Latest / Murder Files Unsealed / Oregon Man Murdered After Late-Night Fling with Co-Worker's Girlfriend

Transcript

Oregon Man Murdered After Late-Night Fling with Co-Worker's Girlfriend · Murder Files Unsealed

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: You know, usually when we talk about a disaster, there's
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: this expectation of a single, like, identifiable spark. Right.
• 0:08
  Speaker 2: Like finding the one match in a forest fire.
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: Exactly. You find the match that was thrown in the
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: dry brush. You rope it off and you can point
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: to it and say, you know, there it is. That's
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: where it all went wrong.
• 0:16
  Speaker 2: Clean.
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Clean in a terrible sort of way. You have
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: this linear progression. Cause and then effect.
• 0:24
  Speaker 2: Well. is how our brains prefer to organize tragedy. We
• 0:28
  Speaker 2: really want a simple narrative. But when you step into
• 0:31
  Speaker 2: the world of human psychology, specifically the kind that leads
• 0:36
  Speaker 2: to premeditated intimate violence, that linear model just, I mean,
• 0:41
  Speaker 2: it collapses entirely.
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: It totally falls apart.
• 0:43
  Speaker 2: Yeah, we aren't looking at a single match anymore. We're
• 0:45
  Speaker 2: looking at something much more volatile, something that defies that
• 0:48
  Speaker 2: simple A to B logic.
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: I mean, it is the absolute definition of a chemical fire.
• 0:53
  Speaker 2: Well, that's a good way to put it.
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: Think about it. Imagine a room for a second, right?
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: You have all these different highly reactive elements sitting in
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: their own separate glass containers. On their own, they might
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: be toxic, sure, but as long as they are separated,
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: they are contained. Right. But the moment those glass barriers break,
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: the moment you combine, like, deep-seated paranoia, severe substance abuse,
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: unhealed trauma, and this perceived deeply personal betrayal, the reaction
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: isn't just predictable, it is catastrophic.
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: And there is no putting a chemical fire out with
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: just water. No.
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: If you try, you usually just spread the flame.
• 1:32
  Speaker 2: And the really chilling reality of a chemical fire is
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: the blast radius. Because once that reaction begins, the people
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: caught in it are often the ones who never saw
• 1:40
  Speaker 2: the explosion coming.
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: Or, and this is wild, they're the ones who stood
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: by and actively watched it ignite.
• 1:45
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Doing absolutely nothing to stop it.
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: Which brings us to the core mission of our deep
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: dive today. So for everyone listening, we are unpacking a
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: case out of Clackamas County, Oregon. This unfolded in the
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: spring of 2024.
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: A really complex timeline on this one.
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: Super complex. I want to be clear right up front
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: with you, the listener. This is not just a recounting
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: of a tragedy. We aren't just going to read you
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: a news ticker today.
• 2:08
  Speaker 2: No, we have a massive stack of primary sources to
• 2:12
  Speaker 2: go through.
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: We really do. We are looking at actual word for
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: word interrogation transcripts, meticulous police timelines, highly technical digital forensics reports.
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: And these really great investigative breakdowns from the Law and
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: Crime Network.
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: Which are crucial for understanding the anatomy of a premeditated
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: murder like this.
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: Exactly. We are going to use these documents to look
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: at the sheer mechanics of it.
• 2:36
  Speaker 2: Because we need to understand not just the what of
• 2:38
  Speaker 2: this case, but the how and the why. Like how
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: does a fractured relationship combined with an allegation of a
• 2:44
  Speaker 2: horrific sexual assault spiral into street-level vigilante justice? Right. And critically,
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: from a law enforcement perspective, How do detectives actually unravel
• 2:55
  Speaker 2: a dense web of lies when the people sitting across
• 2:58
  Speaker 2: the table have completely convinced themselves that they are the
• 3:01
  Speaker 2: righteous victims?
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: It's so twisted. So let's lay the groundwork. We need
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: to set the scene for you because the cast of
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: characters here is incredibly small.
• 3:10
  Speaker 2: But the dynamic is intense.
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: Very. The geometry of this story really revolves around three
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: central figures. First, we have Cody James Dunawith. In the
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: spring of 2024... He's living in an apartment in Milwaukee, Oregon,
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: which is a suburb just south of Portland. And he
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: lives there with his girlfriend, Dominique Marie Britt.
• 3:29
  Speaker 2: Right. So that's the core couple.
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: That's the couple. And the third person in this triangle,
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: the spark that eventually ignites the room, is Nathan Dean Anderson. Now,
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: Nathan was a former co-worker of Cody S. at a
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: local bakery called Dave's.
• 3:45
  Speaker 2: And it's vital to look at the history of these relationships.
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: I mean, Cody and Dominique have a highly volatile domestic history.
• 3:51
  Speaker 2: Very volatile. Which is going to become the foundation of
• 3:53
  Speaker 2: everything that follows. But Cody also has a distinct, established
• 3:57
  Speaker 2: history with Nathan.
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah, they weren't just passing acquaintances at work.
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: Not at all. Yeah. In the police records, Cody actually
• 4:03
  Speaker 2: describes Nathan as a sort of little brother figure. Yeah.
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: He had helped him move into a new place. They
• 4:08
  Speaker 2: worked the same shifts. They spent time together outside of work.
• 4:11
  Speaker 2: There is an established foundation of trust there.
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: Or at least a deep familiarity. Exactly.
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Nathan isn't a stranger on the street. He's someone
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: allowed inside the inner circle.
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: Which makes the chronological sequence of events so jarring. Because
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: if we are tracking the elements of our chemical fire,
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: the very first container breaks in the shadows on April 24th, 2024.
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: What happened that night?
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: Police are called to Cody and Dominique's apartment for a
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: domestic violence dispute.
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: Ah, okay. See, the timeline of a murder frequently starts weeks,
• 4:44
  Speaker 2: sometimes months later. before a weapon is ever drawn. Right.
• 4:48
  Speaker 2: So on April 24th, the environment inside that apartment in
• 4:51
  Speaker 2: Milwaukee is already deeply destabilized.
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: Now, the public records don't give us every granular detail
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: of the physical altercation that occurred that night, but the
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: police response is serious enough and the probable cause is
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: clear enough that Cody is arrested on the spot.
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: He is taken out of the apartment in handcuffs. Yep.
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: Booked into the local jail for a brief stint.
• 5:11
  Speaker 2: So Cody is physically removed from the equation. He's sitting
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: in a holding cell.
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: And this is where the narrative takes a sharp, incredibly
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: dark turn.
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: Because while Cody is incarcerated, while the apartment is presumably
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: a place where Dominique is just trying to recover from
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: whatever domestic incident just occurred, Nathan Anderson goes over to
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: the apartment to visit Dominique.
• 5:32
  Speaker 2: The former co-worker. The little brother.
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: Yes. He goes to visit his friend's girlfriend while his
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: friend is in jail for domestic violence.
• 5:41
  Speaker 2: We really have to pause and look at the extreme
• 5:44
  Speaker 2: vulnerability of this specific window of time. I mean, Dominique
• 5:48
  Speaker 2: is alone.
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 5:49
  Speaker 2: Her boyfriend has just been arrested for violence against her.
• 5:53
  Speaker 2: The emotional environment is chaotic. Her stress levels are undoubtedly peaking.
• 5:57
  Speaker 2: And into this total vacuum of stability walks Nathan.
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: And we don't have a record of his stated intentions
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: for visiting. We don't know if he claimed he was
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: there to check on her or if it was entirely
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: predatory from the moment he knocked on the door.
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: No, but what we do know is the devastating aftermath
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: of that visit.
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: Because when Cody is finally released from jail and comes
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: back home, Dominique makes a revelation to him that just
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: it shifts the tectonic plates of their lives.
• 6:24
  Speaker 2: What does she tell him?
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: She claims that during that visit, Nathan got her incredibly intoxicated.
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: She says she was completely blacked out. And she tells
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: Cody she believes Nathan sexually assaulted her while she was incapacitated.
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: Oh, wow. The details she later provides, both to Cody
• 6:40
  Speaker 2: and eventually to the authorities, are harrowing.
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: They really are. She describes waking up with her entire
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: body in deep physical pain.
• 6:48
  Speaker 2: And a pain she explicitly notes was entirely different from
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: a standard hangover, you know, just sleeping wrong.
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: Yeah, she finds that her knees are badly scraped up
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: and she discovers blood on her body. But she has
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: absolutely no cognitive memory of the night. Right.
• 7:02
  Speaker 2: So she is experiencing what psychologists call an on-block blackout.
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: And an on-block blackout. What exactly is that?
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: So it's where the brain simply stops transferring short-term memories
• 7:13
  Speaker 2: into long-term storage due to severe intoxication.
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: It just stops recording.
• 7:18
  Speaker 2: Exactly. The tape is running, but nothing is saving. So
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: she just has the physical traumatic evidence left behind on
• 7:24
  Speaker 2: her own skin.
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: It's a literal nightmare scenario. She wakes up to a
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: reality where her body has been violated, but she is
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: missing the puzzle pieces of how she got there or
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: what exactly was done to her.
• 7:37
  Speaker 2: Think about the psychological pressure cooker this immediately creates. You
• 7:40
  Speaker 2: have an allegation of a severe, deeply personal violation. Yeah.
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: So she tells Cody she looks at the man who
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: just got out of jail for a domestic dispute. and
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: tells him that his former co-worker came into their shared
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: home and assaulted her.
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: This is the ultimate crossroads for anyone who experiences trauma
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: or is the partner of someone who has.
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 8:00
  Speaker 2: It is the defining fork in the road. Do you
• 8:03
  Speaker 2: turn to the justice system as flawed and slow as
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: it may be to handle the allegation through forensic evidence
• 8:09
  Speaker 2: and the courts?
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: Or.
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: Do you bypass the social contract entirely and take matters
• 8:14
  Speaker 2: into your own hands?
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: And what's crucial here, what is so important to remember,
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: is that Dominique actually suggests taking the legal route.
• 8:20
  Speaker 2: She does.
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: She explicitly tells Cody, I should just go to the
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: cops and make a report. She actively wants to involve
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: the authorities.
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: Because she has physical evidence on her body. The scraped knees,
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: the blood.
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: And in any sexual assault investigation, time is the single
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: most critical factor.
• 8:38
  Speaker 2: Absolutely. Absolutely. You need a rape kit administered immediately. You
• 8:41
  Speaker 2: need those injuries photographed and documented by a medical professional.
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: You need a chain of custody for any DNA.
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: But Cody's response shuts that entire avenue down instantly.
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: His response is chilling in its brevity. He just looks
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: at her and says, no, I'm going to handle it myself.
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: He literally repeats it, cementing the decision. I'm going to
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: handle it myself.
• 9:02
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: But I mean, does that actually make sense? If you
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: want to protect someone you love who has just been assaulted...
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: You get them immediate medical attention.
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: You get the assault legally documented so you can get
• 9:12
  Speaker 2: the predator behind bars where they can't hurt your partner
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: or anyone else ever again.
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: Exactly. So by saying I'll handle it myself and refusing
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: to let her go to the police, is this really
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: about Dominique's trauma at all? Or is this entirely about
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: Cody O's own ego, his deep-seated paranoia, and his absolute
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: need for control?
• 9:31
  Speaker 2: That is the fundamental haunting question at the center of
• 9:34
  Speaker 2: this entire case.
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: Because when a partner steps in, What does it become?
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: Cody's ego was fundamentally bruised here. Because a man he
• 9:42
  Speaker 2: knew came into his apartment. issue of the partner's possession, territory,
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: and pride. Cody's ego was fundamentally bruised here.
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: Because a man he knew came into his apartment.
• 9:58
  Speaker 2: Yes. A man he viewed as a subordinate. A little
• 10:01
  Speaker 2: brother came into his territory while he was locked up
• 10:04
  Speaker 2: and allegedly touched his girlfriend.
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: Wow.
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: For someone with a specific psychological profile we'll soon see
• 10:10
  Speaker 2: Cody possesses involving the police is an admission of ultimate powerlessness.
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: Because he couldn't protect his home since he was sitting
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: in a jail cell.
• 10:17
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Exactly. To go to the police now would be
• 10:20
  Speaker 2: asking another authority figure to fix a problem he feels
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: he failed to prevent. So in his mind, he has
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: to reassert his dominance extrajudicially. He has to balance the
• 10:30
  Speaker 2: scales himself.
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: He essentially silences Dominique's legal avenue for justice to pave
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: a highway for his own vengeance. It's a terrible hijacking
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: of her trauma.
• 10:40
  Speaker 2: It really is.
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: He takes her horrific, confusing experience and weaponizes it into
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: his own personal vendetta.
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: And what's fascinating from a criminological standpoint is how instantaneously
• 10:51
  Speaker 2: this shifts the narrative universe.
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: How so?
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: The second Cody decides to handle it himself, this ceases
• 10:57
  Speaker 2: to be a potential sexual assault investigation. The focus pivots completely.
• 11:01
  Speaker 2: Law enforcement is deprived of the chance to investigate Nathan.
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: And instead, the clock starts ticking on a chilling, premeditated murder.
• 11:08
  Speaker 2: Yes.
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: And that countdown ends exactly five days later. So let's
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: move into the execution of this plan, because the stark
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: contrast between How Cody prepares for this and how he
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: actually carries it out is just baffling.
• 11:19
  Speaker 2: It really makes no sense.
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: We are moving to April 29th, 2024. It is late afternoon,
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: right around 5.30 p.m. Broad daylight in a quiet residential
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: neighborhood in Clackamas County.
• 11:32
  Speaker 2: The geography and timing here are vital to understand the
• 11:35
  Speaker 2: sheer audacity of the crime.
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: It's 5.30 in the afternoon. Right.
• 11:39
  Speaker 2: This isn't the middle of the night in a deserted
• 11:41
  Speaker 2: industrial park. People are commuting home from work. Kids might
• 11:45
  Speaker 2: be playing outside. Neighbors are walking their dogs.
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: People are making dinner near their windows.
• 11:50
  Speaker 2: The visibility is extremely high, and the expectation of safety
• 11:53
  Speaker 2: in that environment is deeply ingrained.
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: So Cody tracks down Nathan on the street. He doesn't
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: pull him into an alley. He doesn't confront him to
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: demand an explanation or a confession.
• 12:03
  Speaker 2: No.
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: He simply raises a Sig Sauer P365 handgun and shoots
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: Nathan three times directly in the abdomen.
• 12:10
  Speaker 2: Three shots to the center mass with a 9mm handgun.
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: That's a very specific weapon.
• 12:14
  Speaker 2: Yeah, the 6-hour P365 is a highly compact, easily concealable
• 12:18
  Speaker 2: weapon often used for everyday carry.
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: So bringing a concealed weapon to a confrontation and firing
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: multiple rounds into the torso.
• 12:25
  Speaker 2: It is a deliberate, unmistakable intent to kill. It's not
• 12:30
  Speaker 2: a warning shot aimed at the ground. It's not a
• 12:32
  Speaker 2: shot to the leg to disable. It is an execution
• 12:35
  Speaker 2: in the middle of a public street.
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: Paramedics rushed to the scene. They race Nathan to Oregon
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: Health and Science University Hospital, which is a major level
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: one trauma center. But I mean, the internal damage from
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: three standard nine millimeter rounds to the abdomen is just
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: too severe. Yeah. He's pronounced dead shortly after arriving. And
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: immediately you can see the profound impact on the neighborhood.
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: The community is completely shattered.
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: I can imagine.
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: Friends and family gather at the exact intersection where he
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: collapsed balloons, flowers and a makeshift memorial spring up almost overnight.
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: A life is just violently erased in the late afternoon sun.
• 13:11
  Speaker 2: But while the community is reeling in shock, the detectives
• 13:14
  Speaker 2: are already moving at light speed.
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: Because a shooting in broad daylight leaves a massive trail
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: of evidence.
• 13:19
  Speaker 2: It's unavoidable. This wasn't a masterfully hidden crime executed by
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: a phantom. Witnesses in the neighborhood, people who actually live
• 13:28
  Speaker 2: there and know the faces in their community, immediately tell
• 13:32
  Speaker 2: the responding deputies that they recognize the shooter.
• 13:34
  Speaker 1: They just outright say it's Cody.
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: They know it's Cody DeNewitt.
• 13:37
  Speaker 1: They have an eyewitness identification almost instantly. That alone is
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: enough for an arrest warrant. But it's just the tip
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: of the iceberg.
• 13:44
  Speaker 2: Oh, absolutely.
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: The police get a warrant and immediately start pulling digital
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: data from Cody's cell service provider. And the digital footprint
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: he left behind is absolutely staggering.
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: It's almost unbelievable.
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: Hours before the shooting even took place, Cody was texting
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: his family members, actively asking them for help to go
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: kill Nathan.
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: We really need to pause and consider the immense legal
• 14:08
  Speaker 2: and psychological weight of that detail. He is literally crowdsourcing
• 14:13
  Speaker 2: a homicide via text message.
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: Makes up walls of, hey guys, anyone free to help
• 14:17
  Speaker 1: me commit a murder this afternoon?
• 14:18
  Speaker 2: It sounds like a joke, but it's exactly what he did.
• 14:21
  Speaker 1: All of his family members refused, obviously, probably thinking he
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: was just venting or having a manic episode. But from
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: a prosecutor standpoint, this is the holy grail of evidence.
• 14:32
  Speaker 2: It is the textbook evidence. Undeniable definition of premeditation.
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: Right, because of the timing.
• 14:38
  Speaker 2: Exactly. When the legal system distinguishes between a crime of passion,
• 14:41
  Speaker 2: for example, walking in on a betrayal, and reacting violently
• 14:46
  Speaker 2: in a split second of emotional overload versus first-degree murder,
• 14:50
  Speaker 2: time and planning are the ultimate dividing lines.
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: So sending a text hours beforehand.
• 14:55
  Speaker 2: It proves to a jury that Cody had time to reflect.
• 14:59
  Speaker 2: He had a cooling-off period. He could have put the
• 15:01
  Speaker 2: phone down, taken a breath, and walked away. Instead, he actively,
• 15:05
  Speaker 2: continually chose to pursue the killing, even seeking accomplices.
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: And the premeditation doesn't stop at the text messages either.
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: Surveillance video from multiple security cameras in the neighborhood catches
• 15:15
  Speaker 1: Cody's silver sedan driving near the scene right when the
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: shots rang out.
• 15:19
  Speaker 2: But crucially, when you look closely at the footage, the
• 15:21
  Speaker 2: car is missing its license plates.
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: Which is such a massive detail.
• 15:25
  Speaker 2: Oh, it's huge. Taking the physical time and effort to
• 15:29
  Speaker 2: locate a screwdriver... Walk around your vehicle and physically unscrew
• 15:33
  Speaker 2: your license plates before driving to confront someone is a
• 15:36
  Speaker 2: highly calculated act.
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: You can't do that by accident.
• 15:39
  Speaker 2: No. It is a deliberate attempt to obscure your identity
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: from law enforcement. It requires forethought. It requires an understanding
• 15:46
  Speaker 2: of cause and effect. And it demonstrates a very clear
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: intention to commit a severe crime that you know you
• 15:53
  Speaker 2: need to escape from.
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: And just to add one more layer of digital forensics
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: to this mounting pile... Nathan's phone wasn't found on his
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: person or at the scene with his body.
• 16:03
  Speaker 2: Oh, right. The phone data.
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: Yes. After his death, cell tower data shows Nathan's phone
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: pinging towers in the direct vicinity of Cody's apartment.
• 16:11
  Speaker 2: Which implies a secondary, highly personal level of interaction during
• 16:16
  Speaker 2: or immediately after the murder.
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: Like he stole the phone off a dying man.
• 16:20
  Speaker 2: It suggests Cody not only shot Nathan, but took the
• 16:23
  Speaker 2: time to retrieve Nathan's phone from his body or his belongings.
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: Why would he do that?
• 16:27
  Speaker 2: Whether he did this to destroy evidence of prior conversations,
• 16:31
  Speaker 2: to see who Nathan had been talking to, or simply
• 16:34
  Speaker 2: as a panicked, irrational afterthought, it inextricably ties Cody directly
• 16:39
  Speaker 2: to the victim post-mortem.
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: I am really struggling to reconcile these facts, and I
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: think anyone listening would be too. We are talking about
• 16:47
  Speaker 1: two wildly different mental states operating at the exact same time.
• 16:51
  Speaker 2: How do you mean?
• 16:51
  Speaker 1: Like, how does a perpetrator have the cold, logical calculation
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: to physically unscrew a license plate to hide their identity,
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: but simultaneously possess such massive cognitive dissonance that they shoot
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: someone at 5.30 p.m. in broad daylight in front of
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: witnesses who literally know their name?
• 17:08
  Speaker 2: It's a paradox.
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: It feels like playing dress-up as a criminal mastermind while
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: entirely ignoring the absolute basics of not getting caught.
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: It really highlights the chaotic, fractured nature of a mind
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: driven by a toxic mix of rage... paranoia, and perceived righteousness.
• 17:23
  Speaker 1: Okay, unpack that for me.
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: In neuroscience, you're looking at a complete fragmentation of executive function,
• 17:29
  Speaker 2: the prefrontal cortex, the part of Cody's brain that handles
• 17:33
  Speaker 2: logical sequencing, risk assessment, and long-term consequences.
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: The part that says, if I shoot a gun in public,
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: witnesses will point me out.
• 17:41
  Speaker 2: Exactly. That part is being completely overwritten by the amygdala,
• 17:45
  Speaker 2: the emotional primal center of the brain that is screaming,
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: this threat must be eliminated right now.
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: So he's half planning and half reacting.
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: He is mimicking the actions of a premeditated killer by
• 17:56
  Speaker 2: taking off the plates and acquiring the weapon. But he
• 17:58
  Speaker 2: lacks the actual psychological discipline and environmental awareness to execute
• 18:03
  Speaker 2: it cleanly. The intense anger creates profound tunnel vision.
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: So he doesn't even notice the surroundings.
• 18:10
  Speaker 2: When he pulls the trigger, he doesn't see the neighbors.
• 18:12
  Speaker 2: He doesn't see the doorbell cameras. He doesn't even see
• 18:14
  Speaker 2: the sun shining in the sky. He just sees the target.
• 18:17
  Speaker 1: The fallout of that tunnel vision is that the detectives
• 18:19
  Speaker 1: are handed a mountain of evidence on a silver platter.
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: I mean, they have the incriminating texts, the missing plates
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: on the surveillance video, the eyewitness accounts, and the ballistics
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: at the scene.
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: They know exactly who pulled the trigger.
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: Exactly one week later, on May 6th, they locate Cody
• 18:37
  Speaker 1: James Dennewith and place him under arrest.
• 18:40
  Speaker 2: But as any seasoned homicide investigator will tell you, slapping
• 18:44
  Speaker 2: the cuffs on the suspect is only half the battle.
• 18:46
  Speaker 1: Really? With all that evidence.
• 18:47
  Speaker 2: Oh, yeah. You have the what happened and you have
• 18:50
  Speaker 2: the who did it. But to secure a rock solid
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: conviction that will withstand a grueling trial, especially for first
• 18:58
  Speaker 2: degree murder where the stakes are life in prison, you
• 19:01
  Speaker 2: want the why straight from the suspect's own mouth.
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: You want them to confess.
• 19:05
  Speaker 2: You need to lock them into a narrative. You have
• 19:06
  Speaker 2: to get inside their head.
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: And that transition takes us into the interrogation room. And
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: this is hands down one of the most fascinating psychological
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: studies ever in denial and deflection I have ever read.
• 19:18
  Speaker 2: It's a master class in it.
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: We are in a small, sterile interview room at the
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: Clackamas County Sheriff's Office. The cameras are rolling in the corner.
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: Cody is brought in, sitting across a metal table. And
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: Detective Alex, along with his partner, begins to probe.
• 19:33
  Speaker 2: Right out of the gate, we see Cody adopt a
• 19:36
  Speaker 2: deeply entrenched defensive posture.
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: The detectives introduce themselves and state plainly that they are
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: investigating the death of Nathan Anderson. Cody's immediate response. He
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: leans back and casually says, yeah, I heard about that.
• 19:49
  Speaker 2: The casualness is so telling.
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: The detectives ask how he heard, and Cody says, social media,
• 19:55
  Speaker 1: it's known on the news I looked.
• 19:57
  Speaker 2: It's a classic transparent distancing technique.
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: He's playing dumb.
• 20:00
  Speaker 2: He is instantly trying to establish an alibi of complete ignorance.
• 20:05
  Speaker 2: He wants to plant the seed that he's just a
• 20:06
  Speaker 2: passive consumer of the local news, a concerned citizen entirely
• 20:11
  Speaker 2: disconnected from the actual physical event.
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: But the detectives don't let him stay at arm's length.
• 20:15
  Speaker 1: They press him on his relationship with Nathan. And this
• 20:18
  Speaker 1: is where Cody Rods' carefully constructed narrative starts to splinter
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: into a million contradictory pieces.
• 20:24
  Speaker 2: He starts tripping over his own lies.
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: He first tries to minimize the relationship entirely, saying, he
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: used to be a worker for me at Dave's maybe
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: a year ago.
• 20:32
  Speaker 2: But then.
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: Almost in the same breath, he tries to pivot and
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: sound like a benevolent, caring mentor. He says, he was
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: like my little brother. I helped him move. If he
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: needed help, all he had to do was call.
• 20:44
  Speaker 2: The linguistic shift there is incredible to analyze. It raises
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: a crucial point about Cody's self-image.
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: What does he want them to see?
• 20:53
  Speaker 2: Even sitting in a police interrogation room for murder, he
• 20:56
  Speaker 2: desperately needs to be perceived as the good guy. He
• 21:00
  Speaker 2: wants to portray himself to the detectives as a solid
• 21:02
  Speaker 2: family man. a helpful pillar of the community who took
• 21:05
  Speaker 2: a young, troubled guy under his wing out of the
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: goodness of his heart.
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: But that narrative directly, violently conflicts with the reality that
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: he just executed that exact same little brother on the street.
• 21:15
  Speaker 2: Exactly. To bridge that massive cognitive gap, Cody realizes he
• 21:20
  Speaker 2: has to turn Nathan into a monster.
• 21:22
  Speaker 1: If Cody is the good guy, Nathan has to be
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: the ultimate villain. Right.
• 21:26
  Speaker 2: To justify the violence. So Cody starts utilizing these wild,
• 21:29
  Speaker 2: almost theatrical deflection tactics.
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: It gets so bizarre here. He claims Nathan was actually
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: the aggressor all along. He tells the detectives that Nathan
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: was actively threatening his life, that Nathan boasted about being
• 21:42
  Speaker 1: a hitman in a cartel, and that Nathan claimed deep
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: affiliations with the GD, the gangster disciples.
• 21:49
  Speaker 2: Right, exactly. Think about the sheer absurdity of the lie
• 21:53
  Speaker 2: he is constructing on the fly.
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: It's ridiculous.
• 21:55
  Speaker 2: A guy he worked with at a local suburban bakery,
• 21:58
  Speaker 2: who he just helped move into a standard apartment, is
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: suddenly an international cartel enforcer and a high-ranking gang member
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: threatening to wipe him clean.
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: He is literally throwing every terrifying buzzword-laden trope he can
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: think of at the wall to see what sticks with
• 22:13
  Speaker 1: the cop.
• 22:14
  Speaker 2: He's attempting to build a retroactive self-defense narrative.
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: I mean, are you kidding me? He's claiming this baker
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: is an international cartel hitman. It's like he's pulling the
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: plot from a terrible straight-to-DVD action movie.
• 22:26
  Speaker 2: It really is.
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: The detective even recognizes how ridiculous it is. And asks
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: him directly, did you feel threatened by him? And Cody,
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: trying desperately to maintain his tough guy alpha male persona,
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: shoots himself in the foot and says, no, not at all.
• 22:41
  Speaker 2: Oh man, he contradicts his own entire self-defense theory in
• 22:44
  Speaker 2: a matter of seconds.
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: Why would he say that if he's trying to claim self-defense?
• 22:48
  Speaker 2: Because his ego simply will not allow him to admit
• 22:51
  Speaker 2: to another man that he was scared of Nathan. He
• 22:54
  Speaker 2: tells the detectives Nathan was talking lots of drugs. But
• 22:58
  Speaker 2: when pressed on whether he actually believed the cartel threats,
• 23:01
  Speaker 2: Cody brushes it off to look tough.
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: So he wants it both ways.
• 23:05
  Speaker 2: He's trying to have it both ways simultaneously. Nathan is
• 23:08
  Speaker 2: a terrifying, lethal cartel threat who absolutely justifies an extreme, preemptive,
• 23:15
  Speaker 2: lethal reaction. But also, Cody isn't scared of anyone and
• 23:19
  Speaker 2: wasn't intimidated.
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: It's illogical aroboros. It eats itself.
• 23:22
  Speaker 2: Beautifully put.
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: Well, the detectives quickly realize they aren't going to get
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: the truth through casual conversation or by letting him spin
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: his wheels. They need to tighten the screws and show
• 23:31
  Speaker 1: him the cards they are holding.
• 23:33
  Speaker 2: Time to bring out the evidence.
• 23:34
  Speaker 1: They start laying out the digital evidence. They mention Nathan's
• 23:38
  Speaker 1: phone traveling to Cody's apartment on the day of the murder.
• 23:41
  Speaker 1: Cody fiercely denies it. How could I have his phone
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: if I was never with him?
• 23:45
  Speaker 2: He's still sticking to the script.
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: Then the detectives drop the polite facade. They lean in
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: and tell him outright, I'm fairly certain that you're involved
• 23:54
  Speaker 1: in this.
• 23:55
  Speaker 2: And how does he react to that?
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: Cody's reaction is a masterclass in fame and credulity. He
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: widens his eyes and says, you think I killed him? Seriously.
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: He pushes back, leaning heavily into that constructed, wholesome identity again.
• 24:10
  Speaker 2: The family man. Yes.
• 24:12
  Speaker 1: I'm a family man. I work hard every day to
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: support my family. Why would I go jeopardize it to
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: kill this guy?
• 24:17
  Speaker 2: It's the ultimate attempt to gaslight law enforcement.
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: But the detectives aren't buying a word of it. They
• 24:22
  Speaker 1: bring up the silver sedan. They bring up the license plates.
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: They point out that the car had plates the day before.
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: Then on the afternoon of the murder, it magically didn't.
• 24:30
  Speaker 1: And now sitting in his driveway, it has plates again.
• 24:33
  Speaker 2: They've got him boxed in.
• 24:34
  Speaker 1: They explain right to his face that this specific action
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: is the element of premeditation. And this is where Detective
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: Alex executes a maneuver that I really want you to
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: dissect for us.
• 24:44
  Speaker 2: Oh, the read technique variation.
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: Yes, specifically the three options tactic.
• 24:48
  Speaker 2: This is a highly effective, deeply researched, and psychologically loaded
• 24:53
  Speaker 2: interrogation technique. The detective calmly lays out three potential scenarios
• 24:59
  Speaker 2: for how the shooting went down, presenting them to Cody
• 25:03
  Speaker 2: as if they are a multiple choice test.
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: How does he frame it?
• 25:05
  Speaker 2: Option one, it was a crime of passion. You got
• 25:08
  Speaker 2: pissed in the heat of the moment. You lost control,
• 25:10
  Speaker 2: and you shot him. Option two, you planned it ahead
• 25:13
  Speaker 2: of time, which is much worse. Option three, you meant
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: to shoot him, perhaps to scare him or injure him,
• 25:19
  Speaker 2: but you didn't actually mean to kill him.
• 25:21
  Speaker 1: The detective even frames it by saying, obviously none of
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: those options sound bad. I mean, none of them are good,
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: but there's a hierarchy of bad. Right. He's offering Cody
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: a menu where every single choice leads to a prison cell,
• 25:34
  Speaker 1: but he's making one choice look like a compassionate lifeline.
• 25:37
  Speaker 2: The underlying psychology of this tactic is brilliant. By offering
• 25:41
  Speaker 2: a hierarchy of bad, the interrogator is actively trying to
• 25:45
  Speaker 2: reduce the immense cognitive and moral load on the suspect.
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: Because admitting to cold blooded murder is just too hard.
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Admitting to first degree premeditated murder is incredibly difficult.
• 25:58
  Speaker 2: The human brain inherently recoils from the severity and the
• 26:02
  Speaker 2: monstrous nature of that admission. But if the detective says, hey,
• 26:06
  Speaker 2: maybe it was just a crime of passion, maybe it
• 26:08
  Speaker 2: was an accident, maybe you were pushed too far. the
• 26:10
  Speaker 2: suspect might latch on to that lesser, more socially acceptable
• 26:14
  Speaker 2: admission to avoid the worst possible outcome.
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: The ultimate irony, of course, is that from a legal standpoint,
• 26:21
  Speaker 1: any admission of pulling the trigger is a confession that
• 26:23
  Speaker 1: seals their fate. Wait, hold on there. When the police
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: offer these three options and minimize the crime, isn't that
• 26:30
  Speaker 1: essentially a form of psychological manipulation?
• 26:32
  Speaker 2: It absolutely is.
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: Couldn't that lead a desperate, exhausted person to invent a
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: false narrative just to please the cops and make the
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: pressure stop?
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: It is a deeply debated topic in modern criminal justice,
• 26:42
  Speaker 2: and you are hitting on the exact reason why techniques
• 26:45
  Speaker 2: like this are heavily scrutinized.
• 26:47
  Speaker 1: I mean, it sounds risky.
• 26:49
  Speaker 2: Critics rightly argue that coercive options, minimization, and maximization can
• 26:54
  Speaker 2: absolutely lead to false confessions. This is especially true when
• 26:58
  Speaker 2: dealing with vulnerable populations, juveniles, individuals with severe cognitive impairments,
• 27:04
  Speaker 2: or people who have been sleep deprived for 14 hours.
• 27:07
  Speaker 1: They just break.
• 27:08
  Speaker 2: They might admit to the lesser crime simply because their
• 27:11
  Speaker 2: brain is breaking down and they just want the interrogation
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: to end.
• 27:14
  Speaker 1: But is that the case here with Cody?
• 27:17
  Speaker 2: In this specific context, investigators argue it is a necessary
• 27:20
  Speaker 2: calibrated tool. They are dealing with an adult who has
• 27:23
  Speaker 2: meticulously removed license plates, crafted elaborate lies about cartels, and
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: is actively stonewalling.
• 27:30
  Speaker 1: So they aren't feeding him unknown details?
• 27:33
  Speaker 2: Crucially, no. The detectives aren't feeding Cody facts about the
• 27:36
  Speaker 2: crime scene he wouldn't know. They are providing psychological off-ramps
• 27:40
  Speaker 2: to encourage a hardened suspect to finally speak. They are
• 27:43
  Speaker 2: trying to find the path of least resistance to the truth.
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: Well, the tactic certainly forces a shift in the room.
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: Cody hears those three options. He processes the evidence they
• 27:53
  Speaker 1: just laid out about the plates and the phone, and
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: he realizes none of these paths end with him going
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: home to be a family man.
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: He's cornered.
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: He finally asks the crucial definitive question. What are you
• 28:05
  Speaker 1: trying to charge me with?
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: And the detective is blunt. Murder in the second degree
• 28:10
  Speaker 2: and unlawful use of a weapon.
• 28:11
  Speaker 1: But then, almost as strategic afterthought, he immediately corrects himself.
• 28:16
  Speaker 1: Based on the premeditation, the physical act of unscrewing the
• 28:19
  Speaker 1: license plates, he says, actually, we're now probably looking at
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: more of a first degree murder.
• 28:24
  Speaker 2: That's the hammer dropping.
• 28:25
  Speaker 1: Cody asks how the charge jumped from second to first
• 28:27
  Speaker 1: degree in the span of five minutes. And the detective
• 28:30
  Speaker 1: simply says, because of premeditation.
• 28:32
  Speaker 2: Wow.
• 28:33
  Speaker 1: That is the exact moment you can feel the air
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: leave the room for Cody. The illusion shatters. He finally says,
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: I think it's time to get a lawyer now.
• 28:42
  Speaker 2: He invokes his Miranda rights. He recognizes, finally, that he
• 28:46
  Speaker 2: has been entirely outmaneuvered. He genuinely thought he could talk
• 28:50
  Speaker 2: his way out of a murder charge, rely on his
• 28:52
  Speaker 2: constructed family man persona, and dazzle them with cartel stories.
• 28:57
  Speaker 1: But the unyielding reality of the digital and physical evidence
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: trapped him in a corner he couldn't lie his way
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: out of.
• 29:03
  Speaker 2: So what did the detectives do next? Because he's done talking.
• 29:06
  Speaker 1: Right. His silence forces the detectives to pivot immediately. The
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: interrogation stops and Cody is no longer providing the narrative.
• 29:14
  Speaker 2: For the investigative team, this means they have a suspect
• 29:16
  Speaker 2: in custody and they have physical evidence, but they still
• 29:19
  Speaker 2: don't have the full cohesive timeline of the why and
• 29:22
  Speaker 2: how the execution was actually facilitated on that specific day.
• 29:26
  Speaker 1: They need the rest of the puzzle.
• 29:27
  Speaker 2: And to get that missing piece, they have to find
• 29:30
  Speaker 2: the weakest link in the chain.
• 29:31
  Speaker 1: And that link is Dominique.
• 29:33
  Speaker 2: Yes. We are entering a really difficult, murky part of
• 29:37
  Speaker 2: this psychological profile, the dilemma of the accomplice.
• 29:41
  Speaker 1: So two days after Cody's interviewed, on May 8th, detectives
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: bring Dominique Marie Britt into that exact same sheriff's office
• 29:47
  Speaker 1: to sit across from them.
• 29:49
  Speaker 2: To truly understand Dominique's mindset going into this interview, we
• 29:53
  Speaker 2: really have to look at the background the investigators pulled
• 29:56
  Speaker 2: on both her and Cody.
• 29:57
  Speaker 1: Which is fascinating. Using basic law enforcement background check tools,
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: they found prior arrests and traffic records for both of
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: them back in Minnesota.
• 30:05
  Speaker 2: This isn't just a random detail. It hints at a
• 30:08
  Speaker 2: transient past, perhaps a long history of instability, moving across
• 30:12
  Speaker 2: state lines to avoid trouble before finally settling in Oregon.
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: It establishes a baseline of a chaotic, unstructured life. And
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: when Dominique starts talking, she paints a vivid, terrifying picture
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: of of just how chaotic things had gotten inside that
• 30:29
  Speaker 1: Milwaukee apartment in the weeks leading up to the murder.
• 30:31
  Speaker 2: She describes Cody's rapidly deteriorating mental health.
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: Yeah, she tells detectives that he is experiencing intense, consuming paranoia.
• 30:40
  Speaker 1: Even though she is home all day taking care of
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: their children, he is constantly obsessively accusing her of cheating
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: on him.
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: He thinks people are sneaking around the property.
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: He believes everyone hates him. He is convinced people are
• 30:51
  Speaker 1: plotting against him.
• 30:52
  Speaker 2: It sounds like a severe psychological break. bordering on total delusion.
• 30:56
  Speaker 1: The detectives actually recognize the severity of what she's describing.
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: They ask her if she thinks it's clinical depression or
• 31:03
  Speaker 1: active psychosis if he's literally hearing voices.
• 31:06
  Speaker 2: And to add a massive amount of highly flammable fuel
• 31:09
  Speaker 2: to that fire, she describes his severe alcohol abuse.
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, this part. She tells them that on
• 31:15
  Speaker 1: the night of the original domestic violence call on April 24th,
• 31:18
  Speaker 1: Cody drank an entire fifth of Crown Royal in a
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: 20-minute period.
• 31:23
  Speaker 2: Okay, let's break down the sheer physiological reality of that statement.
• 31:28
  Speaker 2: A standard fifth of liquor is about 25.6 ounces.
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: Which is how much, practically?
• 31:33
  Speaker 2: That is roughly 17 standard shots of 80-proof alcohol.
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: In 20 minutes.
• 31:37
  Speaker 2: Consuming that volume in 20 minutes is not just heavy drinking.
• 31:41
  Speaker 2: It is a profound, life-threatening attempt to obliterate consciousness.
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: It's basically poisoning yourself.
• 31:47
  Speaker 2: It is a level of acute toxic ingestion that completely
• 31:50
  Speaker 2: short-circuits the brain's rational processing centers. At that rate of consumption,
• 31:55
  Speaker 2: his blood alcohol concentration would skyrocket, drastically amplifying aggression, stripping
• 32:00
  Speaker 2: away all impulse control, and severely exacerbating any underlying paranoia
• 32:04
  Speaker 2: or psychotic features.
• 32:05
  Speaker 1: So this is the volatile, neurologically compromised state Cody is
• 32:10
  Speaker 1: living in, when the allegation against Nathan is finally made.
• 32:14
  Speaker 2: You have a man steeped in deep paranoia, drowning his
• 32:17
  Speaker 2: brain in lethal amounts of alcohol, who was just told
• 32:21
  Speaker 2: his girlfriend was sexually assaulted by his former friend.
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: It is the absolute perfect storm.
• 32:25
  Speaker 2: It really is.
• 32:26
  Speaker 1: So the detectives, sensing the buildup, ask Dominique about Cody's
• 32:30
  Speaker 1: intentions following that revelation. And this is the major turning
• 32:34
  Speaker 1: point in the interview. She admits that on Friday, three
• 32:38
  Speaker 1: full days before the murder actually took place, Cody had
• 32:41
  Speaker 1: his mind completely set.
• 32:43
  Speaker 2: She tells him there was no talking him out of it.
• 32:46
  Speaker 2: He just said that I'm going to go shoot him.
• 32:48
  Speaker 1: The detectives instantly realized she knew about the plan well
• 32:51
  Speaker 1: in advance. So the next logical, critical question is, how
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: did he get the gun to the scene?
• 32:56
  Speaker 2: Because they already know from pulling Cody's text messages that
• 33:00
  Speaker 2: he asked Dominique to bring him his toy a couple
• 33:02
  Speaker 2: of hours before the murder.
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: Right. Dominique initially tries to deny any physical involvement. She claims,
• 33:07
  Speaker 1: I told him, no, I'm not bringing nothing to you.
• 33:10
  Speaker 2: And here we see another legally complex, high-stakes interrogation tactic.
• 33:15
  Speaker 2: The detective decides to bluff her.
• 33:19
  Speaker 1: Ah, the cell tower bluff. Yes.
• 33:20
  Speaker 2: He tells Dominique they have already applied for court orders
• 33:23
  Speaker 2: to get her specific cell phone records. He asks if
• 33:26
  Speaker 2: she knows how cell towers work, and then he casually
• 33:29
  Speaker 2: name-drops a colleague to add authority.
• 33:31
  Speaker 1: He says, when Detective Hunter looks at those records, he'll
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: be able to tell whether or not you went to
• 33:36
  Speaker 1: the house or not. So if the data shows that
• 33:38
  Speaker 1: you drove up and then drove away, it means you
• 33:40
  Speaker 1: brought him the gun.
• 33:42
  Speaker 2: It's a complete fabricated bluff designed to make her think
• 33:45
  Speaker 2: that technological evidence will definitively, mathematically prove she handed him
• 33:49
  Speaker 2: the weapon.
• 33:50
  Speaker 1: Wait, how do cell tower bluffs actually work in a
• 33:53
  Speaker 1: legal setting? Like, are police truly allowed to just make
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: up forensics in an interrogation room?
• 33:58
  Speaker 2: In the United States, under the precedents set by the
• 34:00
  Speaker 2: 1969 Supreme Court case Frazier v. Cupp, yes, they absolutely are.
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: Wow. They can just lie.
• 34:06
  Speaker 2: Law enforcement is legally permitted to use deception, lie about evidence,
• 34:11
  Speaker 2: and bluff during an interrogation, provided that the deception doesn't
• 34:15
  Speaker 2: cross the line into physical coercion or promises of leniency
• 34:20
  Speaker 2: that would produce a false confession from an innocent person.
• 34:23
  Speaker 1: That is wild.
• 34:25
  Speaker 2: The bluff is incredibly effective because cell tower triangulation is
• 34:28
  Speaker 2: a real, tangible forensic tool. By measuring the time delay
• 34:33
  Speaker 2: of arrival and the angle of arrival of a cell
• 34:36
  Speaker 2: signal pinging off three different towers, experts can place a
• 34:39
  Speaker 2: phone within a certain geographic radius.
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: But not down to the front door, right?
• 34:44
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It often does not have the pinpoint, down to
• 34:46
  Speaker 2: the front door, real-time accuracy the detective implies here. But
• 34:50
  Speaker 2: a suspect sitting in a stressful room doesn't know the
• 34:53
  Speaker 2: intricate technical limitations of radio frequency engineering.
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: They just hear the cell towers. Well, proof you did it.
• 34:57
  Speaker 1: We have the map. And they fold.
• 34:59
  Speaker 2: And it works flawlessly on Dominique.
• 35:01
  Speaker 1: Faced with this supposedly irrefutable technological evidence, the pressure breaks her.
• 35:06
  Speaker 1: She confesses to the physical act.
• 35:08
  Speaker 2: What does she say?
• 35:09
  Speaker 1: She says, he was on the side of the street
• 35:12
  Speaker 1: and I brought him the backpack. She admits she walked
• 35:15
  Speaker 1: out and handed him the backpack containing the Sig Sauer.
• 35:19
  Speaker 2: That is the damning foundational confession of the entire case
• 35:22
  Speaker 2: against her.
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: It changes everything.
• 35:24
  Speaker 2: In that exact moment, she transitions from a passive witness
• 35:28
  Speaker 2: or even a victim of a prior assault... into an
• 35:31
  Speaker 2: active participating accomplice in a premeditated murder.
• 35:35
  Speaker 1: And the aftermath of this handoff, the aftermath of the
• 35:37
  Speaker 1: murder itself, is perhaps the most disturbing, surreal part of
• 35:41
  Speaker 1: this entire deep dive.
• 35:43
  Speaker 2: It's bone-chilling.
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: Dominique tells the detectives that after Cody shot Nathan in
• 35:47
  Speaker 1: the street, he came back to her and acted completely,
• 35:51
  Speaker 1: utterly normal.
• 35:52
  Speaker 2: She tells her he was completely normal, like he didn't
• 35:54
  Speaker 2: go and just shoot somebody.
• 35:55
  Speaker 1: Think about what that actually means. What do they do next?
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: Do they panic? Do they pack their bags and go
• 35:59
  Speaker 1: on the run? Do they break down in tears?
• 36:02
  Speaker 2: No.
• 36:03
  Speaker 1: They gather the kids. They drive to McDonald's. They get
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: fast food. They go back to their mother's house. They
• 36:07
  Speaker 1: put on the Smurfs movie for the kids. And they
• 36:10
  Speaker 1: go to sleep.
• 36:11
  Speaker 2: The jarring, almost psychotic juxtaposition. of brutal premeditated street violence
• 36:17
  Speaker 2: followed immediately by mundane suburban domesticity is staggering to comprehend.
• 36:23
  Speaker 1: McDonald's and the Smurfs after an execution.
• 36:26
  Speaker 2: It speaks to a profound, terrifying level of psychological compartmentalization.
• 36:32
  Speaker 2: Cody has just taken a human life in broad daylight,
• 36:35
  Speaker 2: yet his brain allows him to sit on a couch,
• 36:37
  Speaker 2: eat a cheeseburger, and watch a children's cartoon as if
• 36:40
  Speaker 2: he'd just finished a shift at the bakery.
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: It's terrifying. And what about Dominique's mindset in all of this?
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: When pressed heavily by the detectives on why she didn't
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: stop him, why she physically handed him the gun, knowing
• 36:52
  Speaker 1: what he was going to do, she uses this chilling phrase.
• 36:54
  Speaker 1: She says, OK, if it needs to happen, then it
• 36:56
  Speaker 1: needs to happen. But you're going to get caught.
• 36:58
  Speaker 2: If it needs to happen, then it needs to happen.
• 37:00
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 37:01
  Speaker 2: That is the psychology of complicity distilled into a single
• 37:03
  Speaker 2: tragic sentence. It's a complete abdication of personal moral responsibility.
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: She's just surrendering to it.
• 37:10
  Speaker 2: She is categorizing the murder of a human being as
• 37:13
  Speaker 2: an inevitable force of nature, like a hurricane rolling in
• 37:16
  Speaker 2: or a thunderstorm breaking, rather than a choice she is
• 37:20
  Speaker 2: actively facilitating with her own two hands.
• 37:22
  Speaker 1: I think of her mindset as being a passenger in
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: a car with no brakes. She sees the cliff approaching.
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: She knows the crash is absolutely going to happen. And
• 37:30
  Speaker 1: she just resigns herself to the impact. Right. But at
• 37:34
  Speaker 1: what point does handing the driver the gun make you
• 37:37
  Speaker 1: the co-pilot? Was she terrified of Cody? Was she suffering
• 37:41
  Speaker 1: from a form of battered woman syndrome, too afraid to
• 37:43
  Speaker 1: defy a man who drinks a fifth of liquor in
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: 20 minutes and suffers from intense paranoia? Or, in the
• 37:49
  Speaker 1: darkest interpretation, was she genuinely okay with Nathan dying for
• 37:54
  Speaker 1: what he allegedly did to her while she was blacked out?
• 37:57
  Speaker 2: That is the gray area where the justice system struggles
• 38:00
  Speaker 2: the most to assign absolute culpability. The detectives press her
• 38:05
  Speaker 2: incredibly hard on this exact distinction. They tell her either
• 38:08
  Speaker 2: you were good to go with it from the beginning
• 38:10
  Speaker 2: or this was your deal and you wound him up
• 38:12
  Speaker 2: and kicked him loose.
• 38:13
  Speaker 1: They outright accuse her of being the originator of the
• 38:15
  Speaker 1: murder plot.
• 38:16
  Speaker 2: And Dominique vehemently denies wanting it, claiming she was just apathetic,
• 38:21
  Speaker 2: saying whatever, do what you want.
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: But the law doesn't care about your internal apathy if
• 38:25
  Speaker 1: your external actions facilitate a homicide.
• 38:28
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Handing over the murder weapon is a definitive, prosecutable,
• 38:32
  Speaker 2: physical act where the victim of an alleged assault ends
• 38:37
  Speaker 2: and the co-conspirator to murder begins is a line drawn
• 38:40
  Speaker 2: exactly at the zipper of that backpack.
• 38:42
  Speaker 1: That backpack handoff is the linchpin. It turns this from
• 38:47
  Speaker 1: a solo act of rage into a conspiracy, which dictates
• 38:50
  Speaker 1: the fallout and the final toll of this entire tragedy.
• 38:54
  Speaker 2: Dominique's confession cements the premeditation for both of them.
• 38:57
  Speaker 1: They are both taken into formal custody. Initially, the justice
• 39:00
  Speaker 1: system throws the book at them. They are both facing
• 39:02
  Speaker 1: charges of murder and unlawful use of a weapon.
• 39:05
  Speaker 2: And rightfully so, based on the initial documentation. Given the
• 39:08
  Speaker 2: sheer volume of evidence, the text messages crowdsourcing the crime,
• 39:12
  Speaker 2: the missing license plates, the cell tower data, and the
• 39:15
  Speaker 2: recorded Mirandai's confession of handing over the gun the prosecution
• 39:20
  Speaker 2: has the foundational undeniable elements for first-degree murder convictions for
• 39:24
  Speaker 2: both Cody and Dominique.
• 39:26
  Speaker 1: But that is not how this story ends in the courtroom.
• 39:29
  Speaker 2: No, it rarely is.
• 39:30
  Speaker 1: Is. Fast forward to December 2024. Dominique Britt takes a
• 39:34
  Speaker 1: plea deal. She pleads guilty not to murder, but to
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: first-degree manslaughter and unlawful use of a weapon. Her sentence
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: is 150 months, which is 12 and a half years
• 39:45
  Speaker 1: in prison.
• 39:46
  Speaker 2: A huge step down.
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: And then in April 2025... Cody Denoweth also takes a
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: plea deal. The man who unscrewed his license plates, hunted
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: down a former co-worker, and shot him three times in
• 39:55
  Speaker 1: broad daylight pleads guilty to first-degree manslaughter and first-degree assault
• 39:59
  Speaker 1: with a firearm.
• 40:00
  Speaker 2: Unbelievable.
• 40:00
  Speaker 1: He avoids a life sentence entirely and is sentenced to
• 40:03
  Speaker 1: a combined 27 and a half years. Wait, stop right there.
• 40:06
  Speaker 1: If you have text messages explicitly asking for murder, missing
• 40:11
  Speaker 1: license plates to hide identity, and a literal on-tape confession
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: from the accomplice, How on earth does that legally equal manslaughter?
• 40:20
  Speaker 2: I know. It sounds crazy.
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: It feels like a massive disconnect between the evidence we
• 40:25
  Speaker 1: just spent an hour discussing and the consequence handed down
• 40:28
  Speaker 1: by the judge.
• 40:29
  Speaker 2: It is an incredibly valid, common frustration for anyone observing
• 40:32
  Speaker 2: the courts. And it strikes at the very heart of
• 40:35
  Speaker 2: how the plea bargaining system practically operates in America. Over
• 40:39
  Speaker 2: 90 percent of criminal cases end in plea deals. But why?
• 40:44
  Speaker 2: It's not purely about efficiency or clearing crowded dockets, though
• 40:47
  Speaker 2: that absolutely plays a logistical role. It is primarily about
• 40:50
  Speaker 2: risk aversion for both the prosecution and the defense.
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: Risk aversion for the prosecution? They have a mountain of evidence.
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: What are they afraid of?
• 40:56
  Speaker 2: They have evidence of premeditation, yes. But trials are not
• 40:59
  Speaker 2: conducted in a sterile vacuum. They're conducted in a courtroom
• 41:02
  Speaker 2: in front of 12 unpredictable human beings on a jury.
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: Okay, that's true.
• 41:06
  Speaker 2: And the emotional narrative of this case is incredibly dangerously messy.
• 41:11
  Speaker 2: If this goes to a full jury trial... Cody's defense
• 41:14
  Speaker 2: attorney is going to put Dominique's sexual assault allegation front
• 41:17
  Speaker 2: and center on day one.
• 41:18
  Speaker 1: They are going to paint Nathan not as an innocent victim.
• 41:21
  Speaker 2: But as a predator who violated a vulnerable woman in
• 41:24
  Speaker 2: her own home while her boyfriend was locked in a
• 41:27
  Speaker 2: jail cell.
• 41:27
  Speaker 1: So they would try to employ a blame the victim
• 41:30
  Speaker 1: strategy to muddy the waters for the jury?
• 41:33
  Speaker 2: Precisely. They would likely argue a defense of extreme emotional disturbance,
• 41:37
  Speaker 2: or ED, which in states like Oregon is a legal
• 41:40
  Speaker 2: defense that can mitigate a murder charge down to manslaughter.
• 41:43
  Speaker 1: Really? Just based on the emotional shock of the allegation? Yes.
• 41:46
  Speaker 2: They would argue that Cody was so psychologically shattered by
• 41:49
  Speaker 2: the severe trauma inflicted on his partner that he temporarily
• 41:53
  Speaker 2: lost his mind and his capacity for rational judgment. Even
• 41:57
  Speaker 2: if the prosecution proves the physical premeditation with the license plates,
• 42:00
  Speaker 2: there is a very real statistical risk that a sympathetic jury,
• 42:04
  Speaker 2: emotionally swayed by the sexual assault narrative, might acquit on
• 42:08
  Speaker 2: the highest murder charges out of a misguided sense of
• 42:10
  Speaker 2: vigilante empathy.
• 42:11
  Speaker 1: Wow. So the prosecutor looks at that risk, looks at
• 42:15
  Speaker 1: the wild unpredictability of 12 strangers, and decides that securing
• 42:20
  Speaker 1: a guaranteed 27 and a half years for Cody and
• 42:23
  Speaker 1: 12 and a half for Dominique is a safer bet
• 42:25
  Speaker 1: for public safety than risking a potential acquittal on a
• 42:29
  Speaker 1: first degree murder charge.
• 42:30
  Speaker 2: Exactly. The justice system often settles for a sure thing
• 42:35
  Speaker 2: rather than rolling the dice on the absolute truth.
• 42:37
  Speaker 1: That makes a morbid kind of sense.
• 42:40
  Speaker 2: The sentences still represent significant life-altering time in a state penitentiary,
• 42:44
  Speaker 2: ensuring they're removed from society for decades. And for Nathan's family,
• 42:49
  Speaker 2: it brings a measure of absolute legal closure. There will
• 42:52
  Speaker 2: be no painful, drawn-out trial, no appeals dragging on for years,
• 42:56
  Speaker 2: and Nathan's character won't be publicly assassinated on the witness
• 42:59
  Speaker 2: stand by defense attorneys.
• 43:00
  Speaker 1: But the labels manslaughter instead of murder don't perfectly align
• 43:03
  Speaker 1: with the cold, calculated reality of those missing license plates
• 43:06
  Speaker 1: and those text messages.
• 43:08
  Speaker 2: They don't.
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: It is a deeply bitter pill to swallow. A life
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: is irreparably lost. Nathan Anderson, regardless of the allegations made
• 43:15
  Speaker 1: against him, allegations that will now never be investigated or proven,
• 43:19
  Speaker 1: was denied due process, denied a trial, and denied his
• 43:23
  Speaker 1: life on a neighborhood street at 5.30 in the afternoon.
• 43:26
  Speaker 2: The tragic spiral here is profound and far-reaching. A volatile
• 43:30
  Speaker 2: mix of elements, a domestic dispute, an allegation of severe trauma,
• 43:35
  Speaker 2: deep-seated paranoia, immense alcohol abuse, and an absolute egotistical refusal
• 43:40
  Speaker 2: to let the law handle the situation led to the
• 43:43
  Speaker 2: total destruction of three lives and permanently devastated an entire community.
• 43:48
  Speaker 1: It brings us right back to that chemical fire we
• 43:50
  Speaker 1: talked about at the very beginning of this deep dive.
• 43:52
  Speaker 2: The match and the dry brush.
• 43:53
  Speaker 1: Once Cody looked at Dominique and decided, I'm going to
• 43:55
  Speaker 1: handle it myself, he struck the match and the resulting
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: explosion consumed everyone in his orbit.
• 44:00
  Speaker 2: And it left nothing but ashes and incredibly complex, haunting
• 44:03
  Speaker 2: questions about complicity, ego, and the true nature of justice.
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: Which leads me to a final provocative thought I want
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: to leave you, our listener, to mull over as we
• 44:13
  Speaker 1: wrap up today. We spent this entire deep dive looking
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: at the concrete physical evidence, the text messages, the cell
• 44:22
  Speaker 1: tower triangulation. The removed license plates, the gun in the backpack.
• 44:26
  Speaker 2: The hard facts. Right.
• 44:27
  Speaker 1: But looming over all of this physical evidence is the invisible,
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: unreliable specter of the human mind.
• 44:34
  Speaker 2: Which is so fragile.
• 44:35
  Speaker 1: Domini claims she was blacked out, that her memory of
• 44:38
  Speaker 1: the alleged assault is entirely missing, leaving only physical pain
• 44:42
  Speaker 1: and a narrative she had to construct after the fact.
• 44:45
  Speaker 1: Cody was operating under a heavy haze of severe paranoia
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: and massive alcohol consumption. his perception of reality entirely skewed
• 44:52
  Speaker 1: by his own fragile ego and violent delusion.
• 44:55
  Speaker 2: It's all filtered through broken lenses.
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: Exactly. So if human memory, chemical intoxication, and psychological trauma
• 45:00
  Speaker 1: can so deeply, profoundly distort our sense of reality, how
• 45:04
  Speaker 1: often are permanent, irreversible decisions, like taking a human life,
• 45:07
  Speaker 1: made based on entirely fragmented, incomplete, or outright false truth?
• 45:11
  Speaker 2: That is a chilling thought.
• 45:13
  Speaker 1: What happens to a society when we decide the justice
• 45:16
  Speaker 1: system is too slow or too flawed is And we
• 45:18
  Speaker 1: take it upon ourselves to become the vigilantes, the judges,
• 45:22
  Speaker 1: and the executioners of our own distorted realities.
• 45:25
  Speaker 2: Because the one thing you can never do once you
• 45:28
  Speaker 2: act on a distorted reality and pull that trigger is
• 45:31
  Speaker 2: take the bullet back.
• 45:32
  Speaker 1: You can never unstrike the match. Thank you so much
• 45:35
  Speaker 1: for joining us on this deep dive. Keep asking the
• 45:37
  Speaker 1: hard questions. Keep looking beneath the surface of the stories
• 45:40
  Speaker 1: you encounter. And we'll see you next time.