Latest / Murder Files Unsealed / Indiana Mom Arrested for Triple Killing in Illinois

Transcript

Indiana Mom Arrested for Triple Killing in Illinois · Murder Files Unsealed

0:00
Speaker 1: Imagine legally purchasing a five hundred and eighty nine dollars
0:05
piece of tactical equipment online, you know, just sitting down
0:09
to write a handwritten farewell note to your kids, and
0:12
then methodically executing three members of your own family. And like,
0:16
all of this happening while the very systems that are
0:19
designed to intervene the ones meant to prevent such violence.
0:23
I've just been flashing red for years. So welcome to
0:25
this deep dive. Glad to be here today. We are,
0:29
we're navigating some incredibly dark, really complex waters. Our mission
0:34
here is to unpack a harrowing, honestly, meticulously documented five
0:38
thousand word account of a suburban tragedy, one that's come
0:41
to be known as the Crete Township massacre. And to
0:44
be entirely clear with you right up front, we are
0:46
relying exclusively on publicly available court documents, you know, shareff's
0:50
office statements, and verified news reporting from May of twenty
0:53
twenty six.
0:53
Speaker 2: Yeah, and the scope of the material we are analyzing
0:56
today is just immense. I mean, we have a highly
0:58
detailed reconstruction of a night left three people dead and
1:02
two young children orphaned.
1:03
Speaker 1: It's just devastating it really is.
1:06
Speaker 2: But our goal here is not simply to walk you
1:09
through a timeline of a terrible event, because a timeline
1:12
just tells you what happened. We need to understand the
1:15
mechanics of the why exactly, Like how did the legal system,
1:20
you know, family court protocols, interstate firearm regulations, and mental
1:24
health infrastructures all interact to allow this outcome.
1:29
Speaker 1: Because true crime media it often fixates on the stranger
1:32
lurking in the shadows, you know, like the unknown intruder. Oh, totally,
1:36
the boogeyman, right, the boogeyman. But what we are exploring
1:39
today is a much more I guess, destabilizing reality. This
1:43
is an examination of what happens when the threat is
1:46
entirely internal to the family unit. It's about this collision
1:50
course of untreated mental health crises, the weaponization of child custody,
1:55
and fractured familial bonds. When you read through these court documents,
1:59
it doesn't feel like a sudden, unpredictable lightning strike.
2:02
Speaker 2: No, not at all.
2:03
Speaker 1: It feels like a slow moving freight train that multiple
2:05
institutions just watched approach yet completely failed to derail.
2:09
Speaker 2: The sources document a very specific progression. I mean we're
2:12
looking at a system, or rather a patchwork of overlapping
2:16
decentralized systems that failed to interrupt a fatal trajectory. And
2:22
to really understand the failure points, we have to look
2:24
closely at the physical and psychological geography of where this
2:28
took place.
2:28
Speaker 1: Yeah, let's set the scene for that. So we are
2:31
in unincorporated Crete Township, Illinois. And for those unfamiliar, this
2:35
is a community of roughly ten thousand people. It's located
2:38
just a short drive south of Chicago. Okay, but being
2:41
unincorporated is it's actually an important distinction here.
2:45
Speaker 2: Why is that?
2:46
Speaker 1: Well, it means you aren't dealing with a dense urban grid.
2:50
You're looking at spacious, treeline neighborhoods. People move to these
2:54
areas specifically for the quiet, Yeah, for the safety, for
2:58
the predictable rhythms of suburb.
3:00
Speaker 2: Right, they want that piece exactly.
3:02
Speaker 1: These communities are effectively designed as walled gardens, you know,
3:06
they're geographically structured to insulate residents from the unpredictability of
3:10
the city.
3:11
Speaker 2: And on the night of March twenty second into the
3:13
early hours of March twenty third, twenty twenty six, the
3:16
structural illusion of that walled garden was violently dismantled. Yeah, So,
3:21
at approximately two am, Will County Sheriff's deputies are dispatched
3:25
to a residence on East Norway Trail. They're responding to
3:28
a welfare check because neighbors in this extremely quiet, low
3:33
density area reported hearing the muffled sounds of gunfire.
3:37
Speaker 1: And I mean, if you are a deputy pulling up
3:39
to a house in a neighborhood like that at two
3:40
in the morning, your baseline expectation for a shots fired
3:44
call is usually pretty low stakes.
3:46
Speaker 2: Right. You're probably thinking someone is shooting at a coyote
3:48
or yeah.
3:49
Speaker 1: Or maybe teenagers are just messing around with firecrackers. At worst,
3:52
you might anticipate a domestic dispute that got out of hand, exactly.
3:56
But what the deputies stepped into instantly defies any of
3:59
those standard operational expectations. I mean, they walk into a
4:02
dual crime scene that is staggering in its specific calculated brutality.
4:07
Speaker 2: Yeah, and the geography of the crime scene is split
4:09
into two distinct locations, which immediately changes how law enforcement
4:14
processes the event.
4:15
Speaker 1: Oh for sure.
4:16
Speaker 2: So inside the home on East Norway trail, deputies locate
4:19
two victims. Fifty five year old Patrick Ford is found
4:22
in the dining room. He has been shot seventeen times
4:26
at close range.
4:27
Speaker 1: Seventeen times.
4:28
Speaker 2: Wow, yeah, with the ballistic trauma concentrated entirely in his
4:31
chest and abdomen.
4:32
Speaker 1: Guy.
4:33
Speaker 2: And then on the adjacent staircase they find fifty four
4:36
year old Stacey Ford. She has been shot three times
4:39
in the same vital areas, also a close range.
4:42
Speaker 1: Okay, so seventeen rounds into a single victim. But wait,
4:46
couldn't a defense attorney argue that seventeen shots is indicative
4:49
of a panic response.
4:51
Speaker 2: How do you mean?
4:52
Speaker 1: Well, say a random burglar breaks in, gets startled by
4:55
the homeowner, and just empties the magazine in absolute terror.
4:58
Doesn't that happen?
4:59
Speaker 2: That is a really common assumption, But forensic analysis reads
5:03
that entirely differently. Really yeah. Panic fire is almost always scattered.
5:07
A terrified shooter lacks breath control and stance right, so
5:10
the rounds will strike the ceiling, the dry wall, the furniture.
5:12
Oh with placing seventeen rounds tightly into the center mass
5:16
of a single target requires sustained visual focus, intentional trigger
5:21
resets and likely a high capacity magazine or a.
5:24
Speaker 1: Reload, So just deliberate exactly.
5:27
Speaker 2: In the forensic world, we look at the acoustic and
5:29
physical mechanics of that kind of violence. It takes physical
5:32
effort and time to pull a trigger seventeen times. That
5:35
is not panic, that is overkill. It is the physical
5:38
manifestation of profound, targeted animosity.
5:42
Speaker 1: Which completely changes the narrative of the scene, and that
5:45
brings us to the chilling detail that upends any lingering
5:47
theory of a home invasion. The deputies find no broken glass,
5:52
no splintered door frames, the televisions are still on the walls.
5:55
Valuables are completely untouched.
5:57
Speaker 2: Yeah, nothing taken.
5:58
Speaker 1: And then less than a block away and a nearby
6:00
cul de sac they locate the second half of the
6:02
crime scene.
6:03
Speaker 2: Yes, In that cul de sac, investigators find a twenty
6:06
fourteen Ford fusion titanium and inside the vehicle, slump face
6:10
down on a reclined passenger seat is thirty two year
6:13
old Jacob Q. Lambert. He has been shot once, execution
6:17
style in the back of the head.
6:18
Speaker 1: The contrast there is what I find so deeply disturbing.
6:22
I mean, in the dining room, you have an absolute
6:24
explosion of rage seventeen rounds. But out in the car,
6:28
you have a single, precise, execution style shot.
6:31
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's totally different.
6:32
Speaker 1: How does law enforcement reconcile those two completely different signatures
6:36
of violence happening within minutes of each other.
6:39
Speaker 2: They reconcile it by looking at the relationship between the
6:42
victims and the killer. Okay, the execution in the car
6:46
implies a chilling level of physical control and deception. You
6:50
do not get a single shot to the back of
6:52
the head of an adult male in a replying car
6:54
seat unless that victim is completely relaxed, right, entirely unaware
6:59
of the threat, and comfortable with the person sitting right
7:01
next to them.
7:02
Speaker 1: Wow.
7:03
Speaker 2: Yeah. So combine that intimate proximity in the car with
7:06
the overkill inside a locked home, and investigators know instantly
7:10
that they're not looking for a stranger.
7:12
Speaker 1: It's someone they know exactly.
7:14
Speaker 2: The perpetrator is someone within the family's inner circle, someone
7:18
who possessed the keys to the house, someone who possessed
7:21
the trust of the man in the car, and someone
7:23
harboring a highly specific lethal grievance.
7:27
Speaker 1: So the immediate question becomes, who are these three victims
7:31
and what familial dynamic made them the targets of an assassination,
7:36
because everything in the sorts material indicates these people were
7:39
the absolute stabilizing center of their family's world.
7:42
Speaker 2: Let's look at the profiles provided in the court records
7:44
and the community and reporting.
7:45
Speaker 1: Yeah.
7:46
Speaker 2: So, Jacob Lambert, the man found in the vehicle, was
7:49
a thirty two year old father of two young children,
7:51
ages three and four. Okay, he has described extensively as
7:55
a devoted father who is actively working to navigate a
7:58
highly complex coparentings situation.
8:00
Speaker 1: And his mother and stepfather, Stacy and Patrick Ford, were
8:03
essentially the pillars of this family. They were longtime respected
8:07
residents of the Crete area. Neighbors described them as the
8:10
kind of grandparents who didn't just show up for holidays,
8:13
you know, they were deeply involved in the daily logistics
8:16
of raising those two young grandchildren. When the primary parenting
8:20
dynamic broked down.
8:22
Speaker 2: And the sociological impact on the town was immediate and immense,
8:26
a local vigil drew dozens of mourners, and we really
8:30
have to place this within the broader context of the
8:32
town's psychology at that moment.
8:34
Speaker 1: Oh, that's right.
8:35
Speaker 2: Yeah, The sources explicitly note the crete township was already
8:38
dealing with the collective trauma of a completely unrelated fatal
8:42
house fire on shelle a court that has occurred shortly before.
8:45
Speaker 1: Just terrible timing.
8:47
Speaker 2: So the community was already in a state of mourning,
8:49
and then they are hit with a triple homicide that
8:52
wipes out multiple generations of a single family.
8:54
Speaker 1: The dynamic that set this in motions centers entirely around
8:58
the accused, thirty year old Jenni Struggle. She lived just
9:01
across the state line in Saint John, Indiana, and she
9:04
is the mother of the three and four year old children. Right,
9:07
she and Jacob Lambert had a turbulent on an off
9:10
romantic relationship. Now, whenever we hear about violence surrounding co parenting,
9:15
the immediate cultural shorthand is to call it a bitter
9:18
custody battle. Right, Oh, absolutely, we picture two parents in
9:21
a family courtroom aggressively fighting for primary custody, neither willing
9:25
to give an inch. But the sources provided detail that
9:29
totally shatters that trope, and I want to make sure
9:31
we don't glide past it. Jenna Strubbleead actually voluntarily relinquished
9:36
custody to Jacob and his family.
9:39
Speaker 2: That is perhaps the most psychologically significant detail in the
9:42
early timeline. According to the filings, she explicitly cited her
9:47
own ongoing challenges as the reason for voluntarily handing over
9:51
custody of her children to Jacob, Stacy and Patrick.
9:55
Speaker 1: But wait, if she voluntarily gave them up because she
9:58
knew she was struggling, why the violent reversal. That seems
10:01
entirely contradictory to me.
10:02
Speaker 2: It does on the surface, you don't hand over.
10:04
Speaker 1: Your children to a stabilizing force if you view that
10:06
force as an enemy. So what shifts a grandparent from
10:09
a necessary, helpful safety net into a mortal threat.
10:12
Speaker 2: It requires looking at child custody not merely as a
10:15
legal arrangement, but as a proxy for psychological control.
10:18
Speaker 1: Okay, go on.
10:19
Speaker 2: When a parent voluntarily relinquishes custody, it is a profound
10:23
admission of vulnerability and inadequacy. Initially, the Ford stepping in
10:28
to provide stability was likely a massive relief. That makes sense,
10:32
but human psychology, particularly when complicated by severe mental health struggles,
10:36
is not static. As the accused perhaps attempted to regain
10:40
her footing or rebuild her identity, the continuous, undeniable stability
10:45
of the Fords may have transformed into a mirror.
10:48
Speaker 1: A mirror you mean, like reflecting her own perceived failures.
10:52
Speaker 2: Ercisely, in clinical terms, this is often related to a
10:55
narcissistic injury. The competence of the grandparents becomes an active
10:59
insult to her identity as a mother.
11:01
Speaker 1: Oh wow.
11:02
Speaker 2: They transition in her internal narrative, from a supportive safety
11:05
net into an existential threat to her self worth. The
11:08
court sources explicitly state her motive. She expressed a deep
11:12
seated fear that if something happened to her, the Fords
11:15
would gain permanent custody.
11:16
Speaker 1: And she viewed that outcome as unacceptable.
11:19
Speaker 2: Exactly, they were no longer family. They were the ultimate
11:21
obstacle preventing her from controlling the narrative of her children's destiny.
11:25
Speaker 1: To really understand how a mind makes that radical shift
11:29
from voluntarily surrendering toddlers to systematically executing their grandparents, we
11:35
have to examine Jenna Strubble's internal world. Yeah, we do,
11:39
because outwardly she presented as a typical suburban mother residing
11:42
in Indiana, but the court documents reveal a heavily documented,
11:47
years long battle with her mental health. And I'm not
11:50
just talking about mild depression here.
11:52
Speaker 2: No, the filings are explicit she had a long standing
11:55
history of severe depression and suicidal ideation. Critically, the records
12:01
indicate a prior involuntary commitment to a psychiatric facility.
12:06
Speaker 1: And the sources detail specific anecdotes that are genuinely terrifying
12:10
when viewed in hindsight. There are documented expressions of wanting
12:13
to harm her own parents, right. There are voiced thoughts
12:16
of jumping from a window while holding.
12:18
Speaker 2: Her children, just incredibly dark stuff.
12:20
Speaker 1: And then there's an incident that feels like it should
12:22
have stopped everything in its tracks. She actively hit her
12:25
father's rifle under her bed while voicing unexecuted plans to
12:28
kill Jacob Lambert.
12:29
Speaker 2: While she was prescribed medication to manage these conditions. That
12:33
specific incident with the rifle represents a massive behavioral leap. Definitely,
12:38
we're no longer talking about passive suicidal ideation. We are
12:42
talking about active homicidal ideation coupled with physical preparation.
12:47
Speaker 1: We often hear people use the analogy of a check
12:50
engine light for these kinds of warning, right, But that
12:54
analogy feels too passive. For this, a check engine light
12:57
means something is slowly wearing down. This feels more like
13:00
the Swiss Cheese model of systemic failure.
13:03
Speaker 2: Oh, the Swiss Cheese model. Yeah.
13:04
Speaker 1: You have all these different layers of defense, the medical community,
13:07
the family, courts, law enforcement, and each layer has holes
13:11
in it. Usually the holes don't line up. But here
13:14
you have an involuntary commitment, homicidal ideation involving a firearm,
13:18
and severe custody.
13:20
Speaker 2: Ing speities, and somehow the holes aligned perfectly, allowing her
13:23
to slip right through.
13:24
Speaker 1: Yes, how does the system legally allow someone with that
13:27
specific history to regain custody or operate without intense mandatory oversight?
13:32
Speaker 2: Because the systems operate in fundamentally reactive, isolated silos, the
13:37
legal and psychiatric frameworks in the United States are largely
13:41
designed to intervene only during an acute, immediate crisis.
13:45
Speaker 1: Okay, so like a nine to one one call exactly.
13:48
Speaker 2: The criteria for an involuntary commitment, often referred to under
13:52
various state laws like the Baker Act in Florida or
13:55
similar statutes in Indiana and Illinois, require the individual to
14:00
present an imminent danger to themselves or others right. Once
14:03
the acute crisis passes and the patient stabilizes on medication
14:07
or recants the immediate threat, the legal hold is released.
14:11
Speaker 1: So when she hides her father's rifle and talks about
14:13
killing her ex, if she doesn't actually pull the trigger
14:15
that night, the system just categorizes it as a crisis
14:19
averted exactly.
14:20
Speaker 2: The family court might note, the psychiatric facility might document it,
14:23
but there is rarely a mechanism for continuous preventative surveillance
14:27
once the individual returns to the comunity.
14:29
Speaker 1: That's terrifying.
14:30
Speaker 2: And Furthermore, the privacy protections of HYPA often prevent mental
14:34
health facilities from actively sharing detailed, ongoing risk assessments with
14:39
family court judges unless subpoenaed under very specific conditions.
14:43
Speaker 1: Which means the judge making custody decisions might only be
14:46
seeing a fraction of the danger. Right, and those systemic
14:50
blind spots didn't just allow her to regain her footing,
14:53
they provided the cover for her to design a highly specific,
14:56
chillingly methodical plan.
14:58
Speaker 2: Yes, they did.
14:59
Speaker 1: This brings us to the anatomy of the premeditation. The
15:03
timeline of how she weaponized her intent is detailed in
15:06
the sources, and it is methodical. In December of twenty
15:09
twenty five, she legally purchases a Glock nineteen handgun.
15:13
Speaker 2: We really need to pause on the word legally, because
15:15
this exposes the most glaring hole in the Swiss cheese model.
15:18
Speaker 1: Let's do it.
15:18
Speaker 2: How does someone with a prior involuntary commitment legally acquire
15:22
a firearm? The National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or
15:26
NICs is a federal database. Federal law technically prohibits individuals
15:30
who have been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed
15:33
to a mental institution from purchasing firearms.
15:36
Speaker 1: Right, so, if the federal law prohibits it, how did
15:39
she walk out of a store with the glock nineteen?
15:41
Did she buy it on the black market?
15:43
Speaker 2: No? The sources indicate a legal purchase. The failure point
15:47
lies in the reporting mechanisms. Of of course, the NICs
15:51
database relies almost entirely on individual states to voluntarily upload
15:55
their mental health records.
15:57
Speaker 1: Voluntarily.
15:58
Speaker 2: Yes, if it involuntary commitment occurs at a state or
16:01
county level facility and that specific jurisdiction fails to transmit
16:05
the paperwork to the federal NICs index, which happens with
16:09
alarming frequency. Due to underfunding, administrative backlogs, or confusion over
16:14
privacy laws. The background check simply comes back clean, so.
16:18
Speaker 1: The federal computer can only search the records that has
16:20
actually been given. Exactly, So, a clerk at a gun
16:23
shop runs her name, the computer says proceed, and she
16:26
is handed a nine milimeter handgun. But she doesn't stop
16:29
at the gun.
16:30
Speaker 2: No, she doesn't.
16:31
Speaker 1: Weeks later, the sources show she goes online and purchases
16:34
a suppressor a silencer for approximately five hundred and eighty
16:37
nine dollars. I have to ask, how on earth do
16:40
you buy a suppressor online? Doesn't the government heavily regulate those?
16:44
Speaker 2: They do? Suppressors are regulated under the National Firearms Act
16:48
of nineteen thirty four, or the NFA. Purchasing one is
16:52
not like buying a standard rifle.
16:54
Speaker 1: How does it work?
16:54
Speaker 2: It requires submitting an ATF Form four, providing fingerprints, passport photo,
17:00
paying a two hundred dollars tax stamp, and waiting for
17:03
an extensive background check that can take anywhere from six
17:06
to twelve months to clear.
17:07
Speaker 1: Wait wait six to twelve months? Yes, so you're telling
17:10
me she had to navigate a labyrinth of federal paperwork,
17:14
get fingerprinted, pay hundreds of dollars, and then wait months
17:18
for this device to arrive.
17:19
Speaker 2: Yes, and from a psychological and legal standpoint, that administrative
17:24
burden is exactly what prosecutors will focus on.
17:26
Speaker 1: Wow.
17:27
Speaker 2: Navigating the NFA process requires executive function, patience, and long
17:31
term planning. It completely eviscerates any defense that this violence
17:36
was a sudden, impulsive snap.
17:37
Speaker 1: It fundamentally redefines the nature of the crime. I mean,
17:40
if someone buys a handgun, a defense attorney might argue
17:43
they felt vulnerable, they wanted it for home protection. But
17:46
you do not buy a five hundred dollars suppressor for
17:48
personal self defense. You buy a suppressor because you're planning
17:52
a tactical operation and you need to control the acoustic
17:55
environment of your crime scene.
17:57
Speaker 2: Precisely. You buy a suppressor because you you know you
18:01
are going to be firing multiple rounds in an environment
18:04
where the noise would alert neighbors or other victims. And
18:08
if the suppressor wasn't enough to prove premeditation. The final
18:12
piece of evidence cements it the note Yes. The night
18:15
before the killings, she sits down and writes a handwritten
18:18
note According to the court filings, this note explicitly lists
18:23
the names of her three children, the two she shared
18:25
with Lambert, and potentially another child, and it provides instructions
18:29
asking others to care for them in her absence.
18:31
Speaker 1: Think about the psychological state required to write that note.
18:34
She is actively making logistical arrangements for a future where
18:38
she knows she will no longer be present. She fully
18:40
comprehends the permanence of what she is about to do, and.
18:43
Speaker 2: That profound awareness severely complicates any potential insanity defense Under
18:49
Illinois law. To successfully argue criminal insanity, the defense must
18:54
prove that the accused lacked the substantial capacity to appreciate
18:58
the criminality of their conduct at the time of the act. Okay,
19:02
I see, But if you spend months acquiring stealth equipment
19:05
and you write a farewell note making arrangements for your children,
19:09
you are demonstrating a crystal clear understanding that your upcoming
19:13
actions will result in your permanent removal from society, either
19:17
through death or life in prison.
19:19
Speaker 1: She knew exactly what the consequences would be exactly with
19:22
the suppressor legally acquired attached to the Glock nineteen and
19:25
the farewell note left behind the trap is officially set.
19:30
This brings us to the timeline of March twenty second.
19:33
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is where it gets incredibly grim.
19:35
Speaker 1: The sequence of events reconstructed through probable cause affidavits and
19:39
struggles own admissions is an agonizing display of cold deliberation.
19:43
Speaker 2: The execution of the plan begins with deception. She sends
19:46
a text message to Jacob Lambert inviting him to simply
19:49
hang out, and.
19:50
Speaker 1: He agrees entirely on a way of what is coming.
19:54
They initially meet near the Plunk Creek Nature Preserve. However,
19:58
finding the preserve closed, they pull the Ford Fusion over
20:01
onto the shoulder of Burnham Road in Sock Village, right,
20:05
and this is where the trap springs. But it happens
20:07
with a level of intimacy that is frankly horrifying. Struggle
20:11
offers Jacob a back massage. Yeah. She climbs over and
20:14
straddles him in the reclined passenger seat, and she proceeds
20:17
to massage his back for roughly twenty minutes.
20:20
Speaker 2: Twenty minutes. We really need to pause and analyze that
20:24
duration in the context of a premeditated homicide. Twenty minutes
20:28
of physical contact is a vast, almost incomprehensible expanse of time.
20:33
Speaker 1: How does the human nervous system even handle that you
20:36
are touching the father of your children. You can feel
20:38
his chest rising and falling, you can feel his body heat.
20:41
Speaker 2: It's hard to fathom your own heart.
20:43
Speaker 1: Must be pounding out of your chest. And yet she
20:45
doesn't panic, she doesn't break down and confess. After those
20:48
twenty minutes, she reaches for the suppressed glock nineteen she
20:51
had hidden under the seat.
20:52
Speaker 2: And the sources specifically state she holds the muzzle of
20:55
that weapon to the back of his head for several
20:58
minutes before pulling the trigger.
20:59
Speaker 1: The ability to maintain that posture without the autonomic nervous
21:03
system overwhelming the brain, it just speaks to a psychological
21:06
state known as predatory detachment. Yes, can you explain the
21:09
difference there? We usually think of murderers as being completely
21:12
consumed by rage, right.
21:14
Speaker 2: We tend to categorize violence into two types, effective and predatory.
21:20
Effective violence is reactive, it's the bar fight, the sudden
21:24
crime of passion. The autonomic nervous system spikes adrenaline floods
21:28
the body, and the violence is chaotic and immediate.
21:31
Speaker 1: Okay, that makes sense.
21:32
Speaker 2: Predatory violence, however, is instrumental. It is cold, the perpetrator's
21:36
heart rate actually lowers. Yeah, they do not view the
21:40
victim as a human being with an internal life. They
21:43
view them strictly as an object to be manipulated and
21:46
eliminated to achieve a goal.
21:48
Speaker 1: So during those several minutes of holding the gun to
21:50
his skull, she isn't processing his humanity or their shared history.
21:55
Speaker 2: No, empathy requires a cognitive recognition of the other person's reality.
22:00
In a state of predatory detachment, that cognitive bridge is
22:04
deliberately burned. Wow, he was no longer the father of
22:07
her children. He was simply step one in the logistical
22:10
process of preventing the Fords from gaining permanent custody.
22:14
Speaker 1: He is killed instantly in the vehicle, but the operation
22:17
doesn't end on Burnham Road. She then takes the wheel
22:19
of his car, the very car containing his body, and
22:23
drives it to the Ford's home on East Norway Trail.
22:27
She parks in the nearby cul de Sac, walks to
22:29
the house and uses Jacob's own keys to attempt entry.
22:33
When Patrick Ford opens the door, she doesn't hesitate. She
22:37
fires seventeen rounds into his chest and abdomen as he
22:40
stands in his dining room just brutal. Stacy Ford, hearing
22:43
the sudden commotion, comes downstairs and is met with three
22:46
shots to the chest and abdomen.
22:48
Speaker 2: The acoustic environment of that house in those moments is
22:51
something we have to address. She used a suppressor, but
22:54
a suppressor does not make a firearm completely silent like
22:57
in the movies.
22:58
Speaker 1: It doesn't I always thought it did.
23:00
Speaker 2: All it reduces the descpel level from deafening to something
23:03
resembling a loud pneumatic nail gun or a sharp clap.
23:07
It masks the acoustic signature, so neighbors outside might not
23:11
immediately recognize it as gunfire. But inside that house, the
23:16
noise and the concussive pressure of twenty rounds being fired
23:19
would have been chaotic and terrifying.
23:21
Speaker 1: And that leads to the most miraculous yet simultaneously devastating
23:25
fact in these entire documents. Inside that home while twenty
23:29
rounds are being fired are the three and four year
23:31
old children.
23:32
Speaker 2: They were physically present in the environment where their grandparents
23:35
were being executed.
23:36
Speaker 1: The sources indicate they were physically unharmed, but to say
23:40
they were unharmed feels like a massive failure of language.
23:43
Speaker 2: Physically uninjured is the correct legal term, but the neurobiological
23:48
trauma inflicted on a developing three and four year old
23:50
brain in that scenario is catastrophic. Absolutely, whether they visually
23:55
witness the violence or simply absorbed the chaotic auditory environment
23:58
and the immediate terrifying app math, their primary zone of
24:02
safety was violently annihilated while they were inside it.
24:05
Speaker 1: After executing this incredibly cold, multi stage elimination of three
24:10
family members, a plan she spent months outfitting herself for.
24:14
The meticulous tactical nature of the operation just abruptly evaporates, it,
24:19
really does. The unraveling of Jenna's strubble happens at a
24:21
surprisingly rapid pace.
24:24
Speaker 2: She flees the scene in Illinois, leaving the children in
24:27
the house, and crosses the state line back to her
24:30
residence in Saint John, Indiana, and almost immediately upon returning
24:34
to her own jurisdiction, the secrecy she spent months cultivating dissolves.
24:39
What happens. He makes a phone call to her sister
24:41
and confesses to the triple murder, and.
24:43
Speaker 1: The sister does exactly what you pray someone would do
24:45
in an impossible situation like that, she immediately contacts law enforcement.
24:50
Right Indiana deputies arrive at Struggles residence, and again the
24:53
behavior shifts. She doesn't barricade herself, she doesn't attempt to flee.
24:57
She calmly hands the deputies the loaded suppress next Glock
25:00
nineteen without offering any physical resistance.
25:03
Speaker 2: It's just a total one to eighty.
25:04
Speaker 1: The Ford fusion with Jacob Lambert's body is found abandoned
25:08
nearby within days. On March twenty seventh, she appears in
25:12
a Lake County, Indiana court and completely waives her right
25:15
to fight extradition, allowing authorities to immediately transport her back
25:19
across the border to Will County, Illinois.
25:22
Speaker 2: The legal mechanics of extradition between states can sometimes drag
25:25
on for months if the accused fights it, demanding governor's
25:28
warrants and evidentiary hearings.
25:30
Speaker 1: Yeah, I've heard of that dragging out forever.
25:32
Speaker 2: By waiving extradition, she accelerated her entry into the Illinois
25:36
justice system, But it is during the subsequent interviews with
25:39
detectives that the prosecution secures what they view as the
25:43
final nails in the coffin.
25:44
Speaker 1: The quotes from the interrogation room provided, and the sources
25:47
are astonishing in their bluntness. She explicitly admits to investigators
25:52
that she went to meet Jacob Lambert with an intention
25:54
to harm him, and then detectives pushed further. They ask
25:58
her directly if she went to the four home to
26:00
finish her plan, and her exact response entered into the
26:03
record was yeah, pretty much.
26:06
Speaker 2: She essentially articulates the legal definition of first degree premeditated
26:11
murder directly into a recording device.
26:14
Speaker 1: It's unbelievable.
26:15
Speaker 2: She confirms the custody related motive, the forethought, and the
26:19
intentional execution of the subsequent victims.
26:21
Speaker 1: But this is where the legal process introduces a jarring
26:25
contradiction that I need you to explain because it makes
26:27
no sense to the average person.
26:28
Speaker 2: Okay, let's get into it.
26:29
Speaker 1: She buys the suppressor, she leaves the handwritten farewell note.
26:34
She physically hands the actual murder weapon over to the police.
26:38
She explicitly tells detectives yeah, pretty much when asked if
26:42
she was finishing her plan. And then on April tenth,
26:46
she stands before Judge Amy Brittani Tomzak, represented by her
26:49
attorney David drunka and she pleads not guilty to nine
26:53
counts of first degree murder YEA. The judge denies pre
26:55
trial release, which is obvious. But what is the defense
26:58
strategy here when the confession is already on tape. Doesn't
27:02
pleading not guilty just force the surviving family through an
27:05
agonizing trial process. Why does the system allow a not
27:08
guilty plea when the evidence is that absolute.
27:11
Speaker 2: It is a profound point of friction for the public.
27:14
But we have to dissect how the adversarial justice system
27:17
operates mechanically. First, let's address the charge structure. Nine counts
27:22
of murder for three victims can sound.
27:24
Speaker 1: Confusing, right, It makes it sound like there were nine
27:27
bodies in Illinois.
27:29
Speaker 2: First degree murder charges are heavily structured to reflect multiple
27:32
legal theories of the exact same crime. Nine counts for
27:36
three victims likely means three distinct counts per victim.
27:39
Speaker 1: Okay, what are the theories?
27:40
Speaker 2: Prosecutors will charge the intentional act of killing, They will
27:44
also charge committing an act knowing it creates a strong
27:47
probability of death, and finally, they will utilize felony murder enhancements.
27:53
Speaker 1: How does a felony murder enhancement work.
27:55
Speaker 2: Felony murder means that if someone dies while you are
27:58
in the commission of a forcible felon, you're liable for
28:01
first degree murder, regardless of intent.
28:03
Speaker 1: So even if it's accidental.
28:05
Speaker 2: Exactly so, if the prosecution proved she committed residential burglary
28:09
or home invasion by unlawfully using Jacob's keys to enter
28:12
the Ford's home, the resulting deaths automatically trigger the felony
28:16
murder statute. Oh I see it is the prosecution throwing
28:19
a wide net to ensure that even if a jury
28:22
doubts one specific theory of intent, the legal framework catches
28:27
the conviction on another.
28:29
Speaker 1: Okay, that explains the nine counts. But what about the plea?
28:32
Why plead not guilty when you've already confessed?
28:34
Speaker 2: Because a not guilty plea at an arraignment is rarely
28:37
a declaration of actual innocence. It is a strict procedural mechanism. Interesting,
28:42
if she pleads guilty at the arraignment, the case immediately
28:45
proceeds to sentencing, and the defense waives almost all rights
28:49
to challenge how the evidence was collected. The defense attorney's
28:53
primary constitutional role at this stage isn't to decide if
28:56
she did it. It is to relentlessly test the integrity
28:59
of this state's case.
29:00
Speaker 1: So they are throwing the brakes on the system to
29:02
buy time.
29:03
Speaker 2: Exactly, by entering a not guilty flea, attorney David Dronka
29:08
forces the state to legally prove every single element beyond
29:11
a reasonable doubt. It initiates the discovery process. Makes sense.
29:15
We can expect fierce pre trial motion battles. The defense
29:20
will file motions to suppress the confession, arguing perhaps that
29:23
her miranda rights were improperly administered, or that her documented
29:27
mental health crisis rendered the confession legally involuntary.
29:31
Speaker 1: Oh, they could argue she wasn't in her right mind
29:34
when she confessed.
29:35
Speaker 2: Exactly. They will challenge the admissibility of the interstate gun
29:38
purchase records. They will scrutinize the search warrants used to
29:42
recover the handwritten note. The not guilty plea is the
29:45
only tool that allows the defense to ensure the government
29:48
played strictly by the rules.
29:50
Speaker 1: It makes mechanical sense, even if it feels emotionally bankrupt
29:53
to the victim's families. But while the legal machinery of
29:56
Will County slowly grinds forward. Bogged down in motions and
29:59
admissibilit hearings, the real world impact on the surrounding community
30:03
and those surviving children continues to ripple outward.
30:06
Speaker 2: Yeah, the sociological implications here are massive. Tell me about
30:09
that sociologists and criminologists use cases like the Crete Township
30:14
massacre to examine macro level data. The sources note that
30:18
researchers classify this specific type of event as a femilicide,
30:22
a scenario where a perpetrator kills an intimate partner or
30:25
ex partner along with extended family members.
30:28
Speaker 1: The data presented in the Sources points out that while
30:31
familicide is statistically rare compared to standard domestic homicides, when
30:36
it does occur, it almost universally features the exact elements
30:39
we are looking at today. It heavily involves firearms, it
30:42
requires intense premeditation rather than sudden impulse, and it is
30:46
almost always catalyzed by custody disputes or the perceived total
30:50
loss of control over the family structure.
30:52
Speaker 2: Another critical implication highlighted is the logistical challenge of jurisdictional borders.
30:58
This case brutally exposes the poorest nature of state lines
31:01
when dealing with domestic violence.
31:03
Speaker 1: He really does.
31:03
Speaker 2: You have an accused individual living in Indiana who legally
31:07
navigates federal and state gun laws, crosses into Illinois to
31:10
execute a complex triple homicide, and then simply drives back
31:13
across the border to her home state.
31:15
Speaker 1: It required immediate cross border law enforcement coordination between Lake County,
31:20
Indiana and Will County, Illinois, and while the police response
31:23
in the immediate aftermath was swift, it highlights a terrifying
31:27
loophole in preventative care. Yeah, if the police can cross
31:31
borders to arrest you, why can't the mental health and
31:33
family courts cross borders to stop you? That is the question,
31:36
and the most agonizing ripple effect of all this systemic
31:39
failure falls squarely on the shoulders of the three and
31:42
four year old children. Legally speaking, they are now orphans.
31:46
Their father is dead, their paternal grandparents, who were their
31:49
stabilizing force, are dead. Their mother is sitting in a
31:53
Juliet jail cell, facing the rest of her life in prison.
31:57
Speaker 2: The court records indicate that emergency temporary placement hearings were
32:00
immediately scheduled the extended families on both the Lambert and
32:04
Struggle sides are now forced to navigate an agonizing competition
32:08
for guardianship.
32:09
Speaker 1: That sounds like a nightmare.
32:11
Speaker 2: In the interim, the Department of Children and Family Services
32:14
DCFS has to step in. They are tasked with managing
32:17
the immediate physical safety of these children, determining the most
32:21
stable foster or kin placement, and initiating the incredibly intensive
32:26
long term neurobiological trauma counseling they are going to require.
32:30
Speaker 1: I feel a profound sense of urgency about these systemic failures.
32:34
This tragedy crosses state lines, It wipes out multiple generations
32:38
of a family, and it managed to slip perfectly through
32:41
the gaps between our mental health facilities, our federal background
32:44
check systems, and our family courts.
32:47
Speaker 2: Yeah, it fell right through the cracks.
32:48
Speaker 1: If you are a lawmaker, a family court judge, or
32:51
a social worker analyzing this deep dive, where exactly is
32:55
the intervention point supposed to be when a mother is
32:58
involuntarily committed when she hides a rifle under a bed,
33:01
while when custody is voluntarily surrendered and then aggressively fought
33:04
over at what exact coordinate does the system have the
33:07
legal authority to step in and declare stop, this is
33:09
a lethal situation.
33:11
Speaker 2: Domestic violence advocates are actively using the Crete Township case
33:14
to demand an answer to that exact question. They are
33:18
pushing for mandatory automated information sharing across state.
33:22
Speaker 1: Lines, which seems so obvious in hindsight.
33:25
Speaker 2: Right, if an involuntary psychiatric old or a domestic incident
33:29
report in Indiana does not automatically trigger it alert on
33:32
the desk of a family court judge handling a custody
33:34
case in Illinois, you have engineered a lesal blind spot.
33:38
Speaker 1: And the ultimate irony of this entire tragedy is just sickening.
33:42
Speaker 2: It is a dark, self fulfilling prophecy. The sources explicitly
33:46
state that Jenna's troubles, meticulously planned actions were driven by
33:49
a desperate, consuming, desire to control her children's destiny, to
33:53
absolutely ensure that the Fords did not raise them. Yet,
33:56
by executing this extreme violence to maintain that control, I
34:00
guaranteed the precise opposite outcome. She ensured her children violently
34:04
lost every single parental and stabilizing figure they had in
34:07
the world, including herself.
34:08
Speaker 1: To synthesize everything we've unpacked today from these court documents
34:12
and reports, we are staring at the catastrophic intersection of
34:16
inadequately monitored mental health, the absolute weaponization of custody anxieties,
34:22
and a multi month, meticulously executed tactical plan that completely
34:26
shattered the quiet walled garden of Crete Township.
34:30
Speaker 2: We track the timeline from the initial voluntary relinquishment of custody,
34:34
through the quiet navigation of the federal NFA process to
34:37
acquire a suppressor, down to the agonizing twenty minute wait
34:40
in a reclined car seat, culminating in an explosion of
34:43
violence that left three people dead and altered the neurobiology
34:47
of two young children forever.
34:48
Speaker 1: I want to leave you with a final provocative thought
34:51
to mollover as we close. We have spent this whole
34:53
time dissecting the intense premeditation of the accused, the tactical suppressor,
34:58
the handwritten farewell note, the predator detachment. But I want
35:01
you to consider the blind spots of the system itself.
35:04
Look closely at the mechanical facts presented in these documents.
35:08
If a parent with a documented history of involuntary commitment
35:11
and a documented history of homicidal ideation involving a firearm
35:15
can legally navigate the federal background check system to purchase
35:19
a nine millimeter handgun and then wait months to successfully
35:22
acquire a five hundred dollars suppressor without a single alarm
35:25
bell ringing Between the mental health facilities, the NICs database,
35:29
and the family courts are our legal frameworks operating in
35:33
dangerously isolated silos.
35:35
Speaker 2: They absolutely are.
35:36
Speaker 1: We invite you to investigate how your own local jurisdictions
35:39
and state laws handle this perilous gap. How does your
35:43
state report to federal databases? Because if these massive institutions
35:47
don't communicate with each other, that walled garden of suburban
35:50
safety isn't actually protecting anyone at all.
35:52
Speaker 2: It is a critical area for public inquiry and legislative reform.
35:56
And as a final procedural note, we must remind everyone
35:59
that as of the report in May of twenty twenty six,
36:02
Jenna's trouble maintains her innocence and is pleaded not guilty
36:05
to all charges. The legal case remains ongoing and she
36:08
is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
36:11
Speaker 1: Thank you for joining us as we navigate these difficult
36:13
muddy waters. Today, stay curious, keep asking the hard questions
36:17
about the systems that surround us, and keep thinking critically.