Paul Holes: My Life Solving America's Cold Cases

Join us this new year for new conversations at the Commonwealth Club. Alright. Well, thank you all for being here. This is amazing. Well, my first question and thank you all for being here live. It's very nice to have a nice, live audience again after so many, many years, actually. But. When you read your book, it doesn't feel like you're working in Contra Costa. You know, it sounds like you're working in New York City. And that, I think, just shows what editing can do when you take, you know, an entire career and edit it. Sure. But as we were chatting before, there was a time when things were where there was more of a serial killer or more of a serial rapist.

Maybe you can talk about that. It was before you started. You started in 1994. So there were already unsolved

cases

. Good. So why don't you tell that? Well, and what I would say is that yes, this book covers my career. Now, these are just select

cases

in my career. I have worked on many, many more that did not appear in the book. And I ended up focusing on serial predators in 1994. I started at the sheriff's office as a civilian forensic scientist in 1990 and then became fascinated with

cold

cases and, in particular, cases that appeared to be predatory or fantasy-motivated homicides.

And I started focusing on them in 1994, the first being what was known at the time as the East Area Rapist. But while I compiled lists of unsolved cases in Contra Costa County. I was stunned by the number of these cases. And then when I started working on these cases. They began to identify these serial killers Phil Hughes, Charles Jackson, Darryl Kemp. And it was just surprising, especially considering where these cases occurred, which was, you know, Orinda, Lafayette, Moraga, Walnut Creek. You know, you have neighborhoods that were considered very safe, but you have multiple serial killers working in those neighborhoods at the same time.

In fact, there is a neighborhood. San Marcos Estates and Walnut Creek, which I call the Bermuda Triangle serial killers, because I have three serial killers who attacked one of them, Joseph D'Angelo, in that same neighborhood across from Ignazio Vallee, across from Heather Farms. And then we have another unsolved case, the 1976 case of little Lisa Dickinson, a young woman who went riding her bicycle and who is still missing today. Hmm. Speaking of missing to this day, let's go to those missing to this day. There is no longer any missing case. Jaycee Dugard. You talk about that because it's a fascinating case that reminded me of the woman in Utah, in Salt Lake City, who was kidnapped by a man and she had to be like that throughout her

life

.

Yes I know. I know what case you're talking about. Who is now coming out and talking about it and I think he's doing a great job of trying to explain how to deal with having to face someone who is going to rape you or kill you. Good. And how do you deal with that mentally? And we'll get back to that. But this case of Jaycee Dugard is a woman who disappeared when she was 11 from South Lake Tahoe and she turned up in Contra Costa 21 years later, which tells the story of how she lived. Because it's a little strange.

Well, you know, this was surprising to us when it came to light that this girl missing from the Tahoe area where she lived now has a mother with the kidnapper of her against her will. But, you know, kind of like, well, how do you know, how did we miss this? You know, that's where you go, oh, what's going on here? And, you know, she had been in the Tahoe area, riding her bike. And it turns out that Phil Garrido and her wife, Nancy, saw it. Phil Garrido is a predator. And Nancy, her wife, was the one who went out to lure Jaycee near the car and used a stun gun on Jaycee to get her into the car.

And then they drove to the Antioch area. And then basically Jaycee, who was chained inside the shed for years, became Phil Garrido's sex slave. And finally this young woman, you know, gives birth to Phil Garrido's two children, two daughters. And ultimately what ended up happening is that Phil Garrido had a kind of interesting, almost cult-like mentality like David Koresh. And he was really trying to preach the word of God into his mind. And he's in Berkeley with his two daughters. And two female police officers in Berkeley said, "This doesn't look good." And they went up and talked to him and communicated about him, but they kicked him off campus.

And then, upon further investigation, he ends up finding himself on probation. His probation officer was out of Concord. And now, you know, the probation officer calls Phil and then he calls, you know what? Who was Jaycee finally? But she didn't identify herself as Jaycee Dugard until she finally became one. But, you know, at this point, you know, she had almost completely forgotten her previous

life

and had told Garrido: I'll stay with you as long as you don't touch my daughters like you touched me. And so at this point, you know, that's where it all falls on Phil Garrido, El Dorado County, the FBI comes in and they do their pursuit of the Jaycee Dugard case properly.

And I'm sitting in my office in Martínez. I'm leaving, what's going on? And now I'm investigating Phil Garrido. And then I see Phil Garrido, you know, basically at a Pittsburgh council meeting, giving an almost character witness statement to this Jimmy Merlino, owner of G.M. Enterprises, which was a junkyard. And this is where we have a kind of central location for something invisible. All the series of women who have been murdered in that area. I thought: What is the possibility that Garrido was involved in this series? And I write about the series in the book, and also about myself, my Pittsburgh homicide partner and later district attorney. who has since passed away.

Bob Whole no relation. Relationship with me at least recent. Yeah, we might be related to about 500 years ago outside of England, but we haven't quite done it, but you know, we figured out how to write a search warrant to register Garrido's property. And now we're searching Garrido's property to see if he had any role in the unsolved series in Pittsburgh, which included a 15-year-old girl, Lisa Norrell. And while we do this, Alameda County is interested in Phil Garrido for the case of Eileen Mitchell and McKayla Garrett, two missing girls who remain missing to this day. And so we ended up, literally, I spent two weeks there on that property and we demolished everything that was on this property.

But it was surprising to see how Jaycee, not just how she had been basically kept as a child sex slave. And then when she's raising her kids, you know, this is literally a junkyard, you know, where you have abandoned cars. We had, you know, sheds that are falling apart, tents that have gone up. They would use

holes

in the ground as bathrooms. And you're going to say, you know, these poor girls, how could they be raised? You know, I worried a lot when my kids were little, but you know, that outlet doesn't have a safety plug.

Good. And yet these girls, you know, grew up and really thrived. You know, they did it well. Jaycee did an amazing job and luckily she got her life back. But I mean, absolutely tragic in terms of thinking, you know, this man here for his own needs and really, Nancy, for his own personal needs. You know, they, you know, took away part of this woman's life and Jaycee's life. Yeah. Uh, we'll talk a little bit more about the psychology of these people and then how to deal with them a little bit later. And if you have any questions, as you mentioned, especially if you're watching this live stream, you can also submit them through YouTube in the chat room.

We'll be happy to answer your questions a little later, before we look at some of the other cases you looked at. I thought that was a very interesting part of your book that you talked about, your partners, the two police officers, the Canadian and the Canadian Giacomelli, and how you weren't really a police officer, but that drew you into the process because you are Entering the process on your own to tell the story because, you know, it's part of the camaraderie of working on something that's really, really hard to work on. No. Well, absolutely. You know, and you know, John Kennedy and Ray Giacomelli were two associates of the Pittsburgh police.

I met them for the first time on the lease in a real case. And, you know, when we met, they were like the real buddy cops that you see, like Lethal Weapon, Mel Gibson, and Danny Glover. You know, it was like a brother relationship. They were very experienced homicide investigators and very good at what they did. And but they, you know, had a kind of, you know, side of it, you know, a side of the street too. And it turned out that I really identified with them. And I was getting into the you know, at this point, I had been on my unsolved case for about four years, but it was mainly from the lab.

But then I was so interested in the research side, that they would come in and we would chat, you know, we would meet. You know, they're talking to me while we're going to a homicide scene that needed to be reconstructed. And then, of course, I'll meet them in the field for a variety of additional homicides that occurred after I first met them. You know, and then there's a story where we come back from this case where I was tasked with doing a reconstruction in Bay Point, and Canady is driving and Ray is in the front passenger seat.

And these guys at that time, they had, you know, thousand-dollar-plus suits and sunglasses on and they looked great. Here I am more or less like this, this young yellow lab who was in his car. Then I see some kind of head turning and the next thing you know it's doing a U-turn on Willow Pass Road and it goes up and there's a woman who's nodding. You know, she's a sex worker in the area. And Ray rolls down the window and she knows exactly who they are. Good. And Ray says: Hey. And I don't remember her name.

Hey. Have you come across Paul Halls before? This is what Paul maintains. Have you come across him? Paul doesn't stop. Be careful. We want to know if you run into them and then, you know, I feel like I'm sitting back in my seat because now my name is on the street, a John that the Pittsburgh police said. He's looking, you know, for that to be the kind of relationship we had. And, you know, the book describes what happened to Ray, which was absolutely tragic. And you know that the candidate and I remain friends to this day.

And, you know, that was just a part of you know, there's almost like a learning aspect. You know, of course, initially I am a scientist. And then I got into the role of researcher. But I also played sports, you know, and you get into that camaraderie and that really was, you know, a real friendship, but I owe them a lot. That's why I dedicated a chapter to the Canadian Giacomelli and telling that story. It just happened that when Ray was killed, I was also dealing with the Laci Peterson case. It was a very stressful and emotionally draining time where I had to juggle both sides of that.

What I found fascinating about what you wrote was that she helped explain the darkly humorous situation inside with the corpses in the room reaching the slab and having to investigate all this and all the difficult emotional stuff. You go to the crime scene. You know the things you see at a crime scene that you have to deal with emotionally. And now there are endless TV shows about this. And I think some people find it entertaining. It is like that, but they don't realize that maybe it's a coping mechanism, like you said. Well, no, no, it is very much so.

And that's where you know, when I, as an example, again, with the Canadian Giacomelli, you know, we were in the autopsy room in one of these cases and Giacomelli was telling the pathologists, "I never want you to do an autopsy on me." . . And the pathologist says, oh, don't worry, you won't feel anything. And then Ray's response is: Well, I'm going to swallow a capsule. So if you open me up, there will be a little note inside that capsule that says: I told you not to do an autopsy. Good. Later. That pathologist is the one who performed the autopsy on Ray.

That's part of what you know, here's the lightness. Mmmmm. But there is also tragedy. And that's part of what this book is about, the cases I write about are fascinating, but also, you know, this is a real crime. You know, we're in the true crime genre, very much in the true crime genre. But this is based on a real crime. And, you know, now you encounter the psychological and emotional trauma that I and other professionals experience as we move forward in these careers. You know, and that ultimately became one of my main messages: to help people, whether it's someone who's never worked in this field and is only interested in true crime, or is a professional in the field and is experimenting, You know, these these, these, this trauma and you don't recognize it.

And I'm trying to clear it up because I didn't recognize it and too often retired after the success of D'Angelo and Golden State Killer. And, you know, now, all of a sudden, I'm a man over 50, and now, all of a sudden, I'm recognizing, you know, you know, this career came with some sacrifices. Yes. And I think it's helpful to know that prison guards are not just soldiers in war, but they also have to deal with the situation all the time. And, you know, part of our problemprison guard is that we ask people to be prison guards and live their lives in those circumstances.

So not just the police. There are so many different roles in society where we ask people to do something to help protect us and that comes at a cost. Well, a lot. And just within law enforcement, think about it, of course, homicide investigators. What about the eyes of the CSI, the death investigators, the dispatchers? You know, everyone is different. It's a spectrum, but there are levels of trauma. And if he does it over and over again, I've been working on these types of cases for almost 30 years and it has had an impact on me and others.

In fact, you know, in fact, when I was in Portland, I flew out of Portland this morning, by the way, so I could come here for these events. And last night I was interviewed by a podcast team called Small Town Dicks, Yeardley Smith. And Dan and Dave and Dan and Dave are either law enforcement officers or recently left law enforcement. And Dave, who spent much of his career as an investigator working on child abuse cases. He read my foreword in the book and as soon as he stopped reading it, he texted me saying: That really hit me.

That's how I identify myself. And that was my validation in terms of, okay, I did the right thing by putting myself out there and my struggles. For someone like Dave and others to leave, maybe I have to consider, you know, I'm not just going to bury myself, you know, in the bottle. And thank you very much for bringing the bottle. But you know, whether it's relationships, withdrawing from a relationship or separating yourself from normal activities, you know, that's something that's part of this trauma and you know it. So that's where, you know, this message is something that I'm really trying to get out there and say that it's okay, you know, seek help.

Because in law enforcement, it all depends largely on the testosterone-driven alpha male. If you show weakness, you know, they're going to destroy you. I mean, you're going to be ostracized. You'll be passed over for promotion, you know, so you really have to put up a front and bury some of the struggles you may be having. And now we just need to get that culture to change to make sure that the people who do this work receive, you know, a level of help so that their quality of life is not affected and that will make them better in their life. professional life too.

Yes. And I think that's a crucial part: by doing it that way, they'll be better at their jobs. Yes, a little more. Horrific details that caused this type of trauma. You mentioned a case, the rotten fish case, in which you thought that the corpse that had been dead for several days was moving. However, it did not turn out to move on its own. Good. Yes. Well, and this is a fascinating case, a fascinating crime scene, because it is very surreal. And, in fact, they had beaten the fish's body in their Orinda home. A bit. Do you have any association with that?

Yes. Yes. Well, and as I walk through the garage door, you know, I pass a Bentley. And I thought, wow, this is the first time I've seen a Bentley at a crime scene. And I hear this humming. And at first I think it's an electrical hum. And as soon as I open the garage door that leads to the kitchen, the humming noise suddenly becomes very loud. It's like, Oh, this is not good. And as I turn the corner, I try to fight my way through swarms of flies. And now here is the victim lying on his back.

Her head has been crushed and she has been dead for about five days and it happened to be a time in Orinda where it has been over 100 degrees for most of that time. And of course, insect activity increases as the temperature increases. And all this movement that I thought was going on in this victim's body, particularly where the wounds turned out to be maggots, fly maggots. And I literally have flies crashing into me as they fly and swarm. But that fly evidence turned out to be absolutely critical. And the fascinating aspect of this case is that when I processed the victim's head, there were two larvae of different sizes.

There is this larger white larva. And then there were these little gray larvae that were also present. And of course, being diligent, I collect both. And then, using an entomologist who is very familiar with the fly population in Orinda Hills, he ended up identifying the two different types of flies. And he said, well, the largest fly larva was about five days old, which would be consistent at the time of death. But he says, well, the unusual thing is that the tiny grays were only two days old and the flies land on a body minutes after death.

I've seen it happen and start pumping her eggs, orifices, open wounds and everything else. It's just, you know, a fascinating kind of life cycle. And so, but the entomologist said, well, you know, I usually see this when, you know, the first responders come and it smells so bad and they want fresh air that they start opening the windows and everything else. And then I started looking into this well, and when we got to that scene, there was an open door and there was a broken window that had been left open. The largest fly larvae were a species of blue bottle fly.

It was simply a common house fly that would have been present in any house and would have landed on Amman's body within minutes and deposited the larvae. But the other fly is not a house fly. He doesn't enter the house. And unless there's a reason to like it, there's a dead body there. And so this fly waited three days before laying its eggs on Amman's body. Well, why did he do that if he had free access with the door open and the window open? Well, that evidence of flies meant that. No, that did not happen, that window and that door were closed, preventing that type of fly from entering, the fly from outside laid its eggs.

So this suggested a secondary intrusion. Eman was murdered. The house was closed for three days and then opened. And this allowed the outside fly to come in and lay eggs two days before we found Evans' body. Well, why would that be happening? It turns out that Eman was a third-order priestess in the Druid religion and is part of her diaries. In 17 years of her diaries that I read, you know, she needed to be reincarnated to escape this inner demon that she had called the blue demon consciousness. And she needed to die violently. And I should probably say, you know, Amman was born Margaret and then as Margaret got older, she ended up living the life of a man and taking the name Eman.

And now him. He is saying: I have to get out of this life and escape from this demon. I'm reading Starhawk's book A Pagan, Pagan, Living and Dying. You know the art of the pagan way. Living, dying. I forget the exact title, but there is an aspect where yes. Someone dies inside, say, a residence. You do not want to disturb that residence for three days because the soul will become confused and will not be able to move on to its next life or reincarnation. A yellow liquid was poured on Aman's chest and a ritual was performed.

So this is a clue as to who possibly killed Ahmed. And frankly, this case is likely an assisted suicide, even though Eman was beaten to death. But whoever did it needs to be caught because he is a special person who is willing to walk in and use something like a baseball bat to smash someone's head in. And according to the crime scene reconstruction, there were two people there and there was stolen art. The painting was stolen. And I think the back of that painting could possibly say that it contained Swiss bank account information. That was the reward for coming and doing what Emin wanted to do.

He has to suffer a violent death so she can leave the sentient blue demon behind. Could you get this back right now? TRUE. True crime is stranger than fiction. Did the people at the police department or whatever assume it was the stepson or the son, the son who then committed suicide two days later? Yes, like that. But do you think it was someone who was a member of this druid group? Have any of the members of that group you belong to disappeared? No. So I think Edmond used connections through the pagan community, not necessarily a druid community, to be able to reach out and get individuals who are willing to kill someone to commit that crime.

Now, his son committed suicide in Santa Monica, and this has been a debate between two other investigators of the case and me, where they are absolutely convinced that the son is responsible. Why read ten years of your son's diaries? And every day he would say, you know, I'm going to be today. I'm going to commit suicide. And then, as long as mom is still around, you know, blah blah. Now, my mom has been murdered. He is responsible. I think it would have been a murder suicide. He would have committed suicide at that very moment. But the most important thing is that the reconstruction of the crime scene showed that two people beat him.

So a son was one of them. There is still someone out there who was involved in this homicide. When did this happen? Oh God. 1999, June 1999. Okay. So, but that's not resolved, in your opinion? I think it is absolutely unresolved. And I think there are people who know it. Yes that's fine. Well, let's move on to at least one more before we get to more. Well. Before we get to the Golden State Killer, that's what everyone asks. Very good. You know, we'll use dramatic buildup to get to him. Thus arose the case of a couple who was building his dream house and the teenage neighbor took the life of his wife, Pamela Vitale.

She was a woman married to a well-known lawyer who also appears in the media. She appeared in the media and did advocacy work in the Bay Area. And they were building a very large house and I think it was called Run Sacker Canyon in the Lafayette area. It is a very, very beautiful area, very rural. And that the big mansion, for lack of a better word, that they were building was still under construction and they were living in this mobile trailer. And that's where they found her beaten to death. And I didn't come out to the original.

According to the original answer, I was a supervisor at the time. One of my employees, a couple of my staff members had come out initially, and then I came out to take a look when there were some questions about, you know, how much more latent processing needed to be done within this crime scene. . And what caught my attention as I was looking at the crime scene and the crime scene photos was the fight that this woman put up. And part of the crime scene assessment, you know, when you're now trying to assess a one-on-one combat, is there anything that I can discern that will give me some idea about the difference in the physical characteristics of the offender versus the victim?

And this victim was not a small woman, but she was not a huge woman either. You know, she didn't like Emma or anything like that. And she was able to hold this criminal down for a long time or this criminal really struggled to get her under control there. You know, a lot of blood stains throughout the family room area inside the mobile home trailer, a lot of overturned furniture and other objects that had been moved out of place during the fight. And finally the criminal got the upper hand on her and was then able to beat her to death.

But I talked to the investigator assigned to the case outside that house, and I said, you know, this is not indicative of what we would call a robust man, a very big, strong guy, you know, very big, strong. boy. And someone Pamela's size, you know, this would be a very contained crime scene because as soon as this guy gets his hands on her. She's not going anywhere. She is fallen. But this was a very long fight. So I told him this isn't a very big guy and it turned out to be a skinny 17 year old kid, Scott Dyleski.

And, you know, part of what I also evaluated was that, you know, she had this sock near her toes, you know, where it's often worn. You know, her foot had gone through that sock and it was like, you know, she was kicking this guy. You know, if she hit him in the mouth or the nose, you know, is it possible that her DNA could be there? So that was cleaned up. And that is the only place at the crime scene and outside the victim's body where DNA was found. And then, finally, investigators find a car on Dyleski's property or a nearby adjacent property.

And he has, you know, his own. Type of equipment, clothing and things he had used to enter this house. And he has Vitale's blood. You know, it was really a sure thing. But now people say he's not responsible and it's like, no, you know, this is as easy as it gets. But he took the time to carve a symbol into the victim's back. So this is more sinister than just someone who was the prosecutors' theory. He entered that house because they gave him the marijuana growing equipment there, unlike his parents' house. And then things went wrong.

It's like, no, you know, he has some fantasy going on. In fact, he had a book about serial predators inside his room. So I think Dyleski potentially has an aspect of him that if he had stayed out of the public domain, maybe he would have reoffended. You know, one of the other things in that case is you pay attention to this sock and you realize that maybe it should be checked. You know, and that's where the diligence and scientific approach of theevidence and the attempt to prove a case that shows in all your work. And I think that's really an important thing in general in our society, because if we just go by intuition or a couple of facts and then an intuition, I think that's where we make a lot of mistakes.

And another part of the tragedy that we have in our society with all these violent crimes is also accusing someone who seems to be the one. Y. Absolutely. And this is, you know, and I learned it the hard way, you know, and I detail it as I talk about the Golden State Killer in this case, where, you know, I had numerous individuals that I thought were the guys, ya You know, this is the guy I'm looking for. And I spent two years with this suspect who had been contacted in the past and it's absolutely amazing that at that time he was known as an east area rapist, geographic connections, you know, proximity and suspicious behavior.

And you know I'm thinking while I read. What this guy was about is like, you know, this guy, this. This can't be a coincidence. You already know the circumstances. This circumstantial evidence should prove that he is the right guy. And so I ended up spending two years looking for him because he disappeared off the face of the earth in 2004, right around the time of Proposition 69, which opened up California's DNA databases to take samples from more people, almost as if it were trying from hiding from that bill, you know, from having his DNA get into the system.

And, you know, we eventually caught up with it and I detail how that happens in the book and we get it out of the way. And I thought, how could this not be these terrorist rapists, also known as the Golden State Killer? And that's when I took a step back. And this is where I ended up reading an article by Dr. Kim Ross Moe if he had written an article about failures in criminal investigation, and this is where you get into deductive versus inductive reasoning and where we fail as investigators and this is what I did in this particular case: I found a guy and tried to tailor the case to him.

And then I'm looking at all the details and everything is circumstantial. I'm leaving, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. This must be him. And then those details didn't quite add up. I thought, Now, okay, I'll excuse him instead of letting the evidence lead me to someone. And that's really what Ross Moe is trying to convey to investigators: if you have objective evidence, you should rely on that objective evidence to develop your suspects. Don't pick anyone and try to make the case fit. And that's what we were doing with Golden State Killer. We had a master name, an index of over 8,000 names.

And, you know, you start saying, he's okay, well, this, this, this and this adds up to this guy, you know? But fundamentally, it is DNA. It is that objective evidence. You know, once I took a step back and reevaluated and moved forward, then I recognized, okay, I actually have two pieces of evidence that I thought would solve the case. One was DNA, which at that point I had done everything I could. What was it, 2001, 2011, 2012. And then I had this distinctive evidence that I think these curtains had fallen down, and one was this unique, hand-drawn map. And I said: That's pretty unique.

Someone is going to recognize it. And I really dug into that evidence. And after D'Angelo was identified, I don't even know if he's related to the case at this point. But this is where you see this tragedy, and it's not necessarily intentional or negligent on the part of the investigator and the prosecutor, but rather, you know, we as human beings really don't have the mental capacity to evaluate coincidences. So we thought there's no way that can be a coincidence. Well, what does that really mean? Good. And when you have several things that you say, wow, this adds to the case, and in no way can it be a coincidence.

And then you have the objective evidence, like DNA, where it goes, well, guess what? That was a coincidence. And so the experience that I had when you cast a wide enough net, like in the case of Golden State Killer or like in Zodiac, you will find multiple people that you can build a circumstantial case for yourself, it will convince you. And when I hear, you know, researchers say, I don't believe in coincidences, they're wrong, it happens. And that was a difficult lesson to learn. But then we talk about these poor men and women who have been falsely convicted and their lives have been taken away by the government, you know, sometimes spending many decades in prison.

And I'm sure there are many more. And it is based on the circumstances. And God forbid you too have a purpose. You know, I just want to solve this case and move on. And this guy will be the scapegoat. You know, that's criminal. Know? And for me, the biggest fear I have in my career is that I have done something, whether forensic or investigative, that has put the wrong person in prison. And I hope that never happened, because to me, that's almost a bigger tragedy than allowing a case to go unsolved. Another tangential move, you know, before we get back to the Golden State Killer, and that's the case with Laci and Conner Peterson.

And what was your experience with that? Well, that was you know, that was a case. I was outside of Modesto, Stanislaus County, you know, so I saw the headlines. And it was a big case. But I just saw the headlines. He knew almost nothing about the case. And then Laci and Conner washed up on the shores of Contra Costa County. So at that time I was a supervisor of the crime unit of the sheriff's office crime lab. And I assigned him a crime, that was it. I was very. Confident would do a great job processing Laci's body and the evidence that came with his body.

But I also went out to the morgue so I could see what was happening with Laci. And then the Richmond police CSI was handling Conner's body. I mean, there's a lot less physical evidence on that body than we had to deal with. And, you know, bodies that have been submerged in a marine environment for a period of time really change dramatically. And I'm not going to describe anything in detail about any of them. But the part of it was. What really caught my attention with Lacy was the amount of what I would call sessile organisms on his body.

You know, now you not only have predation by marine organisms on the human body, but you can also have it. Just like a boat can grow barnacles. Good. And so I'm looking at these various organisms and wondering if this can be used as insect evidence to determine an approximate date of death, you know, time of death. So I start researching that and I don't make much progress on that front, contacting experts. But one of the experts he had used previously was an anthropologist at UC Santa Cruz. And this was in the case of a girl who went missing in 1969, Elaine Davis of Walnut Creek, who just disappeared.

And we finally identified her as a Jane Doe who had turned up in Santa Cruz two weeks after she disappeared in Walnut Creek. Obviously, the criminal kidnapped her and knocked her down. And I don't talk about that particular case in this book, but because of that case, I was familiar with Dr. Allison Galloway. So I'm talking to the coroner's office. I call Dr. Galloway and say, Hey, we need you here, you know, because now we have very decomposed remains that have been in a marine environment. And their specialty, because it was at the University of Santa Cruz, they have all kinds of humans stranded on their shore.

So if you ever go to Santa Cruz, she should keep her eyes peeled. So we'll get Dr. Allison Galloway to agree to come. And this is where this case intersects with my relationship with John Comedy and Ray Giacomelli. And I'm in the morgue the next day after Ray was killed and I'm dealing with Laci and Conner Peterson and Dr. Galloway is doing her thing. And then they called me into the other room of the morgue where they took Ray out, because I thought the district attorney, Bob Hall, wanted my expertise. So this man I knew well, whose hand I shook the next day, is now lying on the morgue table in the same room where he is telling the pathologist, "I never want to have an autopsy." And this is where it gets dark.

Good? And then I. Dealing with Ray and then I have to go back and deal with Laci and Connor. And Dr. Galloway ends up, you know, being able to formulate an opinion based on Connor's gestational age, based on bone structure. You know, as the fetus goes through different phases, the bones, of course, form in these different phases. And one of the defense arguments in that case was: while Laci had been kidnapped and kept alive for a period of time, could it be Scott Peterson? However, Dr. Galloway was able to prove that Connor stopped developing at the time Laci was reported missing and Connor was eventually terminated due to Laci's abdomen.

Decomposed, separating from her body in the bay, and so they were washed away separately. There was no appearance of birth. There is nothing like that. And that became critical testimony in the case against Scott Peterson. But he wasn't even involved in the Peterson case because of what he happened to Ray. You know, it was like, okay, I did my duty. And I think I could have contributed to the Peterson case if I hadn't had this personal tragedy that occurred at the same time. You know, that was extremely sad because his partner, his mother, had just died and that's why they weren't together.

The three things. And then I explain exactly, you know, you know, how this all happened. And if you're interested, Giacomelli's comedy and story are, I think. The show is called Blood Brothers and I don't remember what network it's on. But if you wanted to see a little more about the details of the case, it would be on that particular TV show. Alright. So let's get to the Golden State Killer known here in the Contra Costa area as the East Area Rapist. Good. And you had seen him as a

cold

case that you were investigating, and it seemed to you and perhaps others as if he was progressing in a way that would have led him to be a murderer.

Yeah. And then you made a connection and you did it for 20 years. All the different pieces of this. Or something like that. Good. Well, I started the case in 1994 and in 1997 I finally got the DNA. And that's when I initially did some sort of phone research that led me to Orange County. But we had incompatible DNA profiles. I was using an old dot plot method, the decaffeinated polymarker. Orange County was using this novel STR Short Tandem Repeater, upon which the FBI's current CODIS system is based. But when I contacted the Orange County analyst in '97, she had at least gotten her alpha and could go from a to two point three and her alpha two point three was the same.

But it's like having the same blood type, you know, type. And I said, okay, that doesn't mean anything. And then I said, Well, once we catch up with you and the new technology, I'll get back in touch. And that took four years. And in 2001, he had already promoted bias, but I assigned him a DNA analyst. Let's remake this story of the rapist's DNA and new technology, which he did. And then she said, hey, you know, the three cases, you know, in Contra Costa County that we still had evidence for, they all match the same guy. And that showed that the original investigators were right based on the modus operandi, the duration of the cases.

Also, at that point I said, hey, call Mary. Mary hung up on the Orange County Sheriff's crime lab and let's check the box. That's what she was thinking. And he comes back and basically tells me the same guy. And now it's like, boom. You know, here we have 50 attacks in Northern California between 1976 and 1979 by the East Area Rapist linked to ten homicides, six cases with ten victims in Southern California. And now this is no longer just a pit, a hobby, because in Northern California, at that time, we didn't think we could pursue even if you identified these ten violators as prior prescriptions.

But now they had homicides. So I really stepped away at that time, you know, and that was in 2001. And now I was working on Pittsburgh cases. I was working on all these other cases that I was promoting through the ranks. And then finally, when I'm now chief medical examiner and bored to death, I'm looking at my East Area Rapist files, which I had kept with me all the time. I thought, "That case isn't solved yet," and that's when I recommitted myself. And so, at that time, I was 24 years and seven working days, 365 days a year, working on the East Air Rapist case.

And then finally, that's how I met Michelle McNamara and we became friends, research partners. He changed her name to Golden State Killer, which I discussed with her and said, Come on, why do we have to do that? And then she tragically passed away. And I have a chapter dedicated to Michelle. And finally, you know, using the genealogy tool, we were able to identify D'Angelo, Joseph D'Angelo, as the Golden State Killer. Just when I retired. Or actually, right after I retired, technically. One of the questions from the audience is why did the GSK killer go to Southern California?

Don't know. You know, he hasn't spoken. That is my question. Well, there you go. So, you know, it is. Then you think of D'Angelo. That? What we do know is that D'Angelo was arrested by theSacramento Sheriff's Office in July for stealing dog repellent, a hammer. They placed him on administrative leave while they do their investigation. And then, in August, the boss decides to fire him. He ends the first attack in Santa Barbara, in Goleta. Santa Barbara, which goes sideways. He doesn't kill the couple or even sexually assault them. The woman's date is October 10, 1979. That's why they fired him in August.

In October 79. he is attacking in the Santa Barbara area. And then I think it was later that month, when he appeared in court in Sacramento being found guilty on the charge of shoplifting. And then, two months later, he commits his first double homicide in Goleta, just a few blocks south of where the initial attack occurred. So he is literally alternating between Sacramento and Santa Barbara during this time. And we don't know why he's going to Santa Barbara. You know, he went on a vacation spot. Was that a fishing spot? Because he is a great fisherman. And to this day, we have no idea about some of these attacks in Southern California, or the location of these attacks in Southern California.

He ends up moving to Long Beach. And this is one of the interesting things. Even before we solved the case, we thought, well, he's in Santa Barbara Ventura, an Orange County, but how come we don't have anything in Los Angeles? Is it just because they have so many cases? We have overlooked it. So I approached his unsolved case and people told me: send me everything you have between these years that is not resolved. And I'm going to scan them to see if there's anything that stands out as potentially a Golden State Killer case and nothing happened.

So, you know, until he speaks out or until his now ex-wife speaks out, I don't think we'll know exactly what he was doing and why he was lashing out in those particular areas. How do you think there is another question from the audience? How do you think D'Angelo could not reoffend between the 1980s and the day he was captured? How could he endure that slaughter for so long? Oh, so this idea that a serial killer, once he starts, doesn't stop, is a myth. And FBI behavioral analysts have said it outright now that more serial murder cases have been solved.

And they are studying them. And he had been saying this even before that. When you look at Gary Ridgway, he killed 48 women in 1980, from 1980 to 1984 there in Seattle as a Green River Killer or Dennis Rader as BTK. They stopped when they were interviewing Gary Ridgway. Do you know what happened? Why did he stop him? I mean, you just watched the interview with Mary Ellen O'Toole, who's an FBI profiler, and you're like, well, I got married, but it's life-changing. Perhaps the marriage restricted her ability to date. Maybe he calmed down because of certain stressors he is having.

Who knows? Dennis Rader, who I think is the predator most similar to Joseph D'Angelo, because he is very intelligent, very sophisticated. He would plan crimes. And he in his interview said: I went into my last attack thinking that after extensive surveillance and everything he would do, all this planning, I thought my female victim would be inside the house. And inside the house there was a man. When he entered, he physically got into a fight with the male. And Dennis Rader said: I walked out of that house thinking they could have hurt me, they could have killed me, they could have caught me.

I don't want any of that to happen. I'm getting older. I can not do this anymore. Made. And the fantasy doesn't stop. But now they're in that self-preservation mode. And when you think about D'Angelo, D'Angelo in his last attack in 1986, he was 41 years old. And, frankly, five years ago, he had been in a physical fight with six-foot-three-inch Gary Sanchez in Santa Barbara. And I won't go into too much detail about what happened, but he had to repeatedly go back to Sanchez after he had shot Sanchez in the left cheek, in the back of the head, but it was not fatal. hurt and then I had to keep coming back and fighting him.

And obviously there's head-to-head combat with Gregory Sanchez's facial laceration guys. And you could see the Golden State Killer's panic, the way he literally throws away the pre-tied restraints he brought to the scenes as he runs out the back side door of this house. And Michael, you know what? I bet D'Angelo I'm sure D'Angelo was probably hurt. And then he also thought they could have killed me. They could have caught me. I don't want that to happen, and so does Rader. And so he doesn't attack for five years until, for some reason, the beautiful 19-year-old Janelle Cruz, in May 1986, runs up to her and beats her to death.

And I think he couldn't help it. And the important thing is that in that case there was no man present. So I think he probably stopped psychologically in '81 and then all of a sudden he had that boost in '86 for Janelle's case. But at 41 he, curiously, managed to keep it under control, but he continued to fantasize. And he absolutely guaranteed it, because when I went into his room after his arrest, he had a towel over his computer monitor. And that's exactly what he did. When he separated the women in his family rooms, he would put a towel or similar object over the television and turn it on so he could get that soft glow and be able to see the woman while he raped them.

Well, that leads to another question. See if he has any advice for people who, unfortunately, find themselves in this situation or are preparing for it, that someone is going to rape them or kill them, and they're pretty sure that's going to happen. . Now, we talk about all the people, you know, who work and dedicate themselves to trying to solve the other cases. You have to stop these people. Is there anything they can do, like the fight that Sánchez had against him, I mean, in a way, you could say that he could have saved ten lives?

No, absolutely. Over the next ten years, Sánchez will surely be a hero. So what would you suggest to people who find themselves in this terrible situation? Okay, fight. But if that doesn't work. Try to stay limp. So you have to understand that there are different types of criminals and what their motivations are. And, you know, I'm a big believer in what's called the grape or weed rapist typologies. And then Dr. Keppel, who was one of the detectives in Seattle on the Green Green River killer. He's one of the ones who, you know, interviewed Ted Bundy.

He now he has a doctorate from Texas. And he took these typologies of rapists and wrote a book that is now available in paperback at The Signature Killers. And you know, your calming power, your assertive power, your retaliatory anger, you know, these are guys who are violent, right? But some of them like the security of power. If you fight, they don't really want that. And they will, they will escape. And, you know, you just do that. But the only typology you should pay attention to is that of a sexual sadist, because he wants you to fight.

He wants you to scream, he wants to hurt you. These are the guys who like to torture while you're alive. That's what gratifies them sexually. And there is evidence. In fact, there's a hitchhiker here who I thought was potentially Phil, who's a serial killer in my book that I talk about, you know, he thought she had possibly been picked up by Phil Hughes and she was picked up in Berkeley, taken through the Tunnel. Caldecott and taken to the Orinda hills, which is now developed, but at that time it was not. And as he rapes her, she realizes that I'm dead, you know, and she looks out the car window and just looks at nature, and she starts caressing the back of this guy's head, almost like it's a consensual encounter.

And this guy immediately likes him and just says, get out. And he finally took her back to a certain place. But that's not what he wanted. He wanted the fear of him. He wanted her to fight. There's a woman in the Pacific Northwest who said she was in the front seat of a van in the sky, and he took a knife and cut her over and over again. And she says: I'm like dead. And she stopped fighting and just said, "I'm going to die." And this guy immediately stopped and walked away. So if you find yourself in this unfortunate situation, you fight, you fight.

And if you see this guy start to amplify like he's enjoying that, he goes to the opposite side for a short period of time and see what happens. You could save your life, but if that doesn't make him stop, then you get involved again. The best thing you can do is keep fighting and hope that you can somehow get out of that situation. That's my best advice based on what these guys are like. Yes. And the whole advice is what your expectations are. You have to frustrate what they want. Yes, no, absolutely. Because these guys are motivated by fantasy, you know.

So if they fail to fulfill their fantasy, then it will be of no use to them. Here's someone who wants to work on this. If someone were to investigate a cold case as a public citizen, what would be the first step you would recommend? Oh, talk about Michelle. Well, I think, you know, could you take a look at what Michelle did? You know, she became very knowledgeable about the case. Forehead. And that's one of the things that I started to recognize, okay, this isn't someone who just read a little bit of information online and is talking to me now.

You know, quite a bit of research had been done at that point. She contacted me for the first time and we had our first conversation. So that's definitely part of it. But you need to develop the skills necessary to find authentic information. Authentic information is not what is online. You need to go and find out: can I make a public records request or an agency request for you right now? Can I go to court and see if there are open search warrants? Was there a trial? By chance, maybe there is an acquittal and it is still an unsolved case, but there could be large amounts of information in the court documents.

This is where you will learn, first and foremost, how to find authentic information. And then, of course, what has been made public. You know, going to libraries, microfilming. You know, libraries are a great source when it comes to files. And now you have online resources like newspapers dot com etc. Of course, pay attention to what's online, but don't give it too much importance, you know, because that's where you need to make sure. You have solid information about the case and then you start to form relationships with the people who have access, you know, the investigators, the family members.

I really try to avoid it. I don't want the typical online detective, you know, constantly harassing victims' families. You know, that's just not right, you know? But at a certain point, if you get to a certain stage, it may be worth knowing, if you can develop it in a way that is not threatening, a way to contact and develop that relationship, because they may see you as their A hope because such Maybe the authorities are not listening. So that is fundamental. And then ultimately, for these cases to be resolved, you have to involve the investigative agency that has jurisdiction.

And that can be done in various ways. But ideally, just as Michelle did with me and others and the Golden State Killer, she formed friendly relationships, a helping relationship, opinions of law enforcement, the media and online detectives as a threat. Yes. And that's something that you should try to alleviate if you want to have any level of cooperation and if you can contribute something that makes life easier for the researchers, you know, I will do this for you. Yes, good. Go. Yes. No, I still had one of the online detectives at Golden State Killer. In fact, her mother had been a victim.

And I said, you know, they're watching the town hall meetings. I said, well, I know Sacramento, you know, the archives have all the photos of SAC B. Go see if you can find all the photos of the public meetings in the East Air Rapist from that time. And he did. And now I have a copy of all of those, you know, and then of course it puts them online for people on Reddit and everyone else to see, which is fine, you know, but I benefited because now I had something which I was interested in getting, but I just didn't have the time to sit down and digitize all of these photos in the Sacramento historical archives.

So there are a variety of ways, but most likely private citizens can help. And I think more progressive law enforcement agencies will be more receptive than other agencies. It will depend on the personal philosophies of the investigators, police chief or sheriff. But, you know, all you can do is try those agencies, at least. Well, we are left with two big questions. And before I do, I want to remind everyone that I will be signing books immediately afterward. And I would also like to let everyone know that this is a good live event sponsored by the Bernard Shaw Foundation here at the Commonwealth Club.

Y. I would like to ask a question similar to this. The question is, beyond genetic genealogy, are there any new scientific techniques on the horizon that will benefit forensic work? And the question I have in that regard is: is there any silver lining to our loss of privacy? You know, it'll end up, you know, helping us, you know. I mean, is that part of 21st century compensation? Well. In relation to new technologies, you know, there is always research going on and new technologies may be something that is being sought.within the forensic field or there are technologies in the academic world that are useful with the physical evidence found in criminal cases. .

And that's what always happens. Yes. You know, you know, when we start talking about active cases, high technology, that's the most important thing. Everyone has a personal device. There are so many things, if you want to call them that. surveillance, you know, whether it's surveillance cameras that people install in their houses for the security of their own home, whether it's government cameras that, you know, cities are installing at intersections. . There are license plate readers out there. You know, there is a lot of technology today that can really help with an investigation. And this is also what helps prevent this type of crime.

You know, we've seen a dramatic change since the 1970s, when these predators frequently entered private residences in a neighborhood. There are no security systems in the home. There is no surveillance in place. They could just walk in or easily walk into these houses and spend hours like D'Angelo did today. Committing that type of crime over and over again is going to be very hard. But now you know, of course, that the criminal will try to do something to minimize the risk to himself. And so the kind of evolution of the serial predator is to use online resources to attract and isolate victims, you know, Craigslist killers or, you know, killers who turn to escort services and make these workers go to a location that cannot be traced back to that particular criminal.

So that's really the big change. It's always a game of cat and mouse within law enforcement. Well. So now the genetic genealogy, you know, at one time I was the poster child for the person who violated the privacy rights of everyone in the United States. This is where you really understand how this tool works. Of course, we have the DNA of the criminal murderer from Golden State. We upload it to a genealogy database and then get a list of people who share DNA with our attacker. But what does that list tell us? All it tells us is how much DNA they share.

It's 35 cents per mortgage, 50 cents per mortgage, 65 cents per mortgage. That just tells me, well, this person is on the order of a third cousin of the criminal. That's all he tells me. That's the initial data point. And I need to reconstruct a family tree from that person in the database down to the great-great-grandfather level. At no time do we as law enforcement officers have access to the genetic information of the people in the database. If any of you have taken these tests on Ancestry.com or MyHeritage, they will receive the emails or the list, and we are no different than you.

It's like, Oh, here's so-and-so. And you share 50 cents of a mortgage as a third cousin. That's all I need to know to use this tool. I don't need to know anything more than that. And the technique itself is really a genealogy technique that uses information from public sources. So once I get a list of relatives and know how close or distant they are, I build family trees using everything on ancestry.com or other types of resources like census records, obituaries, newspapers dot com. Find a serious dot com right now. I can take his name, his age.

I can identify it online. And within minutes, I'm on Ancestry.com building a family tree. I don't need DNA from him to do that. You know, so it's big. I have cousins ​​95/1. Good god. So. So don't use music. That would be problematic. Yes. No, but, but this is really a public records search. We just need the initial data points so we're not. We're not just crossing each other out. Now, what people don't understand are traditional police investigations. Golden State Killer. We collected DNA from hundreds of men because his ex-wives and ex-girlfriends said he was a bad guy in the 1970s and that he looked like that compound.

Good. So now Paul Hall knocks on that guy's door saying that his name has come up in this investigation. It's kind of a serious investigation. Lets chat. By the way, I need a DNA sample. Are you willing to give me a DNA sample? 90% of the time they do. So now I, as a law enforcement officer, a representative of the government, possess that man's DNA. Good. With the genetic genealogy tool. We got DNA from one person throughout the process, and that was the sister of a guy I was watching in Colorado. And when that DNA was Valle absolutely voluntary.

She was very, very friendly to us. When that DNA sample arrived, it proved that she was not the sister of the Golden State Killer. So she could eliminate the Colorado boy without even contacting him and getting his DNA. But she had more shared DNA with the Golden State Killer than anyone else in the database. She then told us: Oh, this is working. And remember, this is the first time this has been done. And suddenly we are excited. And the last person we hadn't really looked at was D'Angelo: Okay, I guess I'll look at the offered cop, you know, how could he be the Golden State Killer?

But the reality is that this genealogy tool saved hundreds more men from having their DNA possessed by the government, and we exonerated people as a result. So this is where I implore lawmakers and even privacy advocates who say, "Oh my God, we can't allow law enforcement to access the genetic information of these private citizens." Learn how this works. It doesn't work like you think, does it? Gosh, what people put on Instagram and Facebook is much more intrusive into their private lives than what, you know, genealogy databases provide to law enforcement. So that's really my underlying message.

I know it's a personal decision. If you want your DNA to be there, I would be more concerned about private companies having access to your DNA than law enforcement having access to your DNA. Take a look at who bought ancestry and research that and say, oh, so, you know, this is where this tool has proven to be revolutionary. We have seen them. I think we're approaching 200 of the worst cases, unsolved cases since the Golden State Killer was solved using this tool. And there has not been a single legitimate claim that anyone's privacy has been violated or that any false arrests have occurred as a result.

You know, it's just showing that it's being done responsibly. And we always, you know, we never make an arrest in the genealogy. We always get a direct sample like D'Angelo. We get a direct sample from him and he goes home. Match Golden State Killer using court-validated technology that has been in use for several decades. So it's a really solid tool and it's proven to be effective. Alright. So, for the last question that everyone wants to know, I mean, in your book you get very personal about your anxiety attacks, about your wife saying that she considers your job to be your lover's job and that you only care about her. you pay attention to your lover and not to the family.

How absorbing it is, but also the infinite number of problems to solve. Yes. You know, there is an infinite amount of suffering out there and what can a person do and where do they draw the line to be able to protect their family life from it? And this is true not only for people trying to solve the crimes of serial killers, but for all kinds of things in life. How do you balance things? Well, I don't do a very good job at that. You know, usually people who don't have good advice for others. Well, when you think about the types of cases that I'm working on, you know, I'm talking about this case of Hercules, father and son who were executed.

His son was 11 years old and she shot him in the back of the head and killed him. And imagine if that was his son and you called to talk to the investigator and the employee who answered the phone said, "Oh, she went on vacation." You would be angry. Good. You expect more from the people who are trying to keep you safe and who are trying to get you justice and get an answer about what happened. And that was always something that was really difficult for me to be able to balance: I have an obligation to this case, you know, and of course, I'm a person who, as a case, would get older. , you know, the amount of time I would spend would get smaller and smaller, but then it would suddenly increase again if something else came up.

That's part of the complexities of this type of work. It's not an 8 to 5 job. And people, the victims' families, expect you to do more. It's different than maybe other occupations too, where, you know, once you know, you know, the clock is ticking, you know, you're closing. You know, you're really forced to keep moving forward. And that's where it really gets complicated when, of course, family calls and it's like being home. I mean, how can I say I'm going to do this, you know, kind of fun feature with my family when I'm trying to, you know, protect the public first and foremost and find out who killed this person?

And I have no answer. You know, I'm poor at that. There are other people who are better. But part of the successes I have had are due to my perseverance. And I think any good researcher will tell you that this is where you have to sacrifice your personal life to be good at this job. Otherwise, you are simply punching a timed card and not doing what you promised to do. Well, first, I think everyone appreciates that you're persistent. I think

solving

the Golden State Killer case was something that a lot of people felt. We are finally getting somewhere with this technology that we can and it gives everyone hope that in the future other things can be solved.

And that also, like you said, the killers are going to have to get around this and they're going to have to be smarter or whatever makes their lives harder. So thank you for your persistence and your work in this area and thank you for coming to the Commonwealth Club and telling us all about it. I'll be out and back here too to sign your books and in just a few minutes. Exactly. And those of you who are watching it online, you know, if you like this show at Commonwealth Club dot org, you can support us. But so ends another Commonwealth Club event in its 120th year of illustrated debate.

I really appreciate it. Paul is absolutely fantastic. Thank you. And you better keep this bottle of wine here. You can go and share it. No.