
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: grim legal calculus?
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: What do you mean?
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: Well, if you go to trial in 1972, Defense attorneys
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: might try to throw out the confession based on coercion
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: or a Miranda technicality.
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: That's true.
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: If a judge tosses the confession, the guy walks completely.
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: Is taking a plea a catastrophic failure or a desperate
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: triage by the state to guarantee at least some time
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: behind bars?
• 8:56
  Speaker 2: This raises an important question regarding the mechanics of prosecutorial triage.
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: You are absolutely correct that the fear of a mistrial
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: or a suppressed confession drives many plea deals. Right. The
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: burden of proof in a child murder case is heavy,
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: and the emotional toll on the families during a public
• 9:12
  Speaker 2: trial is devastating.
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: It destroys families.
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: It does. However, we have to look at the psychology
• 9:18
  Speaker 2: of the easy confession mentioned in the source. What does
• 9:21
  Speaker 2: it tell us about the killer's state of mind?
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: That he's trying to manipulate the prosecutors into making that
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: exact and calculus.
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: Precisely. A killer who willingly and elaborately details their crimes
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: without putting up a fight is often making a highly
• 9:33
  Speaker 2: manipulative attempt to control the narrative.
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: Wow. He's steering the ship.
• 9:37
  Speaker 2: Yes. By giving the detectives a complete story, he essentially
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: hands the prosecutors an easy win on a silver platter.
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: And they take it?
• 9:46
  Speaker 2: They do. He saves the state the immense financial and
• 9:49
  Speaker 2: political cost of a high-profile trial. In return, the system
• 9:53
  Speaker 2: rewards that expediency.
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: With a 15 year sentence.
• 9:56
  Speaker 2: The problem is proportionality. A 15 year sentence for the
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: predatory murder of two children suggests that the system valued
• 10:04
  Speaker 2: the guaranteed closure of the file over the actual severity
• 10:08
  Speaker 2: of the threat he posed to the public.
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: That is sickening. And that 15 year sentence isn't just
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: a failure of proportionality. It's a literal ticking clock.
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: A countdown.
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: Because the state bought that easy confession in 1972, they
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: legally mandated their own future crisis.
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: They guaranteed it.
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: They were forced to confront their own mistake exactly 15
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: years later. Let's look at the corner the parole board
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: painted themselves into in April of 1987.
• 10:32
  Speaker 2: This is where it all comes to a head.
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: Arthur Shawcross has served his time. He is legally required
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: to be released.
• 10:38
  Speaker 2: The inevitable collision of bureaucratic policy and objective reality.
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: Naturally. The source notes that his release was met with
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: ferocious community opposition.
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: Of course it was.
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: The community hasn't forgotten the leaves in the dirt. They
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: haven't forgotten the 10-year-old boy or the 8-year-old girl.
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: You don't just erase that trauma.
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: You don't just erase the memory of a child predator
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: walking out of the local penitentiary. Unrest and chaos are
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: bubbling up.
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: The state is facing a massive public relations and safety nightmare.
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: So what is the administrative solution? To thwart this community unrest...
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: the state physically relocates Shaw Cross and his girlfriend, Rose Wally.
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: Who he marries shortly after, by the way.
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah, a detail that is just mind-boggling in its own right.
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: So they relocate them to Rochester, New York.
• 11:24
  Speaker 2: Relocation is a standard, albeit flawed, geographical band-aid used by
• 11:29
  Speaker 2: parole systems to diffuse immediate localized tension.
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: Just move the problem somewhere else.
• 11:34
  Speaker 2: Exactly.
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: But the relocation wasn't the fatal legal flaw. The source
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: explicitly states that the legal system deliberately sealed his criminal records,
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: in an attempt to avoid more community backlash in his
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: new home of Rochester.
• 11:48
  Speaker 2: Which is just astounding.
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: Let's talk about the actual mechanics of that.
• 11:51
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: How does a state legally justify sealing the records of
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: a confessed child murderer?
• 11:58
  Speaker 2: It's hard to fathom.
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: Wouldn't the state argue they had to seal it to
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: prevent vigilante justice or targeted harassment that might destabilize his parole?
• 12:07
  Speaker 2: If we connect this to the bigger picture, that is
• 12:10
  Speaker 2: exactly the administrative justification. Parole boards operate under the mandate
• 12:14
  Speaker 2: of reintegration.
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: So they want him to blend in.
• 12:17
  Speaker 2: Yes. Their argument is often that if a community is
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: acutely aware of a violent offender's presence, the offender cannot
• 12:25
  Speaker 2: secure employment, housing, or social stability.
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: Which paradoxically increases the likelihood of reoffending.
• 12:31
  Speaker 2: Exactly. To prevent vigilantism and foster this theoretical reintegration, the
• 12:36
  Speaker 2: bureaucracy uses the sealing of records as a firewall.
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: But look at the cost of that firewall. Think about
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: what sealing those records actually means in practice.
• 12:45
  Speaker 2: It's disastrous.
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: It's not just putting a blindfold on the neighborhood watch.
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: It's more like a systemic immunity protocol.
• 12:51
  Speaker 2: I like that analogy.
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: It is like administering a drug to a deadly virus
• 12:56
  Speaker 1: to actively protect it from the body's white blood cells. Right.
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: The community can't defend itself. Sure.
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: The neighborhood isn't panicking, but they have zero systemic antibodies
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: to fight the infection when it inevitably starts attacking the
• 13:08
  Speaker 1: host again.
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: That analogy perfectly captures the concept of state-sanctioned anonymity that
• 13:14
  Speaker 2: the text addresses.
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: State-sanctioned anonymity. That phrase gives me chills.
• 13:19
  Speaker 2: It should. You have a known convicted apex predator. The state,
• 13:24
  Speaker 2: whose primary charter is the protection of its citizens, engineered
• 13:28
  Speaker 2: a horrific irony.
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: They protected him instead.
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: In prioritizing temporary social calm and adherence to their reintegration theories...
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: They essentially handed a 300-pound killer a completely clean slate.
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: Unbelievable.
• 13:41
  Speaker 2: They placed him in a fresh hunting ground where local
• 13:44
  Speaker 2: law enforcement operating in their jurisdictional silos had absolutely no
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: idea who he was.
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: And the direct, unavoidable consequence of the state stripping away
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: that community immune system was the immediate resumption of what
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: the article calls his heinous saga of cruelty and bloodshed.
• 13:59
  Speaker 2: Didn't take long at all.
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: The state-sanctioned anonymity directly caused the emergence of the Genesee
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: River Strangler. Let's look at how fast this unraveled.
• 14:08
  Speaker 2: The timeline is terrifying.
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: He is released in April 1987. By March of 1988,
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: just 11 months later, a group of hunters discovers the
• 14:17
  Speaker 1: body of a 27-year-old woman named Dorothy Blackburn floating in
• 14:21
  Speaker 1: the Genesee River.
• 14:22
  Speaker 2: The state's 15-year gamble collapsed in less than a year.
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: 11 months. Dorothy Blackburn was a sex worker. She had
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: been strangled to death.
• 14:30
  Speaker 2: And this is where the blind spot really shows itself.
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: Holden emphasizes something crucial. regarding the investigation into Dorothy's death.
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: The investigative efforts came up incredibly short.
• 14:41
  Speaker 2: Which is entirely due to the sealed records.
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: Let's walk through how a local detective looks at this.
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: You have a strangulation murder. If records aren't sealed, you
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: immediately look at recent parolees in the area with a
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: history of violent strangulation or sexual assault.
• 14:55
  Speaker 2: Standard police work.
• 14:57
  Speaker 1: Arthur Sharkross was a convicted murderer, a convicted rapist, and
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: brand new to the area. He should have been glowing
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: red on their radar.
• 15:04
  Speaker 2: Absolutely glowing red.
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: But nobody turned a suspicious eye upon him.
• 15:08
  Speaker 2: Because local police departments rely on shared databases and criminal
• 15:12
  Speaker 2: histories to build suspect pools.
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: And his history was invisible.
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: Right. If the state seals the record, that history is
• 15:20
  Speaker 2: essentially redacted from the local system's view. To the detectives
• 15:24
  Speaker 2: in Rochester... Arthur Shawcross wasn't a paroled child murderer.
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: He was just a guy.
• 15:29
  Speaker 2: He was just a regular citizen who recently moved to
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: town and got married. The state's decision to engineer his
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: anonymity made them an active structural accessory to Dorothy Blackburn's murder.
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: Because he wasn't caught, the escalation that followed was practically unimaginable.
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: It was a frenzy.
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: The text outlines a reign of terror operating at a
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: staggering velocity from the fall of 1989 to up to
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: January of 1990.
• 15:54
  Speaker 2: Just a few months.
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: During that intensely condensed time frame, police would exhume 11
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: more corpses from the Genesee River and the surrounding areas.
• 16:01
  Speaker 2: 11 more bodies.
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: We needed to examine the modus operandi that emerged during
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: this frenzy. The source listed out clearly.
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: The pattern was very rigid.
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: Almost all the victims were young female prostitutes. They were
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: physically beaten, they were strangled, and they were sexually assaulted
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: both before and after their deaths.
• 16:19
  Speaker 2: The victimology here requires a deep sociological analysis, we have
• 16:24
  Speaker 2: to look at the severe shift in his targeting.
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: From children to adults?
• 16:28
  Speaker 2: Yes. In 1972, his victims were an 8-year-old girl and
• 16:30
  Speaker 2: a 10-year-old boy, vulnerable children from his own neighborhood. Now,
• 16:35
  Speaker 2: under the cover of a new city in the late 1980s,
• 16:37
  Speaker 2: he shifts entirely to targeting adult sex workers.
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: I want to push back on the intention behind that shift.
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: Did he consciously study the sociological vulnerabilities of Rochester and decide,
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: you know, sex workers are the optimal target for systemic evasion?
• 16:51
  Speaker 2: That's a great question.
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: Or was he just acting on a raw, opportunistic, predatory instinct?
• 16:56
  Speaker 1: Does a killer like this actually engage in applied legal calculus?
• 17:00
  Speaker 2: It is the terrifying intersection of both instinct and calculus.
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: Really? Both?
• 17:04
  Speaker 2: Serial offenders are hyper-attuned to the concept of risk versus reward.
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: They may not write academic papers on sociology, but they
• 17:11
  Speaker 2: implicitly understand the less dead phenomenon.
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: The less dead. Can you explain that for the listener?
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: This is a criminological concept describing how society, the media,
• 17:22
  Speaker 2: and often law enforcement implicitly assign different values to victims
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: based on their socioeconomic status or lifestyle.
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: So the murder of a child generates immediate, massive resources
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: and public outcry.
• 17:35
  Speaker 2: Yes. In 1972, children were the most physically vulnerable targets
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: available to him, but the societal response was overwhelming.
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: He got caught fast.
• 17:44
  Speaker 2: Exactly. In Rochester, gifted with a clean slate, His instinct
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: recognized a different kind of vulnerability.
• 17:51
  Speaker 1: Marginalized women.
• 17:52
  Speaker 2: Sex workers in the 1980s represented a demographic that was
• 17:55
  Speaker 2: heavily criminalized, forced to operate in the margins, and tragically
• 17:59
  Speaker 2: overlooked by mainstream society.
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: Their spatial mobility must have factored in, too.
• 18:03
  Speaker 2: Absolutely. Moving from car to car, operating at night, it
• 18:06
  Speaker 2: made disappearances difficult to track. Missing person reports were often
• 18:10
  Speaker 2: delayed or dismissed.
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: Shawcross took the state-sanctioned anonymity he was gifted, and he
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: weaponized it.
• 18:15
  Speaker 2: He weaponized it against a population that society had already
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: forced into their own form of anonymity. He found the
• 18:21
  Speaker 2: perfect blind spot within the system's existing blind spots.
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: It is deeply haunting that his routine worked perfectly within
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: the fractures of the system. He had built a highly functional,
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: deeply horrific mechanism for avoiding detection.
• 18:35
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it was working.
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: But just as the investigators and the terrified public are
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: grappling with this overwhelming pattern of bodies, Shawcross does something
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: that throws his entire established blueprint into chaos.
• 18:48
  Speaker 2: He changes the rules.
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: He commits a murder that completely shatters his own meticulously
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: established M.O., which brings us to the anomaly.
• 18:56
  Speaker 2: The murder of June Stott.
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: Thanksgiving Day, 1989. Let's look at the facts of June
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: Stott based on Holden's text. She was 26 years old,
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: which fits the general age profile of the other victims.
• 19:07
  Speaker 2: Yes, age-wise she fits.
• 19:09
  Speaker 1: But crucially, fundamentally... She was not a sex worker.
• 19:12
  Speaker 2: By targeting her, he broke the primary rule he had
• 19:15
  Speaker 2: established for his own systemic evasion.
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: He stepped out of his lane.
• 19:18
  Speaker 2: He stepped outside the marginalized demographic he had been exploiting
• 19:21
  Speaker 2: so successfully.
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: He stepped outside the demographic and he radically, violently escalated
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: the brutality.
• 19:27
  Speaker 2: The crime scene was drastically different.
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: The article is very careful to detail the harrowing facts here.
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: And while it's a grim reality to discuss, it is
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: essential for understanding the psychological break in the patterns.
• 19:39
  Speaker 2: We have to look at the details to understand the mind.
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: Unlike all the previous victims who were beaten and manually strangled,
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: June Stott was cut open with a knife.
• 19:48
  Speaker 2: A massive escalation.
• 19:50
  Speaker 1: The text describes a massive incision leading from her pelvic
• 19:53
  Speaker 1: region all the way up to her throat, which exposed
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: her viscera, and her genitals were heavily mutilated.
• 19:59
  Speaker 2: We have to differentiate the psychology of these methodologies. Manual
• 20:03
  Speaker 2: strangulation is an intimate, physically demanding act.
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: It takes time.
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: It does. It is often about exerting ultimate extended control
• 20:11
  Speaker 2: over the life force of the victim. It allows the
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: killer to dictate the exact moment of death.
• 20:16
  Speaker 1: But the knife, the evisceration, that's different.
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: The leap from strangulation to the level of surgical invasive
• 20:23
  Speaker 2: post-mortem evisceration seen in the Stott case is staggering.
• 20:27
  Speaker 1: It's not just control anymore.
• 20:28
  Speaker 2: What he did to June Stott wasn't just about control.
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: It was about utter, unmitigated destruction. It is an astounding
• 20:36
  Speaker 2: display of brutality. that goes far beyond his normal baseline
• 20:40
  Speaker 2: of violence.
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: Which leads to the core question of this entire deep dive.
• 20:44
  Speaker 2: Why her?
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: Why does a serial killer who has successfully relied on
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: a very specific, highly effective routine, a routine that is
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: actively keeping him out of prison, suddenly escalate to such
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: an astounding, gruesome display of brutality on a target completely
• 21:02
  Speaker 1: outside his usual demographics?
• 21:04
  Speaker 2: It's like operational suicide.
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: Exactly. What triggers that kind of operational suicide?
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: What's fascinating here is how the source tackles this exact
• 21:11
  Speaker 2: question by presenting Shawcross's own stated motive.
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: The motive he gave after he was caught.
• 21:16
  Speaker 2: Right. When he was finally captured and questioned about this
• 21:19
  Speaker 2: specific anomalous murder, Shawcross claimed he chose to kill Junestot
• 21:23
  Speaker 2: because he became intensely paranoid that she might tell someone
• 21:25
  Speaker 2: about his crimes.
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: This is the chilling motive the headline refers to. He
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: thought she knew his secret.
• 21:31
  Speaker 2: If we take that statement at face value, it provides
• 21:33
  Speaker 2: a functional explanation for the break in victimology.
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: She wasn't an opportunistic target?
• 21:38
  Speaker 2: No. She wasn't targeted as a crime of opportunity based
• 21:42
  Speaker 2: on her profession. She was targeted as a perceived existential
• 21:45
  Speaker 2: threat to his freedom.
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: But does paranoia explain the evisceration?
• 21:49
  Speaker 2: Paranoia acts as a massive destabilizing agent in the human brain.
• 21:54
  Speaker 2: If a killer feels cornered, the violence often becomes much
• 21:57
  Speaker 2: more frantic and expressive.
• 21:59
  Speaker 1: A panic response.
• 22:00
  Speaker 2: The sheer brutality of the evisceration could be interpreted as
• 22:03
  Speaker 2: a physical manifestation of his overwhelming panic and rage at
• 22:07
  Speaker 2: being found out. He didn't just want to eliminate her.
• 22:10
  Speaker 2: His paranoia demanded that he physically obliterate the threat she represented.
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: But the text immediately introduces a massive, glaring caveat to
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: that paranoia motive.
• 22:20
  Speaker 2: The pathological lying.
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: The article points out that authorities had already well established
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: that Arthur Shawcross was a documented pathological liar. He regularly
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: compulsively embellished stories from his past.
• 22:32
  Speaker 2: He couldn't help himself.
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: Holden notes that because of this psychological compulsion to lie,
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: the truth of how June Stock came to know about
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: his murders, or if she even knew anything at all,
• 22:41
  Speaker 1: remains a complete mystery.
• 22:42
  Speaker 2: This is the diagnostic knot we have to try to untangle.
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: How do you accurately analyze the motive of a man
• 22:48
  Speaker 2: whose primary baseline language is deceit?
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: I mean, if you're a pathological liar sitting in an
• 22:55
  Speaker 1: interrogation room... Trying to explain an anomaly that the detectives
• 22:59
  Speaker 1: are pressing you on, saying she knew my secret, sounds
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: like a very convenient, almost theatrical excuse.
• 23:05
  Speaker 2: It does.
• 23:05
  Speaker 1: It makes him sound like a calculating mastermind protecting his
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: dark empire.
• 23:09
  Speaker 2: Exactly. We have to explore how paranoia and compulsive lying
• 23:13
  Speaker 2: intertwine to create fabricated internal realities.
• 23:16
  Speaker 1: They build their own truth.
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: Pathological liars don't just deceive the police. They build entire
• 23:21
  Speaker 2: narrative structures that they themselves often begin to believe.
• 23:24
  Speaker 1: So she might not have known anything.
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: It is entirely possible that June Stott simply looked at
• 23:28
  Speaker 2: him a certain way in a grocery store or asked
• 23:31
  Speaker 2: a mundane question, and his paranoid guilty mind spun an elaborate,
• 23:35
  Speaker 2: fully realized fantasy where she had uncovered his entire history.
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: That is terrifying.
• 23:41
  Speaker 2: He may have brutally murdered her based on a threat
• 23:43
  Speaker 2: that existed entirely within the corrupted architecture of his own neurology.
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: The idea that you could be targeted because a serial
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: killer hallucinated a narrative where you were investigating them is terrifying.
• 23:54
  Speaker 2: It's a nightmare.
• 23:55
  Speaker 1: But couldn't the lie also serve a defensive purpose for
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: his ego after the fact?
• 24:00
  Speaker 2: How so?
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: Well, admitting that you killed because she was going to
• 24:04
  Speaker 1: expose me gives him agency. The alternative is admitting that
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: he simply lost control.
• 24:10
  Speaker 2: That he couldn't stop himself. Yeah.
• 24:12
  Speaker 1: Admitting that the neurotic bloodlust overrode his intelligence, driving him
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: to attack a and mutilate her in a chaotic frenzy
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: for absolutely no logical reason.
• 24:23
  Speaker 2: It's a blow to the ego.
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: That loss of control might be too pathetic for his
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: own narcissistic ego to bear on the record.
• 24:29
  Speaker 2: Giving himself agency through a fabricated motive is a classic
• 24:32
  Speaker 2: defense mechanism for a malignant narcissist.
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: It frames him as the rational actor.
• 24:37
  Speaker 2: It makes it impossible for forensic psychologists to cleanly separate
• 24:41
  Speaker 2: the objective truth from his dark fantasy. We may never
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: have empirical proof of why June Stott was the outlier.
• 24:48
  Speaker 1: But what we can empirically observe is the fallout. The
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: psychological chaos that led to her horrific anomalous murder in
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: November of 1989 seemed to signal a broader systemic unraveling
• 25:02
  Speaker 1: of his entire operation.
• 25:03
  Speaker 2: Cracks were showing.
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: When a killer breaks their own established rules with that
• 25:07
  Speaker 1: level of extreme violence, it often means the carefully constructed
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: facade is cracking under its own weight.
• 25:13
  Speaker 2: It's the beginning of the end.
• 25:14
  Speaker 1: Which brings us to the unraveling and his ultimate capture.
• 25:18
  Speaker 1: Let's look at January 1990. This is just weeks after
• 25:22
  Speaker 1: the Thanksgiving murder of June Stott.
• 25:24
  Speaker 2: The frenzy is reaching its absolute unsustainable peak.
• 25:27
  Speaker 1: January 2nd, 1990. The police are actively running a massive dragnet.
• 25:32
  Speaker 2: They know what's happening.
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: They have helicopters in the air, actively searching the Genesee
• 25:36
  Speaker 1: River for bodies because 11 corpses have already been exhumed.
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: The state knows they have a monster on their hands.
• 25:42
  Speaker 2: And during the search, the helicopter spots an unknown man
• 25:45
  Speaker 2: standing on a bridge.
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: Directly near where some of the previous victims have been located.
• 25:49
  Speaker 2: He is literally standing over his own graveyard while the
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: police are actively hunting for him.
• 25:54
  Speaker 1: The man on the bridge spots the helicopter, clearly panics,
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: and manages to flee the immediate area before ground units
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: can intercept him.
• 26:02
  Speaker 2: But he makes a mistake.
• 26:03
  Speaker 1: A fatal logistical error. He leaves his van behind on
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: the bridge. And of course, the van has a license plate.
• 26:10
  Speaker 2: A direct line.
• 26:11
  Speaker 1: That standard piece of state-issued metal provides a direct, undeniable
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: line straight Arthur Shaw crosses front door.
• 26:18
  Speaker 2: It's almost poetic.
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: I want to push back on how we view this mistake, though.
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: Is leaving the van a subconscious act of self-sabotage because
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: he wanted to be caught? Or is it just pure
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: logistical panic from a guy who finally realized the helicopter
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: was looking at him?
• 26:35
  Speaker 2: The debate over subconscious sabotage versus logistical panic is central
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: to understanding serial offender degradation.
• 26:41
  Speaker 1: Do they want to be caught?
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: While some killers do subconsciously desire the relief of capture,
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: The evidence here points more towards severe cognitive fatigue and
• 26:50
  Speaker 2: an overwhelming invincibility complex.
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: Cognitive fatigue makes sense. Look at the sheer volume of
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: his crimes.
• 26:56
  Speaker 2: Eleven corpses in a few months. The physical exhaustion, the
• 27:00
  Speaker 2: adrenaline spikes, and the psychological strain of maintaining that level
• 27:04
  Speaker 2: of extreme violence degrade a person's executive functioning.
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: They become sloppy. Exactly. But standing on the bridge in
• 27:11
  Speaker 1: broad daylight.
• 27:12
  Speaker 2: That is the invincibility complex at work. Returning to the
• 27:15
  Speaker 2: dump sites is a common behavior to relive the power
• 27:19
  Speaker 2: of the crime.
• 27:19
  Speaker 1: But doing it during an active helicopter search.
• 27:22
  Speaker 2: Doing it during an active, highly publicized police dragnet reflects
• 27:26
  Speaker 2: a killer who has lost touch with reality. Shaw Cross
• 27:31
  Speaker 2: had been operating with impunity for so long.
• 27:34
  Speaker 1: The system let him get away with it.
• 27:35
  Speaker 2: Think about his life experience. He was shielded by a
• 27:38
  Speaker 2: light 15-year sentence after murdering children. Then he was shielded
• 27:42
  Speaker 2: by the state, sealing his records. And then he was
• 27:45
  Speaker 2: shielded by the systemic marginalization of his adult victims.
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: The systemic consistently bent to his benefit.
• 27:51
  Speaker 2: He genuinely believed he was untouchable. He likely didn't think
• 27:54
  Speaker 2: the helicopter could hurt him because the state had never
• 27:56
  Speaker 2: truly hurt him before.
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: The bitter irony is astounding. For years, the state of
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: New York actively engineered his anonymity.
• 28:04
  Speaker 2: They built an impenetrable wall of bureaucracy around him.
• 28:07
  Speaker 1: To keep him safe from community scrutiny. And in the end,
• 28:11
  Speaker 1: it was his own vehicle. registered through the state's own
• 28:14
  Speaker 1: DMV that completely stripped away the blindfold.
• 28:17
  Speaker 2: His own grandiosity led directly to his downfall.
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: The Genesee River Strangler was finally arrested and the anonymity
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: was permanently revoked.
• 28:26
  Speaker 2: The anonymity ended, but the systemic damage was irreparable.
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: And that brings us to the grim reality we have
• 28:31
  Speaker 1: to synthesize as we wrap up this deep dive. 14
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: lives lost. 14. 14 innocent people slaughtered in what the
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: text accurately calls A deranged frenzy of neurotic bloodlust. We
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: have to sit with the deeply uncomfortable fact that this
• 28:47
  Speaker 1: massive body count was heavily facilitated by a system.
• 28:50
  Speaker 2: A system that chose convenience.
• 28:52
  Speaker 1: A system that consistently chose bureaucratic convenience and immediate social
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: calm over transparency and public safety.
• 28:58
  Speaker 2: It is a devastating indictment of the administrative mechanisms we
• 29:01
  Speaker 2: blindly trust to keep our communities safe.
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: So what does this all mean for you listening to
• 29:06
  Speaker 1: this right now? We talked at the beginning about why
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: we are drawn to these deeply unsettling stories, touching on
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: the cultural phenomenon surrounding figures like Dahmer.
• 29:16
  Speaker 2: Why do we look at this?
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: Why do we willingly subject ourselves to examining these dark
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: diagnostic failures? I think it's because understanding the mechanics of
• 29:26
  Speaker 1: these profound systemic failures is the only way we learn
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: how to spot them.
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: We have to educate ourselves.
• 29:32
  Speaker 1: It's how we educate ourselves so that we can demand better,
• 29:36
  Speaker 1: more transparent legal processes in our own jurisdictions. We study
• 29:41
  Speaker 1: the darkness so we can recognize when the people holding
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: the administrative flashlights are turning them off on purpose.
• 29:46
  Speaker 2: Just to save themselves the headache of a community protest.
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: Exactly.
• 29:50
  Speaker 2: Knowledge is only a protective asset when it is understood
• 29:52
  Speaker 2: and applied. We must continuously question the assumptions and the
• 29:56
  Speaker 2: policies of the systems that govern reintegration and public safety.
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: Before we sign off, I want to toss it to
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: you for one final thought. Yeah. Based on everything we've
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: read in Luke Holden's incredibly dense article, what is one
• 30:08
  Speaker 1: thread you want the listener to pull on and explore
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: on their own after they turn this off?
• 30:13
  Speaker 2: I want to return to the anomaly of June Stott.
• 30:16
  Speaker 2: If we accept the text's premise that Shawcross was a
• 30:19
  Speaker 2: documented pathological liar who constantly manipulated his narrative.
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: Which we know he was.
• 30:25
  Speaker 2: Right. What if his stated motive for murdering her was
• 30:28
  Speaker 2: a complete and utter fabrication? What if he was never
• 30:31
  Speaker 2: actually paranoid that she knew his secret?
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: If it wasn't paranoia, what is the alternative?
• 30:36
  Speaker 2: Consider the massive invincibility complex we just discussed. What if
• 30:40
  Speaker 2: her horrific murder wasn't driven by a fearful attempt to
• 30:44
  Speaker 2: prevent his own exposure?
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: What was it then?
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: What if instead it was a morbid, terrifying test? A
• 30:49
  Speaker 2: deliberate stress test of the system.
• 30:51
  Speaker 1: A test.
• 30:52
  Speaker 2: He may have wanted to see if his state-sanctioned anonymity
• 30:55
  Speaker 2: was so powerful and the system's blind spot so encompassing
• 30:58
  Speaker 2: that he could escalate to a vastly more horrific, entirely
• 31:02
  Speaker 2: different style of crime.
• 31:03
  Speaker 1: Completely outside his normal victim pool.
• 31:05
  Speaker 2: Right out in the open and still have the system look.
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: The other way. Testing the ultimate limits of the blindfold.
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: That reframes the entire anomaly from an act of panic
• 31:14
  Speaker 1: into an act of supreme, terrifying arrogance.
• 31:17
  Speaker 2: It's a dark thought to leave on.
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: That is going to stay with me for a very
• 31:21
  Speaker 1: long time. It forces us to ask just how much
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: power the administrative bureaucracy accidentally handed to a monster. Thank
• 31:29
  Speaker 1: you for joining us on this deep dive.
• 31:31
  Speaker 2: It is incredibly heavy in material.
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: It is. But as always, we appreciate you taking the
• 31:35
  Speaker 1: time to explore the complicated mechanics of these stories with us.
• 31:39
  Speaker 1: Keep asking questions, keep demanding transparency, and never stop looking
• 31:43
  Speaker 1: closely at the systems operating around you. We'll catch you
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: on the next deep dive.