The Delphi Murders: First Person: Brian Olehy: Part Two

[00:00:00] [SPEAKER_01] The Murder Sheet keeps us super busy and so sometimes between writing and podcasting and trying to sell these t-shirts, we don't do a great job of taking care of ourselves. That's probably something a lot of people can relate to. We're all busy people with jobs and families and obligations. It can be hard putting yourself and your own health first.

[00:00:17] [SPEAKER_03] Our brand new sponsor Prolon can help. Prolon's fasting mimicking diet is a plant-based nutrition program that is backed by science. It takes all the fuss out of fasting. Instead of giving up food, you undergo a five-day program where you enjoy snacks, soups and beverages designed to make your body's cells believe they are fasting.

[00:00:41] [SPEAKER_01] It's designed to give a serious boost to your metabolic and cardiovascular health. Plus, it's a no-brainer. Your food comes in prepackaged and labeled so you know what to eat and when. They found that three consecutive Prolon cycles can reduce your biological age score by 2.5 years and cut your waist circumference down by 1.5 inches. Plus, it gets you down to a healthier blood sugar level.

[00:01:04] [SPEAKER_03] Fast with food. Take charge of your health. Try Prolon.

[00:01:07] [SPEAKER_01] To help you kickstart a health plan that truly works, Prolon is offering Murder Sheet listeners 15% off site-wide plus a $40 bonus gift when you subscribe to their five-day nutrition program. Just visit prolonlife.com slash msheet. That's P-R-O-L-O-N-L-I-F-E dot com slash msheet to claim your 15% discount and your bonus gift. Prolonlife slash msheet.

[00:01:33] [SPEAKER_01] Add some luxury into your life without breaking the bank. Check out our wonderful sponsor, Quince.

[00:01:39] [SPEAKER_03] This is a brand that's unlocking luxury products for all of us ordinary people. All the things that sound pricey and out of reach like washable silk shirts and dresses, 14-karat gold jewelry, European linens, Italian leather handbags, sweaters of Mongolian cashmere and organic cotton. That's what Quince offers, but at an unbeatable price.

[00:02:01] [SPEAKER_01] All Quince items are 50-80% less costly than those of their competitors. It's an amazing deal. They cut down the middleman and pass the savings on to you. And remember, by supporting our sponsors, you're supporting our show.

[00:02:14] [SPEAKER_03] We recently gifted ourselves some pieces from Quince. I got their suede bomber jacket. This one is very stylish and it keeps me really warm, which is helpful because it's been a cold winter. I also like the way I look in it, which is big for me.

[00:02:27] [SPEAKER_01] Give yourself the luxury you deserve with Quince. Go to quince.com slash msheet for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's q-u-i-n-c-e dot com slash msheet to get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash msheet. Content warning. This episode contains discussion of the murder of two girls.

[00:02:51] [SPEAKER_01] On February 14th, 2017, searchers found the bodies of Liberty German and Abigail Williams in the woods of Delphi, Indiana. As the CSI with the Lafayette Post of the Indiana State Police, Brian Olahi was one of the crime scene investigators called out to that small shallow near the banks of Deer Creek.

[00:03:10] [SPEAKER_03] In today's episode, he will speak to us about his work on the Delphi murders case, what he discovered at the scene, and his experience testifying at the trial of Richard Allen.

[00:03:22] [SPEAKER_01] Now that the gag order is lifted, Mr. Olahi and others are free to speak about their experiences with the Delphi case. This will be the second of two episodes featuring our interview with him. They will be released on the same day, so check out the first part as well. These episodes are part of our first-person interview series. We will seek to interview as many of the individuals with firsthand experience in the Delphi case as possible in the coming weeks and months. If you had a direct role in the case and are open to talking with us, email us at murdersheet at gmail dot com.

[00:03:51] [SPEAKER_01] This is a part of our ongoing efforts to report on the Delphi case. For many years, we have not gotten the chance to hear directly from some of the principal figures in the case. That all changes now. My name is Anya Kane. I'm a journalist.

[00:04:04] [SPEAKER_03] And I'm Kevin Greenlee. I'm an attorney. And this is The Murder Sheet. We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews, and deep dives into murder cases. We're The Murder Sheet.

[00:04:17] [SPEAKER_01] And this is The Delphi Murders, First Person, Brian Olahi, Part 2.

[00:05:05] [SPEAKER_03] How do you approach a scene? What are some of the principles to keep in mind as you walk through it?

[00:05:10] [SPEAKER_02] Well, I mean, it is a methodical process. And one of the things, you know, we talked about Dean Marks, but one of the things I learned from Dean was, you know, my report should be pretty boring. Even if I repeat, especially if I'm repeating the same process over and over, I generally write it the same. And you might, you know, read the same sentence 10 or 15 times in a row because, but that's part of the methodology is you do it the same way every time. You do it within the parameters of what you're trained and what the policies and procedures tell you to do.

[00:05:39] [SPEAKER_02] You know, just being very methodical about things is what, you know, you have to be as a crime scene investigator. You know, sometimes you go to a crime scene and, you know, there's not a lot of information there. I mean, it's just one thing. And it can be completed and processed in a pretty short period of time. I mean, sometimes you go to a simple little burglary and they stole $100, but you might be there for four or five hours because they touched a lot of stuff looking for that $100. It's a process. And, you know, there is a seven-step process, which ultimately governs how and what we do.

[00:06:09] [SPEAKER_02] You know, you just approach a scene with a method that is complete and unyielding regardless of what the scene is. And, I mean, I remember going to a scene for another agency and one of the investigators, it was clearly a suicide. I mean, there was family home. They were present. They said what happened. But, you know, and it happened in one room at the end of a very long, narrow, a long ranch house. I mean, a very long, deep, large ranch house.

[00:06:37] [SPEAKER_02] And I just remember, you know, it took me seven or eight hours, you know, to kind of document the scene and everything really happened in one room. But I document the whole house for the sake of the scene. And I remember the investigator from that agency saying, you know, a lot of guys would come in here and they just, you know, work the room where it was. And I appreciate you taking the time that, you know, basically I'm getting the full meal deal for what is essentially an appetizer in the room.

[00:07:03] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, you get, you know, you know, and that's the way I tried to approach things and work with people and work with the agencies that I worked with. And I think it's important to point out that for a state police crime scene investigator, the vast majority of cases we work are not state police cases. We are, we work for the state police laboratory. We work for the, you know, we are state police officers. We're full power police officers.

[00:07:27] [SPEAKER_02] But most of the cases I worked, I would say probably 80 to 90 percent of the cases I work in a given year as a crime scene investigator were for an agency other than the state police.

[00:07:38] [SPEAKER_01] We like to automate things here at the Murder Sheet. We get all kinds of alerts about our episodes. We schedule emails in advance. We set reminders for ourselves to do interviews, lest we accidentally ghost a detective or a defense attorney. Automation makes life easier because it's one less thing to have to think about. That's why we love Acorns. This is an automatic investment service that's built to help everyone invest, no matter how much money you have.

[00:08:04] [SPEAKER_03] You've heard us speak about our sponsor, Acorns, before. Today's episode is sponsored by them. Acorns is a financial wellness app that makes it easy to start saving and investing for your future. You don't need to be an expert. Acorns were a recommended diversified portfolio that matches you and your money goals. You don't need to be rich. Acorns lets you get started with the spare money you've got right now, even if all you've got is spare change.

[00:08:28] [SPEAKER_01] I just wish we had had an app like Acorns back when we were just starting out. It would have saved us so much money-related time and stress because it's really a no-brainer. All it takes is $5 or even just your spare change. Sign up now and join the over 13 million all-time customers who have already saved and invested over $22 billion with Acorns. Head to acorns.com slash msheet or download the Acorns app to get started. Paid non-client endorsement. Compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns.

[00:08:58] [SPEAKER_01] Tier 1 compensation provided. Investing involves risk. Acorns Advisors LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor. View important disclosures at acorns.com slash msheet. What are some pitfalls or mistakes one must try to avoid making, you know, doing crime scene work?

[00:09:16] [SPEAKER_02] Open-minded about what's here and not rushing to judgment. Like, you know, for a death investigation, is it a suicide? Does it present itself as a suicide? Okay, well, let's figure out why it is or why it isn't. Let's not just say, okay, it's a suicide and, you know, work this and get done and get out of here as fast as you can. I'm trying to work through everything and not miss things that are obvious and miss things that are unobvious.

[00:09:42] [SPEAKER_02] Just being methodical in your approach and being open to interpreting what you're told or shown or seen. Yeah, just working through the process to make sure that what you did is complete and thorough.

[00:09:55] [SPEAKER_03] Some people have criticized some aspects of forensic science recently. Has that changed the suicide world now the work is done?

[00:10:04] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, obviously, any criticism generally changes people. Like, you want to be defensive about it or you want to do something to change to adapt to it. If the criticism is warranted, absolutely. I hope that any investigator would reevaluate what they do or how they do something to make sure that they're doing it to the best of their ability. You know, there are areas that are open to interpretation and some of that interpretation is based on experience. Some of that interpretation is based on science. Some of it's based upon conjecture.

[00:10:34] [SPEAKER_02] But I think for the most part, there are areas that are more exact than others in the forensic world. And I think that's true in the science world. I mean, mathematics is very precise. It's either it's either it either adds up or it doesn't. Whereas the psychology world as a science is not that exact of a science in comparison to, you know, Euclidean geometry or basic freshman algebra. You know, those things are open to some interpretation.

[00:11:04] [SPEAKER_02] And, you know, if there's changes, my hope is that they are always for the better and that the criticism is directed at the heart of the problem. That there was a problem and not taken out of context to criticize a science or taken personally to criticize a science for gain or need or relationship.

[00:11:29] [SPEAKER_01] You mentioned earlier the CSI effect. And I was wondering, is there anything else you can tell us about that and how that impacts the work of CSIs and the public's understanding of this work?

[00:11:42] [SPEAKER_02] You know, the CSI effect is something that comes from TV and remembering that the world doesn't operate in a one hour with commercial format. So, you know, on TV, they have to wrap up an episode within that, you know, 48 minutes of time or so.

[00:12:02] [SPEAKER_02] So the idea that, you know, you can just take a device, an electronic device, a tablet or a phone, you know, and just very quickly like, no, like, oh, here's here's the answer. Like, it just doesn't really work that way. You know, we still use pad and paper. We still use, you know, diagrams to lay out scenes. We still use a tape measure to document scenes.

[00:12:27] [SPEAKER_02] Now, there are things that will map a scene with light distance and ranging with a LIDAR that will document a scene very well also. But, you know, you still go back to television has this device maybe that scans the scene in three seconds and you have a full scan of the scene and shows everything. You can manipulate it on a computer and it just really doesn't work as quickly as that 48 minute, one hour time slot.

[00:12:53] [SPEAKER_02] So the idea that there is DNA at every scene or DNA can be analyzed in 10 minutes or we just run stuff to the lab and five minutes after I drop it off the lab, an analyst is telling me yes or no on a positive ID. Those things take time. Now, can they be turned around in some cases in a matter of, you know, 24 to 48 hours? Yeah, absolutely. Can it, is it possible to get that done?

[00:13:21] [SPEAKER_02] But that's at the detriment of every other case sometimes that's being worked. And, you know, a laboratory like the Indiana State Police Laboratory is working cases from all over the state, you know, at the, what, four regional laboratories with a limited number of people. Everything has a priority. Those priorities have to be organized and managed by the lab staff.

[00:13:45] [SPEAKER_02] So, you know, the idea that you can get information in very short periods of time is very inaccurate, I think, from the CSI effect. And that there is always DNA left at a crime scene or at any event, you know, that that's not always the case.

[00:14:04] [SPEAKER_01] Sometimes it feels like people have over the top expectations for CSI work in general based on TV.

[00:14:12] [SPEAKER_02] Yeah, no, absolutely. I mean, because, I mean, TV, you can, I can make the script be what I want it to be. You know, I can write, I can start with the end and work backwards. TV writers, in my experience, will use experts in certain fields like law enforcement, crime scene, pathology to input data, which makes it seem very real. But oftentimes it's only a percentage of reality that's actually real and shown.

[00:14:41] [SPEAKER_02] Like, I mean, just some things just don't exist to the extent that they show them on TV.

[00:14:46] [SPEAKER_01] I want to ask you to talk us through your experience February 14th, 2017. Where were you when you got the call that you needed to come to a crime scene in Delphi?

[00:14:57] [SPEAKER_02] On February 14th, I got a phone call from Detective Kevin Hammond with the Carroll County Sheriff's Department requesting my appearance at an area where the two girls had been found deceased. I was previously aware, I think from media reports, that there were two girls missing overnight and that there was a search planned that day in Carroll County. So I was aware that that was going on.

[00:15:24] [SPEAKER_02] But what I recall was Detective Hammond's call to me was that both had been found and they were both deceased. And at that point, Kevin had not been to the bodies. He had not, I mean, literally, he had just been told, oh, we just found him. And he knew that he was going to need my assistance to, you know, document what had happened and why they were deceased. And he didn't know when I spoke to him at that first phone call, he didn't know how, how, cause, manner, what.

[00:15:52] [SPEAKER_02] But, I mean, he just knew there were, there were two girls deceased and his expectation was he was going to need assistance with determining cause, manner of death and document the crime scene.

[00:16:03] [SPEAKER_01] So then what happened next? It's our understanding just from trial that, you know, your colleagues, Jason Page and Dwayne Datsman also come over. Tell us just about how you all get together and then move forward.

[00:16:16] [SPEAKER_02] So on that day, I'm, I was in, in, I was in Lafayette. It was right at lunchtime and I got called during my lunch, lunch hour and started towards Delphi from Lafayette. While I was en route, I made a phone call to detective, or I'm sorry, to crime scene investigator page. And I think also to Sergeant Datsman, to Dwayne as well, and asked them just to be en route to the general area.

[00:16:41] [SPEAKER_02] I got to the area near the cemetery in Delphi, out by the high bridge about 1250 in the afternoon. Yeah, there were, there were a lot of people already in the area just because of the search. There were members of the Tippecanoe County dive team and the emergency management director was also there. Smokey Anderson, a former sheriff in Tippecanoe County, he was there. I think when I arrived, crime scene tape was being put up by a trooper.

[00:17:09] [SPEAKER_02] Another, another trooper was manning the crime scene entry log, which is a, basically a log of who enters and who exits a crime scene. It, it controls your, your scene and who goes in and who goes out and what time they went in and what time they went out. I mean, that's pretty standard industry-wide. I just basically began to get a lay of the land. And, um, I remember, remember, you know, the, the, the trooper who was putting the crime scene tape out.

[00:17:35] [SPEAKER_02] I asked him, you know, not to make it very narrow and keep a very large area because the area was pretty, pretty rural. You know, kind of typical Indiana woodland area. It's down at the river bottom area along Deer Creek near the high bridge. And I remember speaking with, uh, the Smokey, um, that the dive team had found items potentially related to the victims in the water.

[00:17:58] [SPEAKER_02] And, um, basically just began to like kind of get the lay of the land and what was here and what wasn't here and what we were going to, you know, start to make a game plan of what, what needed to be done and assigning tasks. And, you know, doing that initial assessment and walk through the scene and, um, just trying to not too narrowly or too broadly define the scope of the scene.

[00:18:16] [SPEAKER_01] What were the challenges of working this specific outdoor crime scene? Um, I mean, from our understanding of trial, not just necessarily working it, but even getting down there.

[00:18:28] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, I, I guess every, every scene presents its own trials. I mean, this one was just in a rural area and down a pretty steep embankment. So, I mean, just physically getting things down to the river bottom area along the Creek and the area where the bodies were found. Um, you know, it was not really, um, an area accessible by vehicle, uh, or at least by normal vehicle. I mean, yeah, it's, I mean, it's a, it's, you know, it's a wooded area. I wouldn't, I don't know that I'd call it densely wooded.

[00:18:58] [SPEAKER_02] Um, but it's, it's a wooded area with a lot of dead fall, a lot of river bottom debris, you know, spring floods and things like that. So there's just a lot of, a lot of leaves, branches and kind of a, you know, a gentle rolling wetland, you know, river bottom kind of area. Um, so, I mean, I guess the, the, the area itself is just the remoteness and the ruralness of it. And the, the fact that it's kind of down at a, this, this area is, it's a pretty big valley around the high bridge.

[00:19:26] [SPEAKER_02] And I'd say it's kind of unique. If we were in Southern Indiana, it wouldn't be, it wouldn't stand out nearly as much, but in kind of the flatlands of Northern Indiana, it's kind of unique in Northern Indiana to have, have the, the height and depth. And width of the valley there.

[00:19:43] [SPEAKER_01] I wanted to ask you about, um, you know, you've worked so many crime scenes. Um, what struck you about this particular scene? Was it unusual in any way, or is this sort of thing maybe a little bit more commonplace than some people might expect?

[00:20:00] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, I guess I, I'd, I'd say that everybody defines unusual or unique in their own way. And I, um, is it unique? I mean, I, I, every, every scene is different. There are no two scenes alike. Um, no two scenes are ever going to present themselves exactly the same way. So, I mean, the challenges are the challenges. And I guess I don't, I don't think about it in terms of, oh, wow, this is overwhelming or this is daunting. You know, it's just work that has to be done.

[00:20:29] [SPEAKER_02] Um, and you know, there's a process to work through and you're going to work through that process and you're going to methodically go through the steps you need to go through as best you can.

[00:20:38] [SPEAKER_03] This goes back to something you mentioned earlier. And, uh, I apologize for the repetition, but I think it's worth underscoring. A lot of people seem surprised, at least lay people seem surprised that there wasn't any offender DNA at the scene. Is that unusual or is it? Yeah. Can you speak to that?

[00:20:58] [SPEAKER_02] Um, I think it's entirely possible to not leave DNA at a scene that particularly, particularly an outdoor scene where there's a lot of, uh, air movement, you know, and, and when you're talking about DNA, I mean, DNA is found in many different areas. It could be in hair, it could be in skin, you know, touch DNA cells from skin cells, but you can very quickly cover that up.

[00:21:18] [SPEAKER_02] You know, if I'm wearing long sleeves in February, I'm wearing gloves in February and I'm touching things, you know, wearing gloves, I'm, I'm not going to slough off a lot of skin cells. And then at the same time, if, if I touch something and then the victim's blood, like actual pooling, pouring blood is on top of that DNA, it's going to mute out whatever DNA may have been left by a suspect.

[00:21:45] [SPEAKER_02] There was no DNA specific to the suspect in this matter, but there wasn't also DNA to a second person. There wasn't DNA to a third person. So the fact that DNA isn't at every crime scene, again, the CSI effect, I would say that it's not unusual to find DNA. There are very, oftentimes I've found DNA at places where I didn't think I would find it.

[00:22:11] [SPEAKER_02] And when there are places where I have not found DNA, where I absolutely was sure I was going to find it. You know, in this case, uh, I think there are some things that the crime scene investigators believe probably happened or went on. And that were presented at trial and we would have expected to find DNA, particularly on the right wrist of, of, of Liberty because it, you know, in our estimation, she was drugged to a position and that would have been a prime spot for it.

[00:22:39] [SPEAKER_02] But if I'm wearing a glove when I'm handling that wrist, I don't think I would leave DNA behind myself. To think that, well, there's no DNA. So innocence is obvious. The, the absence of evidence is not evidence of innocence.

[00:22:54] [SPEAKER_03] Well said. You mentioned, uh, Liberty, signs of Liberty being a mood. Can you talk about some of the evidence you saw that the bodies have been moved in some fashion?

[00:23:04] [SPEAKER_02] Well, I think there were some, there were some on the, on the back of the body, there were some marks of, you know, mud and debris and then areas of pooling of blood, um, which were determined to be liberties. And from where she was, you know, they were a distance from where the body was found. So it would stand to reason that she was drugged. The manner in which the body was found indicates dragging because it was not in a natural position for the human body. So, I mean, I would think those are probably the main things that what I would say.

[00:23:34] [SPEAKER_01] There's always been a lot of theorizing, um, in terms of, uh, you know, the girls being taken elsewhere, killed and then brought back. Um, can you tell us what the crime scene actually told us about, um, just generally the plausibility of that?

[00:23:49] [SPEAKER_02] Nothing. I mean, I, that's, I don't see anything that says they were left, that they left an area. Yeah. And I also go back to, so this is one thing I get from forensic pathologists as far as time of death. When I've asked any forensic pathologist I've worked with how to establish time of death, their response to me has always been, what's their device say? What information is on their device? When did they stop using their device?

[00:24:18] [SPEAKER_02] Whatever electronic device they have, their phone, that's probably where you should start tracking. And I go back to the testimony presented at trial from the experts like Brian Harshman and, uh, that, that dealt with the phone. I would go back to their testimony up on what's there and what information is there. Um, that's, that's what I would go to, but there's, there's nothing that, you know, there's not, there was no evidence of, in the area of movement by a group of people.

[00:24:44] [SPEAKER_02] There was no evidence of movement by a, you know, a trail that led to where they were. Um, you know, just, I can't think of anything that makes me start to ponder the idea that they left and came back to the same spot.

[00:24:59] [SPEAKER_01] And you mentioned time of death. That might surprise people because, again, we've all watched the, the, the police shows where, you know, time of death was midnight or whatnot. Um, why is that really not something that, um, forensic pathologists necessarily really, um, do anymore in terms of like locking down something so specific?

[00:25:22] [SPEAKER_02] So in, in this case, I would point out that, um, the, the primary way of, of establishing body temperature over time for death establishment is taken rectally from, for all intents and purposes. One of the things that we wanted to make sure we didn't destroy was evidence on the bodies, destroy any evidence in this matter. Um, but one of the areas was, um, for the fact that these girls had potentially been sexually molested or sexually penetrated in some way.

[00:25:48] [SPEAKER_02] So the way you do that temperature is to take a rectal, uh, reading and we didn't want to insert anything foreign into the body, which is the crime scene. We didn't want to insert anything to, to get, get a body temperature. It's also a pretty inexact science based upon a lot of information, things like size of the individual, uh, ambient air temperatures being on cold ground, knowing, um, the wind patterns, you know, knowing how things were.

[00:26:16] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, I would say on, on February 13th and 14th of 2017, it was unusually warm, but I wouldn't say it was summer-like. So it was, it was warmer than normal, but there, there are a lot of, a lot of things that to be taken into account on body temperature. And it is such an inexact science on television.

[00:26:38] [SPEAKER_02] And that's the SI effect, you know, the, the, the detectives go in and the, you know, the, somebody at the crime scene, I don't know, coroner, medical examiner, crime scene investigator looks at them and goes, you know, what time did they do this? Okay. Well then look here, this is my temperature reading. They died between seven 30 and seven 47. It's not that exact. I mean, it looks great on TV. It sounds great on TV, but it's not an exact science and it just doesn't work that way. That's not real world. That's science fiction.

[00:27:08] [SPEAKER_01] And then this just kind of came to my mind as we were talking, but I'm curious, this, there's three of you sort of processing this crime scene. How are you dividing up the work? How are you sort of communicating? Who's got what? Was there any sort of, um, division of labor in that sense?

[00:27:23] [SPEAKER_02] Um, yeah, I mean, there's, there's a division of labor, but we also, I would say that Dwayne and Jason and I had worked together a lot at that point, at least enough that we kind of had a working, like, I don't know, Jason and I talked about this. It was just kind of like, we knew what to do and we knew what the others were going to do. And sometimes there didn't have to be a communication to get things done, but sometimes there was on, you know, and, and, and as the lead, as the lead crime scene investigator, you know, my goal was to do the best.

[00:27:53] [SPEAKER_02] Best job collecting the items and preserving them. And, you know, that's one of the reasons we sent things to, uh, the Putnamville post with, uh, then Sergeant Cody, now Lieutenant Cody, um, because their drying room was better than the drying room at the Lafayette post. And we wanted to dry them out correctly without, you know, doing anything that would cause mold, mildew or anything like that. Um, just because of the slow nature of the drying. And so as far as, you know, communicating, yeah, absolutely. We, we're, we're talking all the time about this, that, or the other.

[00:28:23] [SPEAKER_02] Jason has a unique set of skills. He's, you know, he's a gifted artist. So like doing the diagrams and diagramming certain things. Absolutely. But, you know, Jim Cody also spent time doing diagramming with, you know, a LIDAR instrument that the state police has. So it, it, you know, he was diagramming electronically the scene. Um, and some of those things were used at trial.

[00:28:44] [SPEAKER_02] Some of them weren't, and I go back to speculation and ideals and the amount of stuff, although there's been voluminous amounts of information put out about the Delphi investigation. It still pales in comparison to the total amount of information. So people assuming things are only assuming them on a portion of the evidence. One plus one equals two.

[00:29:12] [SPEAKER_02] But when you have three and four in that equation that you don't know about, your math just doesn't work out.

[00:29:19] [SPEAKER_01] In terms of, I guess, you're talking about collecting evidence. This was sort of something that came up at trial, the sticks on the bodies. I'm just wondering, for people who may not know this, what makes sticks a particularly poor source of DNA?

[00:29:35] [SPEAKER_02] Specifically to these. These were obvious deadfall. I mean, they'd been there for a while. They were decaying. I would, I would say that, um, they were, the, the, the wood surface itself was soft and punky. You know, it would flake off. Um, so it's a very porous material. It's not ideal for extracting cells of touch DNA. Touching the outer surfaces of those pieces of wood, the remaining parts would flake off when we touched them, moved them, began to deal with them.

[00:30:05] [SPEAKER_02] There was moldy wooden decay on them. So we had long discussion about that. I mean, this wasn't without discussion that we didn't collect them because what we hoped to find would be DNA from the individual. Well, we believe that the best DNA was probably going to be on the girl's bodies if there was any to be found. And I would tell you the next day, I mean, the scene was held overnight. I mean, there was somebody on the scene after the crime scene investigators left.

[00:30:31] [SPEAKER_02] Jason Page went back to that scene the next day, along with other crime scene investigators. The area, I guess what we refer to as ground zero, like literally he went through and looked at every leaf. Every leaf was taken and moved within several feet of where both bodies were found.

[00:30:49] [SPEAKER_02] So the idea of digging up, down five, six inches of dirt for a big area and cutting every tree and every branch and every leaf and stick in the area. I mean, there is a limit to what you can collect because at some point somebody is going to have to analyze that. And if we had collected 10,000 leaves, we'd still be documenting leaves to this day.

[00:31:18] [SPEAKER_02] But what a crime scene investigator tries to find is those items which are probative in nature to the events that happened at hand. We went through it in a very methodical process going through that scene. You know, between us, we have a lot of experience as officers and a lot of experience as crime scene investigators. I don't feel like we left anything on the table. I don't feel like we left anything behind.

[00:31:41] [SPEAKER_02] I feel like the items that were at hand were found and the information that was available at that scene was found. I think that the phone is probably the most crucial piece of evidence found at the scene. And, you know, I still distinctly have a visual image of how it was found and where it was found and what it was found like, you know, and in the manner that it was found. And, you know, I guess I always wonder why the phone remained there. Like, why didn't the suspect take it?

[00:32:10] [SPEAKER_02] Didn't even know it was there. So I don't know. That's something I, in my estimation, only the suspect knows. And I think that's Richard Allen. So.

[00:32:18] [SPEAKER_03] You say you have a very distinct memory of the phone beef. I'm pretty sure that was.

[00:32:22] [SPEAKER_02] Well, I mean, as we worked through the, we took one body out and then we took the other body out, you know, and we worked one body at a time. So we weren't dividing our attention. I mean, our attention was a group, you know, at that point in time was, you know, focused on collecting any evidence related to each and individual body. And the phone was, you know, in an area under a body kind of covered by leaves. You know, I had a few leaves over the top of it. It wasn't obvious like that quick.

[00:32:50] [SPEAKER_02] Like, I remember it being kind of face up and the black screen kind of, you know, looks like the dark black earth of the area. So, you know, initially it's like, that doesn't look right. Something's wrong there. And then, you know, I remember we rolled the body over and both bodies were in a, you know, a state of rigor at that point. And before we took them out, I remember like, oh, just like I probably said it out loud, like, oh, hey, something here, you know, very specific to, I don't know, I guess.

[00:33:18] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, I'm not surprised to find a phone at a crime scene with teenagers in today's modern world. But, you know, after we hadn't seen anything and where it was found under a body, that was important, I thought.

[00:33:28] [SPEAKER_01] And then I wanted to ask you just a follow up. You mentioned the tree, the sticks, the limbs were deadfall. So those are basically, they were dead. They weren't like snapped off a living tree in that sense.

[00:33:41] [SPEAKER_02] No, there was no indication of fresh breakage. There was no indication of being sawn by anyone or anything because of the area. I mean, and kind of the decay in the inner parts of them. Some of them may have been broken after. I mean, the deadfall had breaks on some of them, but they weren't sawn. They weren't clean cuts. I saw no clean cuts on anything. And there was no area where there was any sawdusty residue found or located.

[00:34:11] [SPEAKER_02] There was nothing on any piece that indicated to me that a sharp edged saw like device was used on any of them in any way, shape or form.

[00:34:22] [SPEAKER_01] And then another thing that became a thing at trial, I guess, was the cartridge. The unspent round found at the scene and procedures around photographing that. Can you just talk us through what that typically looks like?

[00:34:40] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, let's just get to the point. People said that, well, why didn't you take pictures of it with a scale? Why didn't you take pictures of it after you got it back to the lab? There are multiple reasons. One reason being, you know, hey, we are in the middle of kind of collecting the bodies. We don't want to do anything to destroy what's here.

[00:35:03] [SPEAKER_02] So let's collect this item, you know, before the body rolls back over on it, before we, you know, any blood from the body gets on it. Let's not contaminate it. Let's collect it. So let's take a picture of where it is, where it lies. Do I have second thoughts about it? No. Could I have done other things? Yeah. Could I have put a scale in and not disturbed it? Yeah, I could have. But ultimately we took a picture of it as it laid, where it laid, where it was found, the manner it was found.

[00:35:30] [SPEAKER_02] And then once I got it back, I didn't want to do any additional photography of it because I didn't want to take it out of where it was placed. I didn't want to handle it because any handling of it, what if I dropped it and put a mark on it? This appeared to be something that was potentially important to our case. And this is before, as I recall in the video, there's some maybe, everybody hears what they want to hear on the video.

[00:35:57] [SPEAKER_02] There's purported that one of the girls says, is that a gun? We find this cartridge before we know that that's even on the video, that there even is a video. So, you know, this may have been very important to the case. So to pull it back out of evidence and to start to manipulate it in any way, I didn't want to do anything to destroy or add evidence to it. I wanted to keep it in the manner that I found it, in exactly the manner I found it.

[00:36:24] [SPEAKER_02] So that if it was going to be examined in some way, shape or form by anyone, whether that be to swab it for DNA. I would say that fingerprints on a cartridge or a casing is the best of my knowledge. The Indian State Police has a zero success rate on making cases with fingerprints on cartridges because they're pretty small. They're pretty round.

[00:36:47] [SPEAKER_02] And in most instances where crime is involved, they're not large caliber that might present a better substrate for collecting a fingerprint. So I didn't want to do anything that would, if there was DNA on it, I didn't want to do anything that an analyst would hurt. An analyst ability to examine it either from a firearms perspective or from a DNA perspective. If it was collected, it was collected in a proper manner. It was documented. It was documented in a proper manner.

[00:37:16] [SPEAKER_02] Could it have been documented more? Okay. Yeah. But is it documented enough? Is it the bullet? Is there, you know, it's not the, it's the same one we found as the same one that was used to examine.

[00:37:28] [SPEAKER_01] It sounds like almost if you had done all the things that the defense sort of asked you about, then they could have rightfully perhaps criticized you for doing those things because it could have lost other things of evidentiary value. Is that fair to say?

[00:37:42] [SPEAKER_02] Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[00:37:46] [SPEAKER_01] What was it like preparing for trial and working specifically with Deputy Prosecutor James Luttrell?

[00:37:53] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, Deputy Prosecutor is probably a disservice to James because he was a prosecutor in Grant County for a long time. You know, he's, he's a well-respected attorney. He's a well-respected prosecutor. This is the first time I ever worked with him. He bent over backwards to accommodate my schedule in prep and in, you know, just preparation for the top trial. Yeah. I mean, he worked very, very closely with me to do that. And I appreciate him. He was very thorough and very methodical.

[00:38:22] [SPEAKER_02] I think he thought things through. I think he was well-prepared. By the second day of cross-examination with the crime scene investigators, with myself, with Sergeant Dasman and Sergeant Page, they had determined that the line and manner of questioning from the defense was not really, the way he asked questions was not a proper way to form a question. And they began to object.

[00:38:50] [SPEAKER_02] And I felt like that was whether who in the defense team determined to object on that. I think that threw the defense team's thought process off and threw them off their game as far as like how they were, how they were going to work. I think for attorneys in trial, in all the trials I've seen, whether it's prosecution or whether it's defense, it doesn't matter. They have a flow. And when you disrupt their flow or what they have planned, it throws them off.

[00:39:17] [SPEAKER_02] You know, they have to be prepared to do something different. I mean, it's like a quarterback in football. You know, if the blitz comes at you, you've got to determine what the check down is and where you're going to go with the ball. And I don't know that I think that Jim Luttrell was very good at keeping the trial moving and keeping things in a way, shape and manner that was proper for court rules.

[00:39:46] [SPEAKER_02] I just I can't say enough good things about Jim Luttrell. I thought he was a it was a pleasure to deal with and a professional in every in every sense of the word.

[00:39:54] [SPEAKER_01] And you kind of touched upon this, but is there anything else you want to share about your experience testifying at the Delphi trial?

[00:40:01] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, I guess I've testified in a lot of cases in my career. They're all kind of the same. I don't usually get too nervous with them. I try to prepare. I mean, I try not to overprepare either. You know, Jason probably prepares even more than I do. Like just in the way he does things and the way I do things, it's a little different in trial prep. I just kind of want to review things.

[00:40:26] [SPEAKER_02] And I don't want to come across as I don't want to come across as like I, you know, like a robot. But I also don't want to come across as, you know, adversarial. I don't think I've had people attack me in court on the stand probably worse than this case was. And I don't take it personal. I mean, the defense has a job to do and everyone has a right to a strong and viable defense. So I don't take them criticizing or asking questions of me.

[00:40:55] [SPEAKER_02] I just don't get that stuff's not personal to me. It's, you know, it's part of the process and it's part of the way the system works. And I respect it.

[00:41:03] [SPEAKER_03] A lot of the things you testify about involve some pretty complicated scientific concepts or some even some details about violence that people might find very difficult to listen to. How do you convey all of that in a way that the jury grasped it and understands it?

[00:41:21] [SPEAKER_02] I think I just try to talk, you know, kind of in a layman's way. I mean, I even hear sitting talking, I'm not throwing out a lot of crime scene terms or things like cyanoacrylate acid, you know.

[00:41:31] [SPEAKER_03] I appreciate that.

[00:41:32] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, because I just don't know that everybody hears them that way. And I mean, people geek out on that stuff, but I don't know that most people will be like, oh, yeah, yeah, that's that's a big word. That must be important. Big words aren't necessarily more important than just saying it in a plain manner. So, I mean, I think I tried to just convey what I had and what I knew in not necessarily the simplest terms, because, I mean, obviously the jury's, you know, they're adults.

[00:42:01] [SPEAKER_02] They're able to make their own opinions and they listen to things. But I just tried to, you know, not I never try to be over the top with terminology or lingo. So, and quite honestly, I mean, a lot of the things I understand, I don't know that I can even pronounce some of the big words that come with the science.

[00:42:20] [SPEAKER_01] I wonder if you could speak about Major Pat Cicero. Is it usual in a trial for the state to bring in sort of somebody like to kind of review everything later and speak to that in addition to the CSIs who all originally worked the scene?

[00:42:35] [SPEAKER_02] I would say specifically it's to bring in someone such as Pat. It might be a little unique, but at the same time, I would say to bring in an outside source, even within the state police, like another, you know, for example, if Dean Marks was still in the state police as an expert in certain areas, you know, he could have been brought in if he was still with the state police. I mean, I mean, Dean still knows his stuff.

[00:42:59] [SPEAKER_02] He could have been brought in, but bringing in someone from a completely different agency means that there's no bias to the agency or to the officers. And I go back to my work is reviewed by my supervisor as a crime scene investigator with the state police. And then it may also that, you know, specific case may be reviewed by the QA section, the quality analysis section.

[00:43:24] [SPEAKER_02] But the fact that Mr. Cicero and Major Cicero came in and looked at our work and didn't find fault with it, I go back to we're not afraid to put our work in front of you and say that this is the work we did. And we believe it's well within the parameters of policy procedure of the state police and the manual that we work from. And I think he agreed with that. So, I mean, to have him come in, we welcome the extra set of eyes.

[00:43:48] [SPEAKER_02] And I think it only validates the work that Jason Page, Dwayne Datsman and I did, particularly on that crime scene on that first day.

[00:43:55] [SPEAKER_03] You speak, of course, of your work being reviewed within the agency. You speak of your work being reviewed by people from other agencies. Is this this sort of area where all reputable experts would be likely to look at the same set of data and come to the same conclusions? Or is there ever instances of like dueling experts who have different conclusions?

[00:44:17] [SPEAKER_02] Well, like I said, I mean, my work, you know, Jason, Dwayne, and my work would always be reviewed by our supervisor, Scott Gilbert, who is, you know, is probably the best supervisor within the lab for crime scene investigators in the state. You know, I'm just blessed to have Scott as a, you know, as my supervisor when I was with the state police. He's methodical. He's logical. He's common sense. So to have somebody look your stuff over is always welcome.

[00:44:46] [SPEAKER_02] I know it should not be feared. Are two people always going to come to the same conclusion with crime scene data? Probably not. Should they come to an understanding of, yeah, well, these are the knowns and these are the facts and here's where I differ? Yeah. I think it's odd when experts in an area both come up with 180 degrees the opposite. That always is concerning to me.

[00:45:15] [SPEAKER_02] I would point out that I don't get paid more if there's a conviction. I don't get paid extra if there's a conviction. I don't get more vacation time if there's a conviction. None of the crime scene investigators work that way. You know, I have nothing to gain or lose if the person is found guilty or they're found innocent. My life really in the end doesn't change a whole lot. Do I want to do good work and get justice for everyone and I want the truth? Absolutely. It's always about the truth.

[00:45:43] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, we are the finders of fact. We're not on the police team particularly to get a conviction. We're here to get the truth as crime scene investigators. Pat Cicero, to my knowledge, was not paid or compensated in any way to render his analysis and he did it as a public service. That's the same way we did our work. I would venture to guess an expert brought in by a defense team would probably be paid for their opinion.

[00:46:09] [SPEAKER_01] When you look back on this case, what sort of things do you think about when you're reflecting?

[00:46:15] [SPEAKER_02] Oh, there's a lot of personal things that I'm never going to talk about. There's a lot of things, though, like professionally, like, you know, I'm proud of the work that was done and I'm proud of the result. And I'm sorry that it took as long to get justice for the family.

[00:46:29] [SPEAKER_00] Is there anything we didn't ask you about that you wanted to mention?

[00:46:33] [SPEAKER_02] No, I mean, I just think that, you know, everybody's entitled to their opinion. Everybody's entitled to think what they want to think and believe what they want to believe. I don't know Richard Allen from A Hole in the Ground. I don't I don't know him. I never dealt with him. He was developed as a suspect even after I retired from the state police. So the. I don't I don't have any preconceived notions about this case. You know, I did like I do any other case.

[00:47:01] [SPEAKER_02] What happened happened and what was there was there and what was collected. We collected what information was presented to us was reviewed, was processed and was collected in a manner that was impartial. That was without an intent to an ending and was with the idea that justice and truth. Be found. That's pretty much what we do.

[00:47:27] [SPEAKER_01] We want to thank Brian so much for coming on and speaking with us. We really appreciate it.

[00:47:31] [SPEAKER_03] Thanks so much for listening to the murder sheet. If you have a tip concerning one of the cases we cover, please email us at murdersheet at gmail dot com. If you have actionable information about an unsolved crime, please report it to the appropriate authorities.

[00:47:50] [SPEAKER_01] If you're interested in joining our Patreon, that's available at www.patreon.com slash murdersheet. If you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests, you can do so at www.buymeacoffee.com slash murdersheet. We very much appreciate any support.

[00:48:15] [SPEAKER_03] Special thanks to Kevin Tyler Greenlee, who composed the music for the murder sheet, and who you can find on the web at kevintg.com.

[00:48:25] [SPEAKER_01] If you're looking to talk with other listeners about a case we've covered, you can join the Murder Sheet discussion group on Facebook. We mostly focus our time on research and reporting, so we're not on social media much. We do try to check our email account, but we ask for patience as we often receive a lot of messages. Thanks again for listening.

[00:48:47] [SPEAKER_03] Can we talk a little bit before we go about Quince, a great new sponsor for us? I think in one of the ads that we've already done for them, we talked about the compliments I'm getting on my jacket. I know you're a very modest woman, but can we talk about the compliments you're getting on the Quince products you wear?

[00:49:08] [SPEAKER_01] Yeah, I've got two of their Mongolian cashmere sweaters. They're a brand that just does this sort of luxurious products, but without the crazy costs really well. They give you Italian leather handbags. They do European linen sheets. You have a really cool suede jacket, and I really like the way I look in my sweaters. I like the way you look in your bomber jacket. It looks super cool.

[00:49:33] [SPEAKER_03] You've gotten a lot of compliments when you go out wearing these sweaters.

[00:49:36] [SPEAKER_01] I think I have, yeah.

[00:49:38] [SPEAKER_03] And deservedly so.

[00:49:39] [SPEAKER_01] Also, I'm one of those people, my skin is very sensitive, so when it comes to wearing sweaters, sometimes something's too scratchy, it really bothers me. These are so soft. They're just very delicate and soft. Wearing them is lovely because they're super comfortable. It's not one of those things where you buy it and it looks great, but it doesn't feel that great. They look great. They feel great. But yeah, I really love them. And you've got your cool jacket.

[00:50:07] [SPEAKER_01] I mean, that's a little bit of a – you're the guy who wears the same thing all the time. So this was a bit of a gamble for you, a bit of a risk. You got something a bit different.

[00:50:15] [SPEAKER_03] I do wash my clothes.

[00:50:16] [SPEAKER_01] I know you wash your clothes, but I mean –

[00:50:19] [SPEAKER_03] You're filthy. You just made me sound awful. So no, I wash my clothes.

[00:50:23] [SPEAKER_01] But you don't really – I launder them. You don't really experiment with fashion that much is what I'm saying. So this is a little bit out of the norm for you, but I think you really like it and it looks good.

[00:50:32] [SPEAKER_03] Thank you. Great products, incredible prices. Absolutely. Quince.com.

[00:50:37] [SPEAKER_01] There you go. So you can go to quince.com slash msheet, and right now they're offering 365-day returns plus free shipping on your order. So that's quince.com slash msheet. That's quince.com slash msheet.

[00:50:54] [SPEAKER_03] Before we wrap up this episode, can we take just a moment to say a few more words about our great new sponsor, Acorns?

[00:51:02] [SPEAKER_01] Yeah. Thanks so much to Acorns. Remember, when you support our sponsors, you're supporting us. And our sponsors make it possible for us to do this job, so we really appreciate them.

[00:51:10] [SPEAKER_03] We love our sponsors.

[00:51:11] [SPEAKER_01] Absolutely. Acorns is a terrific investing app. It's the perfect thing for somebody who wants to get started with their personal finance journey. That can seem daunting. It is daunting. I'm so not financially minded. For me, it's always really hard to get started with something like this where you're like, what am I doing? But Acorns sort of takes the guesswork out of that. It gets you started, and it will essentially help you take control of your financial future.

[00:51:39] [SPEAKER_01] You can get set up pretty quickly, and it allows you to start automatically saving and investing. That money can help you, your kids, if you have a family, your retirement. And you don't need to be rich. You don't need to be an expert to do this. It's very simple. And you can start with only $5 or whatever change you have. It's not like you need to put in some massive payment.

[00:51:59] [SPEAKER_01] So it's a great fit for people who are starting out, but they want to take the next step and improve themselves financially and make their money work for them more. So if you're interested, head to acorns.com slash msheet or download the Acorns app to start saving and investing for your future today. Paid non-client endorsement. Compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns. Tier 1 compensation provided. Investing involves risk. Acorns Advisors LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor.

[00:52:28] [SPEAKER_01] View important disclosures at acorns.com slash msheet.

[00:52:31] [SPEAKER_03] Before we go, we just wanted to say another few words about Vaya. This is really a wonderful product. I think it's really helped both of us get a lot better rest.

[00:52:39] [SPEAKER_01] Vaya is pretty much, I guess you'd say, the only lifestyle hemp brand out there. So what does that mean? It means that they're all about crafting different products to elicit different moods. Kevin and I really like their non-THC CBD products. Specifically, Zen really helps me fall asleep. Some Zen can really just kind of help me get more into that state where I can relax and fall asleep pretty easily. And they've been such a wonderful support to us. They're a longtime sponsor.

[00:53:06] [SPEAKER_01] We really love working with them, and they really make this show possible. I'm going to say this. You may not realize this, but when you support our sponsors, you're supporting us. And it kind of makes it possible for us to do this show. So if you or one of your loved ones is interested in trying some of this stuff, you're going to get a great deal. It's very high quality, high value.

[00:53:25] [SPEAKER_03] Anya, if I wanted to get this discount you speak of, what do I do?

[00:53:30] [SPEAKER_01] Okay. If you're 21 and older, head to VayaHemp.com and use the code MSHEET to receive 15% off. And if you're new to Vaya, get a free gift of your choice. That's V-I-I-A, hemp.com, and use code MSHEET at checkout.

[00:53:44] [SPEAKER_03] Spell the code.

[00:53:45] [SPEAKER_01] M-S-H-E-E-T. And after you purchase, they're going to ask you, hey, where did you hear about us? Say the murder sheet because then it lets them know that our ads are effective and it really helps us out.