#Justice For JonBenét

[theomenmedia]

The Teaser For "Cold Case: Who Killed JonBenét Ramsey" Is Out Now!

Dive into the mystery that stunned a nation. "Cold Case: Who Killed JonBenét Ramsey" premieres on Netflix, uncovering truths and questioning the narrative. Don't miss it.

Check out the full teaser right here: https://www.theomenmedia.com/post/unraveling-the-unsolved-netflix-s-cold-case-who-killed-jonbenét-ramsey-revisits-a-haunting-myste

[mechadria]

certainly didn't expect much objectivity from a podcast called "the prosecutors" but ouhhhh they're so biased it hurts. I'm listening to their JonBenét series to kind of gauge who they are since I know a bit about the case and the things they keep quiet??? They make a lot of neutral things sound worse and anything that makes the parents look suspicious they bend around it to find excuses.

Incredibly interesting that a panel held by two prosecutors would fail to mention that the DA, who was refusing to subpoena anything or write warrants to search the Ramsey's property and belongings was also a man to whom John Ramsey had made substantial donations. The DA in this case is soooo obviously a corrupt man in many ways (to the point the police dpt believed it too) and his acquaintance with John Ramsey and donations from him absolutely do not make him a party that should be able to legally refuse to subpoena their bank statements (since, yaknow, he's in them.)

Their overall coverage of the DA just makes it impossible for me to trust their opinion and even the facts they present, since they so conveniently hide a lot of them. (I'm a couple hours in and there's already several notable things they just haven't mentioned at all).

They also went on and on at the beginning about only looking at evidence and not trying to build stories around it and they've done ONLY that the entire time. They've built intricate, ridiculous stories to defend anything the Ramseys may have done weirdly and argued at length about things that are neither evidence, nor were part of the case. Truly, if either of them were my lawyers in real life i'd just plead guilty to avoid them making me look worse.

So yeah. If you want people who advocate for the victims or are unbiased and look clearly at the US justice system, don't go there, you won't find anything worth your time (except the same ad twice in 30 seconds because they reaaaaally care about what products they sell you).

[incoldbloodsblog]

Unsolved Murder Mysteries: Cold Cases That Haunt Us

Throughout history, numerous murder cases have remained unsolved, leaving behind a trail of questions and chilling mysteries. These cold cases continue to captivate the public's imagination, often becoming the subject of intense speculation and investigation. Here, we explore some of the most notorious unsolved murder mysteries from around the world.

1. The Isdal Woman

In 1970, the body of an unidentified woman was discovered in Norway's Ice Valley. Dubbed the Isdal Woman, her remains were found charred and surrounded by personal belongings, including a bottle of liqueur and clothing with labels removed. Investigators uncovered suitcases filled with wigs and maps, indicating she had been living under multiple aliases. Despite extensive investigations, her identity and the circumstances surrounding her death remain a mystery, with authorities initially ruling it a suicide due to sleeping pills.[1]

2. The Black Dahlia

One of the most infamous cold cases in American history is that of Elizabeth Short, known as the Black Dahlia. In January 1947, Short's mutilated body was discovered in Los Angeles. The brutal nature of her murder and the subsequent media frenzy led to numerous theories about her killer. Despite various suspects being proposed over the years, including connections to Hollywood elites and local criminals, no one has ever been charged with her murder.[2]

3. Jack the Ripper

Operating in London during 1888, Jack the Ripper is perhaps the most notorious serial killer in history. His gruesome murders of at least five women in Whitechapel left authorities baffled. The killer's taunting letters to police added to the intrigue, leading to over a hundred suspects being investigated. Modern forensic techniques have yet to conclusively identify him, making this case a lasting enigma.[3]

4. The Zodiac Killer

Active in Northern California during the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Zodiac Killer is known for sending cryptic letters and ciphers to newspapers. While some codes have been deciphered, including one in 2020, his identity remains unknown despite extensive investigations. The Zodiac claimed responsibility for multiple murders but only five have been confirmed. His ability to evade capture continues to haunt law enforcement and amateur sleuths alike.[2]

5. JonBenét Ramsey

The murder of six-year-old JonBenét Ramsey in 1996 shocked the nation. Found dead in her family's Boulder, Colorado home shortly after a ransom note was discovered, JonBenét's case has been marred by controversy and speculation. Despite numerous investigations and media coverage, no one has been charged with her murder, leaving many questions about what truly happened that fateful night.[2]

6. The Jeannette DePalma Murder

In 1972, the body of Jeannette DePalma, a 16-year-old girl from New Jersey, was found on a cliffside adorned with occult symbols. Her death sparked theories involving witchcraft and human sacrifice due to the eerie circumstances surrounding it. Despite extensive searches and investigations, no definitive cause of death was established, leaving this case shrouded in mystery.[1]

7. The Monster with 21 Faces

In Japan from 1984 to 1985, an unknown group known as The Monster with 21 Faces terrorized candy companies through extortion and threats. They kidnapped a company president and sent letters challenging police efforts to catch them. Despite extensive investigations into their identity and motives, this group vanished without a trace, leaving behind an unsettling legacy.[1]

Conclusion

These unsolved murder mysteries not only highlight the limitations of forensic science and investigative techniques but also reflect society's fascination with crime and justice. Each case carries its own unique story filled with intrigue and unanswered questions that continue to haunt families and communities alike. As technology advances and new methods emerge, there remains hope that some of these cold cases may one day be solved, bringing closure to those affected by these tragic events.

.

.

.

.

.

Read more about these cases on:

https://spyscape.com/

2. www.britannica.com

3. www.geeksforgeeks.org

[jbrunsolved]

3 Big Ways ‘The Case of: JonBenet Ramsey’ Got It Wrong

From confirmation bias in the 911 tape analysis to dissecting an 'appropriate' response to death, how CBS's documentary didn't tell the whole story

This month, two new TV documentary specials about the unsolved murder of JonBenét Ramsey have aired in anticipation of the 20th anniversary of the six-year-old’s tragic and mysterious death on Christmas night, 1996. Viewers who hoped to learn conclusive proof of who killed the child beauty queen sometime after she was put to bed in her Boulder, Colorado, home were likely disappointed. Two decades later, and the debate over whether it was the Ramseys or an intruder rages on, with A&E and CBS taking startlingly different positions.

Though each promised new exclusive details, both programs largely relied on the available evidence gathered during the investigation and interviews with members of law enforcement involved in the original case. As was the case in 1996 – and every year since – the interpretation of that evidence remains at the center of this unsolved crime. A&E’s documentary, which maintained that the Ramseys were rightfully exonerated by DNA evidence in 2008, concluded that because the intruder theory was dismissed early on by Boulder police, there simply isn’t enough evidence to name a suspect without a complete reinvestigation.

A complete reinvestigation is what CBS’s The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey promised, but the only thing they delivered was a witch hunt that culminated in naming Burke Ramsey, JonBenét’s then nine-year-old brother, as her killer, and implicating John and Patsy Ramsey in a coverup. (Burke Ramsey, now 29, appeared on Dr. Phil last week in his first-ever public interview, and insisted that neither he, his father John nor his late-mother Patsy has anything to do with JonBenét’s death.)

Absent any new physical evidence ormeaningful new witness statements, the fruits of this reinvestigation, led by former FBI agent and criminal profiler Jim Clemente and behavioral analyst Laura Richards, were almost entirely subjective, at times dangerously misleading and dependent on a flawed police investigation that will very likely never result in the killer being brought to justice. 

Here, three big ways CBS mislead viewers with their reinvestigation into JonBenét Ramsey’s murder

Confirmation bias, selective hearing and the misleading 911 call analysis The first step in Clemente and Richards’ reinvestigation was analyzing Patsy Ramsey’s 911 call, specifically an inaudible portion at the very end when the phone clicked but did not disconnect. Because the operator did not hang up, the call continued to record, but no one has ever been able to conclusively decipher the extremely muffled, inaudible voices heard faintly in the background.

But many have tried. One such example is the Aerospace Corporation, who in 1997, at the request of the Boulder Police Department, conducted a test of the 911 tape, but the results were never officially released. However, in 1998, the National Enquirer leaked the results, which were subsequently quoted in Larry Schiller’s 1999 book, Perfect Murder, Perfect Town: The Uncensored Story of the JonBenét Murder and the Grand Jury’s Search for the Final Truth, and former Boulder Police Detective Steve Thomas’s book, JonBenét: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, in 2000.

Clemente and Richards made a vague reference to this analysis, but didn’t disclose that it had been leaked and that they were aware of its conclusions, as any investigator in this case surely is. Instead, they claimed they were going to use “more modern audio technology” to figure out how many voices were on the tape and what they were saying. Sitting in a recording studio, the pair listened as the engineer fussed with levels and knobs. As Clemente and Richards began to “figure out” what was allegedly being said and who was allegedly saying it, subtitles popped up on screen in a flagrant attempt to convince the viewers that they, too, could hear it. There were three voices speaking, they claimed, and one of them was Burke Ramsey, whom Patsy and John told investigators was asleep in his room the morning they discovered JonBenét was missing.

A cursory review of the Twitter reactions to this segment indicates that many viewers could not make out any of what Clemente and Richards claimed to hear. “In the headphones it was incredibly clear,” Clemente tweeted, the implication being that despite devoting substantial time to playing back the audio over and over again, viewers should just trust what Clemente and Richards said they heard.

The problem is, at least as far as the 911 call analysis goes, Clemente and Richards lost credibility by failing to disclose that the leaked results from the Aerospace Corporation’s analysis are word for word what they seemed shocked and awed to hear on the other end of those headphones. Here is what the Aerospace Corporation found in their analysis of that 911 call, according to a report in local newspaper the Daily Camera: “Those sources say enhancement of the tape reveals Burke’s voice in the background, asking his parents ‘What did you find?’,” the paper writes. “John Ramsey allegedly can be heard shouting to Burke, ‘We are not talking to you,’ and Patsy shouts ‘Oh my Jesus, oh my Jesus.'”

This is what Clemente and Richards concluded, verbatim. It’s not clear if and how their analysis is new or more advanced than what was done previously. Far more egregiously, not disclosing their knowledge of the conclusions of the Aerospace report misleads viewers about the purity of their own analysis by not addressing the significant risk of confirmation bias, the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one’s existing beliefs or theories – a factor in the vast majority of wrongful conviction cases. Witness identification, recall of memories, evidence collection and analysis and forensic testing can all result in misleading or false results if precautions are not taken to prevent it. At the very least, the risk that confirmation bias can lead to selective hearing should be considered when weighing the significance of Clemente and Richards’ analysis of Patsy Ramsey’s 911 call.

Instead, viewers were subjected to their herculean efforts to isolate, amplify and translate this supposed bit of muffled dialogue as if it was just as brand new to them. And then they presented their conclusions as proof that the Ramseys had lied, and used Burke’s alleged presence as an excuse to add him to their suspect list.

Dismissing the DNA evidence entirely Some of the forensic scientists and experts Clemente and Richards assembled for their investigative team, including forensic pathologist Dr. Werner Spitz and forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee, offered some interesting and credible assessments of the physical evidence. For example, Dr. Lee did a demonstration that showed how a blow from a flashlight found on the Ramseys’ kitchen counter could have caused JonBenét’s skull fracture. And both Dr. Lee and Dr. Spitz disagreed with Boulder County District Attorney Mary Lacy’s decision to exonerate the Ramseys in 2008 based on new DNA tests which revealed the presence of unidentified male DNA from a single source on both JonBenét’s underwear and leggings. Dr. Lee explained how touch DNA is so easily transferred that it can show up on a brand new pair of underwear straight out of its sealed packaging, so his belief that the presence of unidentified male DNA on a little girl’s underwear could have come from a factory worker was convincing.

However, just because the DNA is not proof of an intruder or proof of the Ramseys’ innocence doesn’t mean the touch DNA is completely useless either, as Dr. Lee claimed. Regardless of how CBS regards its investigation, this is still an unsolved murder, no one in the Ramsey family has been proven guilty in a court of law and the intruder theory has not been conclusively ruled out. The absence of proof is not proof of anything.

While touch DNA is easily transferred, there are still scenarios in which a specific DNA match would be regarded as extremely suspicious and should be pursued further. What if the DNA suddenly matched a child molester who had never worked in a factory that manufactured little girls’ underwear and had no reason to have ever come into contact with JonBenét, her new underwear or any of her other belongings that the DNA might have transferred from? Touch DNA alone is not a reason to convict, but it shouldn’t be ignored as an investigatory lead. Dr. Lee’s bizarre conclusion essentially invalidated the usefulness of touch DNA in all criminal cases.

Overselling linguistic forensics and behavioral analysis as conclusive Time and time again, Clemente, Richards, former FBI “linguistic profiler” James Fitzgerald and former FBI statement analyst Stan Burke, reached certain conclusions based on highly subjective analysis of the vocal inflections, body language, pronoun use, linguistic phrasing and human behavior exhibited by the Ramseys during the investigation. Everything from Patsy Ramsey referring to herself as “the mother” in the 911 call, to John Ramsey’s decision to pick up his dead daughter’s body, to the “appropriateness” of Burke Ramsey’s response to her death was scrutinized through the lens of the investigators’ “expertise.”

The Case of never made it clear that these areas of forensic science and behavioral analysis are viewed by the courts with varying degrees of acceptability and reliability, and with very good reason. Human behavior and language is not one-size-fits-all, especially with the introduction of trauma. Jim Clemente voicing his opinion that Burke didn’t respond or emote “appropriately” seems irresponsible, especially when presented as evidence of guilt.

The admissibility of linguistic forensics and behavioral analysis testimony is subject to a set of standards that may limit its scope or forbid it entirely in a court of law. In criminal cases, these methods are more likely to be used to eliminate potential suspects – not presented as proof of someone’s guilt. 

Alas, the social media response to The Case of has been flooded with comments about how Burke is “weird” and “a total psychopath” who is “obviously guilty.” For Clemente and his team to stoke that mentality without any caveats has repercussions that go beyond this case. Human beings are naturally inclined towards relying on their emotions and intuition, so expert testimony and evidence that is informed by subjective assessments of what is and isn’t normal behavior can be incredibly convincing.

Moreover, Clemente and Richards presented themselves and their team of investigators as infallible, their expertise as inarguable and their opinions as indisputable facts. More than once, they made unproven, disputed or misleading statements without providing further evidence, like the claim that John Ramsey disappeared for an hour and a half the morning of the murder – in actuality, he was in his study and the Boulder police just didn’t notice. They also rushed to disprove alternate theories. After one attempt to get through a replica model of the basement window, Clemente and Richards concluded there could not have been an intruder because the spider web in the corner was “destroyed” and the real spider web in the Ramseys basement window was undisturbed.

Yet when laying out their theory for Burke Ramsey as the killer, these experts literally made up a story about Burke killing JonBenét (on accident or in anger, but probably unintentionally) by hitting her in the head with a flashlight because she took a piece of his pineapple. The proof? JonBenét had undigested pineapple in her stomach. Even if this theory had been proven back in 1996, at age nine, Burke would have been too young to be legally prosecuted in Colorado, and he certainly couldn’t be held responsible for any horrendous cover-up instigated by his parents. To unleash a witch hunt on him now without rock solid proof of guilt is a cruel ratings ploy.

CBS included a disclaimer at the end of their closing credits which acknowledged that the “opinions and conclusions … about how [the crime] may have occurred represent just some of the a number of possible scenarios,” and encouraged viewers to “reach their own conclusions.” This bare minimum of legal cover may be just enough to protect CBS from John Ramsey’s inevitable lawsuit – as his attorney Lin Wood has already suggested is in the works – but it likely went unnoticed by viewers. The repercussions of depending on such controversial evidence go beyond this case, as jury members (the majority of which are not educated in the law) are often asked to weigh similar evidence and testimony when deciding guilt or innocence. The Case of oversold the same flawed methodology that has manipulated juries and resulted in countless wrongful convictions, coupled it with cherry-picked evidence and an extreme case of tunnel vision in order to finger a nine-year-old for a 20-year-old cold murder. That’s disturbing and irresponsible, no matter who killed JonBenét Ramsey.

CBS investigators allege that it was Burke, JonBenét’s older brother, who murdered her. Watch here.

x

[bafflingmysteries1]

Delve into the perplexing and unresolved mystery surrounding the tragic death of JonBenét Ramsey, a young beauty queen whose murder continues to captivate public interest and elude definitive resolution. Explore the details of the case, the various theories, and the enduring quest for justice. JonBenét Ramsey: Unsolved Case published first on https://www.youtube.com/@bafflingmysteries/

[shezanenigma]

Book Review: Law & Disorder

Law & Disorder The Legendary FBI Profiler’s Relentless Pursuit of Justice  By, John E. Douglas and Mark Olshaker 💎💎💎 3 Diamond Review This memoir is an incredible glimpse into the mind of one of the world’s most renowned criminal profilers. Douglas is one of the pioneers of the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit and has been instrumental in the development of criminal profiling and the art of criminal investigative analysis.  Through the pages of this book, the reader is taken on a journey with Douglas as he recounts the details of some of his most notable cases, including the infamous JonBenét Ramsey Murder. Douglas’s vivid descriptions of his work are incredibly engaging and often chilling. His passion and dedication are evident throughout the book. He provides fascinating insight into how he applies his knowledge and experience to develop a profile of a suspect. He also explains how he uses this to help law enforcement track down and catch the criminal and, in some cases, prove someone innocent.  Some of the book can drag on, but overall, it’s an interesting read. I give this book 3 Diamonds.

[termytheantisocialbutterfly]

Kind of really sick of the "JonBenét Ramsey's brother killed her" stuff. Like, first of all, just because a 9yrold maybe could doesn't mean that he did and, second of all, if you're continuing to parade this theory around after he's been ruled out by DNA evidence found on her pants and in her underwear then I hate to break it to you but you're the police officer everyone hates because he cares more about a simple answer than justice.

[mikeyxcallahan]

"Shit, that's a good question." Mikey stirred her drink with her straw as she pondered Kalina's question. She'd gotten into true crime not too long ago and she'd been enjoying Kali's podcast, so she didn't know too many cases but she typically listened to the unsolved ones. "JonBenét Ramsey. I've listened to that one so many times and it's just so bizarre. She deserves justice. I mean, every victim does. That's a case I think about a lot. What about you?"

@screamqueen-slater

Closed for @mikeyxcallahan

“ okay so serious question, well maybe not serious but kind of “ kalina began before realizing she was kind of going around in circles. “ but im getting a bit ahead of myself here, but if you could solve one mystery. Any mystery in the world what would it be and why “ she asked glancing over to her with a small smile. It was one of those general questions it Kali always wanted to know what people answered. It was her way of figuring out people

[love4columbine]

•December 25th, 1996 - JonBenét Ramsey’s last Christmas...and her last day on earth.

Just hours after these pictures were taken, the six-year-old girl was reported missing by her parents. Mrs. Ramsey noticed her daughter missing from her bed around 5am on December 26th, after finding a ransom note on the counter. The note demanded $118,000 for the safe return of their daughter. The following day JonBenét’s body was found in the basement of her Colorado home. Her death was ruled a homicide. Although there have been many suspects in this case, no one was ever charged for the murder of little JonBenét Ramsey.

[fresherbrine]

[yellow675]

Chopped Up People

  Once upon a time, when I was 6 years old, my father and I were watching TV (a device long extinct in our wireless house). He was lying across our entire old green sofa, and I had assumed my position lying on the top of the sofa’s head rests. I think we were watching a wildlife documentary and halfway through my dad fell asleep, in typical dad-fashion. I continued watching until the wildlife documentary ended, when—unbeknownst to my slumbering father—a crime documentary came on next.

  My parents were not the kind to let their child watch dodgy things like “violent” PG movies or creepy documentaries. They weren’t necessarily strict, they just monitored the kinds of TV shows and movies I was watching. (Once I got my hands on my first apple device all that went out the window because they didn’t know how those things worked, so I was totally free to view whatever I wanted. But that was when I was 10, and this story takes place before that.) So this crime documentary was the first taste I got of things sinister and real-world.

  My 6 year old self sat glued wide-eyed to the screen as documentary eerily documented a homicide. A young girl’s boyfriend had strangled her then chopped her up into pieces and stuck her remains in a freezer. Up until this point in my life I had never really thought about death, nor had I been told much about it. I think my parents had explained the whole circle of life concept—mostly about how old people die—and not much else. Never had I thought that a human body could be chopped up like a carrot, or even that a person had the power to take another’s life. And if I had heard of the concept of murder it was only in sugar-coated children’s storybooks and not real life scenarios. So this documentary was eye-opening to say the least. My dad slept through the whole thing and most of whatever came on next, so my parents never knew that I had seen this documentary. I kept it a secret.

  I entertained it in my mind, though. My plastic animals suddenly had a taste for murder, and my stuffed animals were no different. I vaguely remember telling other kids at my elementary school about chopping people up. I was utterly fascinated by that crime documentary, and it spurred my addiction to them, an fascination that still flourishes today. I delved into the world of crime and murder more when I got my first iPad, and watching crime shows and conspiracy theories became a hobby. In middle school I did a couple projects on serial killers, I splattered fake blood on the poster boards and everything. Jack the Ripper, JonBenét Ramsey, Lizzie Borden, Columbine, Anissa Weier and Morgan Geyser—names that stuck in my mind and rolled off my tongue. In high school I’ve done many more projects on school shootings, teenage or child murderers and the like. In the last year my fascination has taken new heights as I began frequenting gore sites, looking at murder scenes and autopsies—or watching murders happen.

  I think this is when it starts to get weird, right? My friends are concerned. My parents would be speechless. My mother can’t even look at fake blood in movie effects without feeling nauseous (I clearly do not take after my mother). I loved the shows Hannibal and Dexter, and she always asks me how I can stand watching “that stuff.”

  “Ugh, you shouldn’t watch that! So violent! I don’t like you watching those things, you’re too young. Doesn’t it give you nightmares?” she asked me.

  I wanted to tell her I have seen much, much worse things than fake blood splattered across fake people, but I kept my mouth shut. I was talking to a lady who gets nightmares from watching Grey’s Anatomy, she would certainly freak out if she knew her daughter was watching real-life executions.

  The way I see it, my slightly-concerning hobby is not a problem for these reasons:

I do not wish to re-create the crimes/gore

I am not turned on by the crimes/gore

I do not romanticize the perpetrators/crimes/gore

Seeing the crimes/gore does not make me paranoid, depressed or anxious to the point where it interferes with my life

I think that if any of these ever start to apply to me, then I will have a problem. For the record I am certainly not worried about this happening. I am starting to plan on using my fascination with homicide to pursue a career in that field. I have turned my sights onto a career in forensic science, pathology or homicide detective work. I seem to have little trouble looking at chopped up people, in fact I do it as a pass-time, why not use it to my advantage?

[redrabbitspod]

Today (Aug 6) JonBenét Ramsey would have turned 30. It’s horrible and such a shame her death never received any justice despite it being so obvious - the brother did it and the parents covered it up and nobody can convince me otherwise.

Congratulations on solving the case. -A

[murdermanager]

Long Form True Crime Podcasts

Must Listens for 2020 involving just one case or criminal

Culpable

In 2014, the Andreacchio family suffered a tragic loss, the death of 21-year-old Christian Andreacchio. Host Dennis Cooper travel’s to Lauderdale, Mississippi to visit Christian’s mother Rae and the rest of his family. Rae, laments the time lost with her son as their 4 year struggle for justice continues. From Black Mountain Media and Tenderfoot TV, this is Culpable.

The Queen

Linda Taylor was a con artist, a kidnapper, maybe even a murderer. She was also America’s original “welfare queen,” the villain Ronald Reagan needed to create a vision of a country being taken advantage of by its poorest citizens. Josh Levin reveals the never-before-told story of a woman whose singular life was forgotten in the rush to create a vicious American stereotype.

The Killing of JonBenet: The Final Suspects

For 22 years, the JonBenét case has gripped the world, leaving everyone asking the same question: Who killed JonBenét Ramsey? The six year old's death shocked the nation. The circumstances surrounding her murder, horrific. Now, for the first time ever, JonBenét Ramsey's father and brother are armed with the original suspect list from Lou Smit, the late lead investigator on the case. Will they finally track down JonBenét's killer to solve one of the nation's most infamous crimes? The creators of THE KILLING OF MARILYN MONROE and FATAL VOYAGE: THE MYSTERIOUS DEATH OF NATALIE WOOD bring you THE KILLING OF JONBENÉT: THE FINAL SUSPECTS. The Killing of JonBenét: The Final Suspects is narrated by Danielle Robay

Urge to Kill

A man with an “urge to kill” took the life of a beloved Oregon woman in the middle of the night. We’ll follow investigators as they uncover the wild twists and turns of this case, including the killer’s multi-state crime spree in which he terrorized everyone in his path.

Have You Seen This Man?

Join the real-time nationwide manhunt for escaped Ohio death row inmate Lester Eubanks. While out on bail for attempted rape in 1965, Eubanks murdered a 14-year-old school girl, was convicted and sent to prison. Through a series of shocking events, Eubanks was designated an honor prisoner and granted permission to join a small group trip outside penitentiary walls to go Christmas shopping. He walked away and hasn't been seen since. Now, join ABC News as it peels back the curtain on Eubanks' escape and life on the run, and follow the U.S. Marshals service as one of their star investigators uses every tool available to catch up to Eubanks. Hosted by Sunny Hostin.

Amy Should Be Forty

VAULT Studios and WKYC Studios in Cleveland look at the kidnapping and killing of Amy Mihaljevic on the 30th anniversary of her murder.

Bardstown

Welcome signs proclaim it “America’s Most Beautiful Small Town.”  It’s considered the Bourbon Capital of the World.  And in many ways, Bardstown, Kentucky is just like a lot of small, tight-knit communities all across the country.

The Catch and Kill With Ronan Farrow

For the past two years, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Ronan Farrow has been following a trail of clues from his investigation of Harvey Weinstein to other blockbuster stories about the systems that protect powerful men accused of terrible crimes in Hollywood, Washington, and beyond. But he didn’t bring that information to light on his own. A compelling cast of sources—from brave whistleblowers to shadowy undercover operatives—decided the fate of these investigations, sometimes risking everything in the process. The Catch and Kill Podcast brings you their stories, in their own words, for the first time.

Slow Burn

In its first two seasons, Slow Burn looked back at two of the biggest stories of the late 20th century—the Watergate scandal and the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Season three of the show tackles another: the murders of Tupac Shakur and the Notorious B.I.G. 

[austin-lockhart]

What do you regret most?

“That JonBenét Patricia Ramsey never saw justice.”