00:00:00
Exclusively on AMC Plus. >> What is this place? >> A gripping new AMC Studios original
00:00:07
series. >> You'll find out soon enough. >> From executive [music] producer Ridley
00:00:12
Scott and acclaimed director Karen Kusama. >> Something feeds on our souls. >> Starring Dan Stevens, Judith [music]
00:00:19
Light, and CCH Pounder. >> I am not okay. None of this is okay. >> The Terror Devil [music] in Silver. New
00:00:26
limited series. stream now exclusively on AMC Plus. >> Picture this. It's the end of a long
00:00:32
week. You're unwinding in the tub listening to your favorite true crime podcast. And then chronic hives come
00:00:40
back again in the middle of the episode. What a wet blanket. Looks like another spell of itchy, swollen, red, or skin
00:00:49
colored hives. If you have chronic spontaneous urtdicaria or CSU, there may be a different treatment option. Worried
00:00:58
about your chronic hives interrupting our next episode? Learn more at treatmyhives.com/g.
00:01:22
>> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Welcome to True Crime Garage. Wherever you are, whatever you are doing, thanks
00:01:51
for listening. I'm your host, Nick, and with me as always is a man you may have seen last weekend walking the Vegas
00:01:58
[music] strip and a pair of booty shorts with his thumb out. Here is the captain.
00:02:03
>> Thumb out [music] or thumb in, it's good to be seen and good to see you. Thanks
00:02:07
for listening. Thanks for telling a friend. This week we are drinking Hoser Juice by
00:02:15
Double Trouble Brewing up in Toronto. Hoser Juice is a triple IPA and trust me, you will feel it. This baby is both
00:02:23
heavy duty and delicious. ABV 10.8% garage 3 and 3/4 bottle caps out of five. Let's give some thanks and praise
00:02:33
to our good, wonderful garage friends. First up, a double fisted cheers goes out to Cody Laauo and Mary Garcia
00:02:43
[music] in Woodville, Ohio. >> And a big we like your jib goes out to Savannah in Perth, Australia.
00:02:49
>> And last, but certainly not least, a special shout out to longtime friend of the show, Tim in Michigan. I saw him on
00:02:57
YouTube with his band Stealing [music] Copper, and he was sporting one of our True Crime Garage Alien Skull shirts.
00:03:05
So, cheers to you, Tim, and cheers to everyone who has contributed to the beer fund.
00:03:12
>> Yeah, all cans in [music] the air. Bw beer run. If you want to support the garage and get something in return, sign
00:03:19
up [music] on Patreon or Apple podcast subscription and get our bonus content off the record. If you're not listening,
00:03:26
you're missing [music] out. And Colonel, that's enough of the business. All right, everybody, gather around, grab a
00:03:31
chair, grab a beer. Let's talk some true crime. >> [music] >> We are back [music] to this blanket, my
00:04:04
friends. We are examining the blanket once again and so is law enforcement. And we have Michelle who originally
00:04:12
denied when it was found with the remains of her son that she had ever owned a blanket. That blanket in
00:04:19
particular, her mother and father do not recognize it as well. pressed with this
00:04:25
theory about the blanket. She is denying once again ever having seen the blanket
00:04:32
or ever owning one like it. To test that theory, however, investigators interviewed other people beyond the
00:04:41
scope of just Michelle and her parents. And one of these people would be Michelle's niece, Jennifer. the same
00:04:47
niece who had encountered Michelle at the carnival shortly after Michelle says that she realized that she could not
00:04:54
find her son Timothy. >> Well, and just to be clear, this blanket was showed to two people. So, she will
00:05:00
be seeing it for the first time. >> Well, or as the investigators are hoping, not for the first time,
00:05:05
>> right? I mean, the investigators will be showing it to her for the first time.
00:05:09
>> Correct. Correct. So, this is one of those shifts. It's a major shift in the story. a major shift in alliances and
00:05:19
loyalties. So, Jennifer had once been supportive of Michelle, but time changes people. Time changes those alliances and
00:05:29
loyalties. >> Yeah. But also, if Michelle just this is the only thing that has happened and she
00:05:36
goes to lead a normal productive life, but she hasn't. She has had run-ins with law enforcement over and over. Well, and
00:05:46
that's one thing that I always point out with these cold cases and why investigators should revisit them once a
00:05:53
year at the very least just to stir the pot to check in on everybody because alliances, allegiances, loyalties,
00:06:01
friendships, relationships, they all change with time. They can change over time and
00:06:07
people change sometimes with time and that affects their relationship. Now, regardless of what Michelle was doing or
00:06:14
what she had been caught doing, we should say that may not have been the major factor in the shift in their
00:06:22
relationship. As said, Jennifer was once supportive of Michelle. I don't know. I
00:06:27
don't have a hard date of when that changed, but Jennifer's life had changed during this time period as well. She
00:06:35
gets married. She has two children of her own. She becomes drug addicted. She's addicted to heroin. She went to
00:06:42
Florida for rehabilitation. Now, why she is at while she's at rehab while she's in the program, her children go to stay
00:06:51
with Michelle. >> So, she must have still been supportive of her at that time. There's no way that
00:06:57
she could think that Michelle did something to her own son and then she's like, "Hey, could you watch these kids
00:07:02
for me for a while?" >> And if one goes missing, no, no big deal. So while Jennifer is away at
00:07:09
rehab, Jennifer's mother and Michelle together without Jennifer decide that Jennifer's condition, her
00:07:19
situation is too serious. It's serious enough that they are not going to allow returning the children to Jennifer once
00:07:27
she completes the program. So instead, the children are turned over to Jennifer's mother-in-law.
00:07:36
And it sounds like this was somebody that Jennifer really did not like. Jennifer later regained custody,
00:07:43
but she viewed Michelle's role in this situation as a betrayal, a deep betrayal. And
00:07:51
>> you think >> it didn't wear off. It's not something that you just like, all right, that
00:07:55
happened and now we're moving on. No, this this hurt. It cut deep and it stayed fresh. Investigators attempted to
00:08:02
use that to reopen a channel, right? They encouraged Jennifer to message Michelle on Facebook
00:08:12
and bring up Timothy's case. Their general hope that Michelle might confess or slip into some incriminating
00:08:20
statement. The Facebook exchanges take place, but nothing comes of it. Nothing good for the investigation.
00:08:29
>> Yeah. >> Or nothing incriminating regarding Michelle takes place during those
00:08:34
exchanges. So the investigators showed Jennifer physical items connected to the evidence to or at least to the remains
00:08:42
that were found. So they show her the blanket, a pillowcase, and a red jacket. Jennifer's reaction was immediate and
00:08:50
very specific. And as you were saying, Captain, this is very important because this would be the first time that
00:08:57
investigators are showing these items to Jennifer. And as I was saying, in hopes
00:09:02
that maybe she had seen them prior to them showing them to her for the first time. They say her reaction is
00:09:09
immediate, though. And and there they say that she told them the blanket had in fact been in Michelle's apartment.
00:09:17
>> Mhm. and specific, like I said, she said that she specifically remembered Timothy
00:09:23
using it to wrap himself in that blanket at times when Jennifer was babysitting him.
00:09:30
>> Yeah, but this is a little bit of a double-edged sword because you're showing her this information. She knows
00:09:35
why you're showing her this blanket and she already has this vendetta now against Michelle. So, I think it's like
00:09:44
as law enforcement, you probably are going to get excited because now we're going, "Okay, this is possibly evidence
00:09:51
that we can link her to the crime scene." So, that's not good for Michelle. Great for the investigation,
00:09:59
but we have to also take it with a little bit of a grain of salt because we go, is Jennifer telling us the truth?
00:10:06
>> Yeah. And this blanket is going to be an ongoing point of contention in this case because look to to put it short and
00:10:17
sweet and to provide no clarity at all on the matter. Basically what takes place is they show this blanket to
00:10:25
everybody who they think may have seen it at one time in Michelle's possession or inside her apartment. And for every
00:10:32
person that they can find that says, "Yes, I've seen that before. it was in Michelle's possession or in her
00:10:38
apartment, they find another person equally as close to Michelle who says, "No, I've never seen it before." And if
00:10:44
it was in her apartment, I would have seen it before. >> So you you basically get, let's put a
00:10:50
roughly a handful of people that say, "Yes, I've seen it before in her apartment and a handful of people that
00:10:55
have been in her apartment equal number of times or maybe even more, like her own parents saying, "No, I've never seen
00:11:03
that item before." And in the end, what's even more troubling regarding this blanket is we know that it was
00:11:11
tested or it's stated that it was tested when it was originally found with the remains. That didn't yield any evidence
00:11:19
or clues. Now, we do know that when they're revisiting this angle of the investigation, after talking to Michelle
00:11:27
again, after talking to Jennifer and others regarding this blanket, in the end, even the material science did not
00:11:34
cleanly settle the question of was this blanket Michelle's and Timmy's or not. So, they're retesting, they're testing
00:11:43
again. Hairs recovered from the blanket and the pillow ca case did not match Michelle's DNA. So, just one more fact
00:11:52
added to a case already crowded with contradictions, accusations, and items that seem to point somewhere without
00:12:00
ever fully arriving >> to a real conclusion. I think they were hoping, look, if we show this blanket to
00:12:07
10 people and nine or 10 of them tell us that I've absolutely seen it in her apartment, we got her. When that didn't
00:12:15
happen, when there was when it was parted down the middle, equal sides, they went to the science and the science
00:12:22
didn't tell them that it belonged to Michelle, >> right? But if you get them to say, "Hey,
00:12:27
this is her blanket. Maybe it gets her to crack it." You're not going to be able to go to trial with this blanket.
00:12:32
And I I just don't believe you're going to get a conviction just because of this. But with the misinformation, the
00:12:42
lies, the if you could bring other things, you're building a case. But then, man, I with law enforcement,
00:12:50
they're probably going, "Okay, well, half saw it, half didn't, but the science is going to prove it either
00:12:55
way." And when you get nothing, when I'm talking about a kick in the dick, right
00:13:00
in the dick. On August 6th, 2014, a date that would have been Timothy's 29th birthday, the long dormant case
00:13:13
launched forward again in a way that felt extremely overdue. After a sealed indictment was returned by a grand jury,
00:13:22
Michelle was arrested in Florida and formally charged with the murder of her son, Timothy. For the people who had
00:13:30
watched the story twist and stall for years, it was a moment that carried a lot of weight, maybe even some relief.
00:13:38
Think about that for a minute. The day that they finally arrest Michelle, >> yeah,
00:13:42
>> Timothy's mother for his murder, on that day, if he were alive, he would have
00:13:48
been about six years older >> than his mother at the time of his disappearance. >> Yeah. Now, from there, the case moved
00:13:57
into the grinding machinery of pre-trial litigation. Lawyers on both sides brought forward extensive legal
00:14:04
arguments, each trying to define what the jury would be allowed to hear and what would be kept outside of the
00:14:11
courtroom entirely. This is where I don't think most of us Joe public here realizes that a lot of times this is
00:14:21
when a case can be won before the jury is even brought in for the actual trial. This is going to decide what is allowed
00:14:31
to be argued and what cannot be presented at all at trial. And as we've seen, this is one where you really got
00:14:39
to get down in the muck and the mire and and and shoot. We went through the FBI report. They were saying digging through
00:14:47
the mud by hand. That's what you kind of have to do with this case to arrive at any real conclusion in my humble garage
00:14:55
opinion. >> Yeah. So, we're not going to go through all of it because it took days to come
00:15:01
to these decisions. But in a pre-trial ruling, the New Jersey Superior Court drawing the lines that would shape
00:15:08
everything that came next, the court concluded that Michelle's active omission, and some of this is confusing.
00:15:17
It's a bit legal jargon, but we'll go through it. Michelle's active omission and her hindrance to the investigation
00:15:24
through her statements could reasonably establish circumstantial evidence of guilt. Basically, that meant the
00:15:29
prosecution would be allowed and permitted to argue what Michelle did not do and what she said in ways that
00:15:38
obstructed investigators and that that could be treated as meaningful proof when placed alongside
00:15:46
of other facts of her guilt. So, meaning everything that she said and did not say
00:15:51
during the investigation could be presented as well as everything that she did and did not do. Yeah, I think it's
00:15:57
uphill battle, but I guess after almost 30 years, you want to at some point you have to roll the dice, right?
00:16:05
>> By the same ruling also imposed strict limits because some evidence was excluded. Of course, the polygraphs
00:16:14
would not be allowed. That's standard procedure, right? The judge also shut the door on another dramatic piece of
00:16:21
the saga and this was one that you had said for you was a big big big red flag. So Michelle's self-kidnapping hoax was
00:16:30
not allowed to be presented to the jury. >> Well, essentially that wasn't connected
00:16:34
to this case at all other than she said >> people that kidnapped her said I'm not
00:16:40
allowed to talk about my son's case anymore. >> True. It's it's a little difficult
00:16:45
though, right? Because when she's presented with proof of those fake FBI business cards, she comes clean. That's
00:16:51
the one time like if she is guilty of other things, that's the one time she comes clean,
00:16:56
>> right? >> And but we know she was presented with people saying, "Hey, that blue and white
00:17:00
blanket did we found some people that said it did belong to you." >> Yeah. >> But of course, very different cases. And
00:17:06
maybe that's why the other thing that they would not allow for the prosecution, the judge would not allow
00:17:12
an expert witness. this was an expert on women who kill their children. Just like
00:17:18
you pointed out with that kidnapping hoax, that's really not part of the case. I mean, I guess you could argue
00:17:25
that it is, but this expert witness, she's not an expert witness in regard to this specific case. Right.
00:17:31
>> Right. So instead of leaning on a generalized behavioral expert to frame Michelle as fitting a
00:17:39
particular category of people, so the state would have to build its case without that kind of
00:17:46
>> Yeah. But that would be like >> testimony. >> The prosecutor is calling an expert to
00:17:50
explain why serial killers kill their victims. or like in West Memphis when you call a
00:17:58
guy who has a purchased degree from out of state >> as an expert witness on the occult
00:18:06
>> when you weren't able >> though >> when you weren't able to completely >> convince the court that the occult was
00:18:15
even involved in the in the crimes at all. >> Yeah. You have to prove it it was a
00:18:21
ritualistic sacrifice before you can called the expert on ritualistic sacrifice.
00:18:27
>> Of course, one physical object that continued to be at the center of the prosecution's narrative is that blanket.
00:18:34
It wasn't just another exhibit. It was going to be major battleground at this trial. And again, their theory was like
00:18:42
this. The blanket found near the recovered remains highly suggestive that Timothy had been taken from his home to
00:18:49
the place where his remains were eventually recovered. and most importantly suggests that he was never
00:18:54
at the carnival at all. So, we talked about some of the people that said they had never seen the blanket before. Uh, a
00:19:02
few more people. And th this is interesting because at least one of these people have made actually
00:19:12
now that I review it and think about it more, all three of these people have made statements at some point that are
00:19:19
without saying they believe Michelle's guilty, they've they have statements that would be indicators that maybe they
00:19:27
believe that she's guilty, but don't want to say it directly to the newspapers. So Michelle's brother,
00:19:32
Michael, is one of those people. Her former fiance from from the period when Timothy went missing, you know, cuz we
00:19:43
she's had multiple several relationships afterward. But this is the fiance from the time frame that remember she stopped
00:19:50
off at the bar, asked the uh the person driving her home when they were recovering an item to bring to the scent
00:19:58
dogs. She had asked, "Hey, could you stop at the bar? my my boyfriend's bartending. I I need to tell him what's
00:20:04
going on. So, this would be that man from that time period. And her landlady from the time that she rented from this
00:20:12
woman when Timothy was still alive. So, these three people who all have made statements that make it sound like they
00:20:19
think she's guilty. They all being honest on the stand said, "We've been in her apartment dozens of times. I've
00:20:28
never seen that blanket in her possession or in her apartment before. So, that doesn't help. That undermines
00:20:34
the prosecution's narrative. >> Yeah. >> And then, of course, we have Jennifer, her niece, who says, "Yes, I've seen it
00:20:40
before." We have Jennifer's friend who occasionally babysat Timothy. >> But Jennifer again has a motive. So,
00:20:48
well, and then her friend her statement's weird because her her friend at one point says,
00:20:57
"I remember a blanket. It was some somewhat similar to that. I don't think it was that one because the one I'm
00:21:02
remembering had a different pattern. Yet later she identified the blanket found at the Raritin Center site near the
00:21:08
remains as one that she had in fact seen inside a Michelle's home during the early 90s."
00:21:16
>> Right. What is a blanket? It's not a smoking gun. >> Yeah, they found another babysitter who
00:21:22
babysat Timmy telling police that the blanket was in the house as well. So again, this is it's it's difficult. This
00:21:33
blanket of course is going to be the battleground as we can clearly see. And again, as I stated earlier, during the
00:21:39
course of the investigation, what they learned is for every one person we could say that they had seen the blanket in
00:21:45
Michelle's possession or apartment prior, we can find another person who says they've never seen it. And they
00:21:52
presented, the defense presented photographs of where Michelle and Timmy were living
00:22:02
and in the background or even on a person, you could see a blanket or blankets in the background. And of
00:22:10
course, this is for the defense. So all of these photographs that were shown of Michelle and Timmy and where they were
00:22:17
living at the time leading up to the disappearance, not you never see that blanket, the blanket in question in any
00:22:24
of those photographs. Of course, we have prosecutors that are will be walking the
00:22:31
jurors through the case history starting from 1991, focusing attention on what they argued
00:22:40
mattered most, the changes in Michelle's story over time. They emphasized not just that the story had changed, but
00:22:47
there were multiple versions of the story, suggesting inconsistencies that could be read as guilt
00:22:55
rather than mere confusion. And we've went through those stories, right? They're they're very, very different.
00:23:01
It's not like you can misremember that you forget seeing a knife or a knife held to a person or that two men and a
00:23:09
woman were involved when you first say that nobody, you know, he just I turned and he was gone.
00:23:15
>> They also presented and highlighted Michelle's admission from her time working in that fulfillment center, her
00:23:22
discrepancies and her work history that she provided to investigators. And it it
00:23:27
it looks like what we see in a lot of trials that the prosecution that their approach was going to be
00:23:36
cumulative. Take, you know, take the small fractures in her story and in the case. So we have
00:23:44
conflicting accounts, questionable timelines, disputed details, and then press them all together.
00:23:49
>> Yeah. And I think the other thing they're they're probably hopeful of is the sympathy for the victim. We have a
00:23:57
five-year-old child. And so if we can build this little pile of evidence and then have this sympathy and guilt go
00:24:08
through the jury that maybe they'll convict solely on that. But also I think I think this case is pretty weak.
00:24:18
But I understand at some point you again it's it's almost [music] 30 years on. You you got to roll the dice.
00:24:39
Exclusively on AMC Plus. >> What is this place? >> A gripping new AMC Studios original
00:24:46
series. >> You'll find out soon enough. >> From executive producer Ridley Scott and
00:24:51
acclaimed director Karen Kusama. Something feeds on our souls. >> Starring Dan Stevens, [music] Judith
00:24:58
Light, and CCH Pounder. >> I am not okay. None of this is okay. >> The Terror Devil [music] in Silver, new
00:25:05
limited series. Stream now exclusively on AMC Plus. >> As routines shift and summer plans
00:25:11
begin, it's easy for learning to take a backseat. Makes it simple to stay sharp and keep
00:25:18
skills fresh in just a few minutes a day. LL is an award-winning online learning platform that helps kids truly
00:25:25
understand what they're learning. Whether they're building math confidence, strengthening reading and
00:25:30
writing skills, or reviewing science concepts from preK through 12th grade with personalized interactive content
00:25:38
that adapts to each child's level and pace. L is used in 96 of the top 100 school districts in the US and studies
00:25:47
show kids who use score higher on tests. Proven in all 50 states. It's an easy way to support learning now through
00:25:55
summer and into the next school year. Make an impact on your child's learning. Getl now and Going West True Crime
00:26:03
listeners can get an exclusive 20% off of EXL membership when they sign up today at exl.com/going
00:26:10
west. Visit.com/goingwest to get the most effective learning program out there at the best price.
00:26:19
>> Summer always changes how you get dressed. You want pieces that feel lighter and more breathable. Things that
00:26:25
are easy but still put together. That's where Quint comes in. They focus on highquality essentials that feel and
00:26:31
look amazing. Think breathable linen and soft organic cotton. And Quint goes way
00:26:37
beyond clothing. They have custom upholstered sofas, ceramic cookware, premium bedding, and more for your home.
00:26:44
It's the kind of brand you end up recommending to everyone for everything. I've been recommending Quint for a
00:26:50
couple years now. And I've been shopping quint.com for a couple of years now. Why? Cuz they keep me coming back. Cuz
00:26:58
they got the good stuff. I love their classic fashion. They got me looking good for any situation. And you can shop
00:27:05
quint.com for men's fashions, women's fashions, shop for kids. They have travel essentials. And here's a secret.
00:27:12
I've purchased a lot of gifts on quint.com. Elevate your summer wardrobe. Go to quint.com/g
00:27:21
for free shipping on your order and 365day returns. Now available in Canada, too.
00:27:28
That's qui nce.com/g for free shipping and 365day returns. quint.com/g. Picture this. It's the end of a long
00:27:40
week. You're unwinding in the tub listening to your favorite true crime podcast and then chronic hives come back
00:27:49
again in the middle of the episode. What a wet blanket. Looks like another spell
00:27:55
of itchy, swollen, red, or skin colored hives. If you have chronic spontaneous urtdicaria or CSU, there may be a
00:28:04
different treatment option. Worried about your chronic hives interrupting our next episode? Learn more at
00:28:12
treatmyhives.com/g. All right, we [music] are back. Cheers, mates. What happens in Vegas goes on off the
00:28:36
record. [laughter] >> That's right. It typically does. >> Cheers to everybody. Thanks for joining
00:28:43
us once again here in the garage. Of course, the jury, you know, the prosecution wants the jury to also
00:28:51
understand and see and hear about what they thought was her unemotional demeanor when presented with news or
00:29:00
information about the case. her demeanor as being angry and frustrated and ending
00:29:08
questioning, ending polygraph examinations by storming out of the room, shouting at people. But again,
00:29:18
it's it's troubling because none of this, like you were pointing out before the break there, Captain, none of this
00:29:25
to me is conclusive hardcore evidence. >> Yeah, I would have to >> It's a lot of suggestive stuff. Yeah. I
00:29:33
mean, I might find her guilty of being a pile of [ __ ] or a giant bag of salty dicks, but to me, if I'm looking at this
00:29:44
evidence, I'm like, this is not enough to convict somebody of this crime. Well, and then we'll get into this next part
00:29:51
here because we kind of went through the discrepancy of people's memories on the blanket, right? That's that was a
00:30:00
big battleground. The other part of the battleground is going to be what witnesses do we have at the trial
00:30:07
who saw Timmy or somebody that they thought was Timmy or saw Michelle by herself with no little boy with her at
00:30:15
the carnival. And look, the short of it here is the same as the blanket. Basically, for every one person that
00:30:22
said that they saw somebody that they thought could be Timmy. So >> yeah, >> one one part that was difficult for the
00:30:30
defense and for this case is you have two people who would take the stand and say, "I saw someone at the carnival who
00:30:38
could be Timmy." He fit the general description of Timmy. And then you have the one woman who says, "I saw a woman
00:30:45
who could have been Michelle with a boy who could have been Timmy. And then later I saw that same woman walking
00:30:52
around shouting and calling out the name Timmy or Jimmy. So your two people that
00:30:58
say Timmy may have been at the carnival are people that did not know Michelle did not know Timmy. That makes them
00:31:05
difficult to be great solid witnesses. Now the flip of that is you have a couple people that say I saw Michelle at
00:31:16
the carnival. never saw her with a a little boy. One one that I found to be the most interesting was the testimony
00:31:24
that it was a woman who took the stand who recalled waiting in line at the carnival at a refreshment stand. So,
00:31:32
this could be the refreshment stand that's come up several times in this case, >> right?
00:31:37
>> It's not said [snorts] that way. It just it said a refreshment stand. So, we'll
00:31:41
we'll leave it as that. But this woman says, "I'm waiting in line at the carnival at a refreshment stand with
00:31:48
Michelle." The witness said she briefly chatted with Michelle while they waited. But in
00:31:55
her telling, something essential was missing. She did not see Timothy. She did not see a little boy. And she says
00:32:03
on the stand, her testimony, that Michelle did not speak of him. So to that witness, it was as if there was no
00:32:10
child there at all. And of course, prosecutors used this statement, this testimony, as well as others to account
00:32:20
this account to reinforce the argument that the carnival scene might have been staged and that the truth lay elsewhere.
00:32:28
>> Yeah. But her original story was she's at the refreshment um station without her son. Another
00:32:36
thing that I've been pondering for the last week is so we find this blanket but we we don't find our victim
00:32:47
clothed, right? Um it's the problem is we find our victim a skeleton and a partial one at that. So, it it's
00:32:59
look, I'm not a medical examiner, but my my take on this is I with the way that the remains were found to me, it's
00:33:10
clothing or no clothing, it's not really suggestive of anything. I I wouldn't expect even if the body was
00:33:17
placed there fully clothed, I wouldn't expect given the state that it was found in to be clothed at the time of of the
00:33:24
discovery. >> Right? And where I'm going with this is she is telling us whether she's saying
00:33:32
I turned around and when I turned back around he was gone or there was this lady and these two people were saying
00:33:40
Timmy was wearing a red tank top and these printed pants or printed shorts. And so if those aren't found at the
00:33:49
disposal scene then maybe that's evidence of something. And then also, let's just say Timmy was never there.
00:33:59
And she goes and then she sees a little boy that kind of looks like Timmy. And so when they go, "Well, what was he
00:34:06
wearing?" Well, Timmy was wearing a red tank top and these printed shorts, right?
00:34:12
>> Mhm. >> Well, then somebody might have saw that individual. Does that make any sense?
00:34:18
>> Yes. So now we have these eyewitnesses that go, "Well, I saw this boy wearing
00:34:22
this stuff, so I'm assuming because I don't know him that he's Timmy." So these people that are saying that they
00:34:28
saw Timmy, these are not individuals that knew Timmy personally. >> So correct. >> These eyewitness accounts, I mean, it
00:34:35
just I think these are on both sides, whether she's innocent or guilty is kind of a nothing burger.
00:34:43
>> Absolutely. I think these are people with the intention of helping and their information is incomplete.
00:34:51
It's it's not strong enough to suggest one way or the other what is right. >> Absolutely.
00:34:57
>> So now let's get that's why when you have all this you have to go back to the
00:35:02
science. Okay. So the science that's presented at trial is one. So that they they presented
00:35:12
evidence to establish that tides could not have washed the body up the creek from the river. Really what they're
00:35:19
doing here is they're aiming to close off an explanation that might suggest accidental or natural movement of the
00:35:28
remains. >> Right? rather than intentional placement. >> They're what they're saying is
00:35:34
>> we believe and we have experts that will back this up that where the partial remains were found is where they were
00:35:42
placed when they were discarded. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Now the flip of of that science.
00:35:51
Okay. So you have that science, right? But now let's go to the other science. The defense is facing a case largely
00:35:59
built on circumstantial evidence. Well, actually, let's take this a step further because you can get
00:36:05
a conviction. You get a lot of convictions and rightfully so. Convictions, not all the time, but I
00:36:12
believe the majority of the time off of circumstantial evidence and and circumstantial cases. You can take that
00:36:20
to court, you can get a victory, and I think the majority of the time that they are right. here it's less of
00:36:25
circumstantial evidence or a circumstantial case. It's more of circumstantial interpretation.
00:36:32
>> Yes. >> Of everything. So the the defense very smartly uses science to challenge any of the reliability of the
00:36:45
narrative about the blanket. So they presented a forensic expert who reviewed the documents and photographs and said
00:36:53
that they doubted any meaningful con connection could be drawn between the blanket and the crime. So this expert he
00:37:03
also questioned whether it could be proven that the blanket had been there for as long as the remains had been
00:37:09
there attacking the assumption that the blanket and the remains shared a long-term link. Okay, so this was from
00:37:17
uh New Brunswick News, I believe. I'm sorry, from the home news. Summarization here for you, Captain. A
00:37:26
defense expert testified in New Brunswick that a blue and white blanket found near 5-year-old Timothy Wilty's
00:37:32
skeletal remains in 1992 was unrelated to Timothy, his death, or his mother, Michelle. Retired NYPD forensic
00:37:41
scientist Nicholas Petreco said he reviewed FBI and New Jersey State Police lab reports and photos. He says the
00:37:49
blanket was never sent to him and found no link between the blanket and other nearby items, including waistband
00:37:57
remnants and a pillowcase, a balloon, a shovel, and a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle sneaker found about 15 to 20 feet
00:38:05
from the remains. Patreo said investigators found no fibers connecting the blanket to the waistband or
00:38:12
pillowcase, no hairs on the blanket, and no blood on the blanket, pillowcase, or
00:38:17
sneaker. He testified that smothering or strangulation usually leaves trace evidence, hair, saliva, skin cells, or
00:38:26
sweat, even after laundering or environmental exposure, though he acknowledged some cases show none. He
00:38:33
concluded the blanket had not been in contact with Timothy, his room, his mother Michelle, or her car, despite
00:38:41
earlier indications by three babysitters as a blanket used by Michelle and Timothy. A New Jersey state police lab
00:38:50
found a hair on the blanket, but determined it was not Michelle's, and no fluids or DNA were detected. Petraco
00:38:58
also questioned how well the blanket appeared preserved if it had been outside for 11
00:39:04
months. So, he's questioning if the blanket was even there the entire time that the remains were there.
00:39:10
>> Right. If I'm the prosecution, I don't know if I'm bringing this case to trial.
00:39:15
And like I said, I understand it. You got to roll the dice. But I just don't I just don't know. It's tough because what
00:39:22
they did was they brought it to the grand jury and then the grand jury comes back and says take it to trial. It it's
00:39:29
it's tough because you would find if in a review of the judicial system and these especially homicide cases often
00:39:39
times when a grand jury tells you move forward with charges and take it to trial, they do. Not not in all cases. I
00:39:48
mean, the the John Benet Ramsey case is one that comes to mind. Um, there are several other cases that we've covered
00:39:55
that didn't end up at trial. The Boys on the Tracks case, grand jury said, "Take
00:40:01
that one to trial, I believe, if I'm recalling correctly." >> So, what does the jury find in this
00:40:06
case? The other thing that the defense is going to challenge and this is you you would do this absolutely a good
00:40:13
defense team would is remember we have a scenario where the county's medical examiner
00:40:21
ruled it a homicide but also stated in the report that the cause of death could not be determined from the remains due
00:40:29
to the decomposition. >> Yeah. And this to me is similar to h having having a trial where you have no
00:40:35
body because we have a body but we can't even determine if there was a crime. We
00:40:42
don't have factual evidence where we go hey victim died of strangulation. We just have dead victim.
00:40:51
>> Right? And so for me, the the hurdle that needs to be cleared or to cause the person to collapse on
00:41:01
the track in front of a crowd to be laughed at is the carnival, right? Because if Timothy never goes to the
00:41:09
carnival, then that is the one thing that I would say conclusively to me says, "Mom killed boy dumped him over in
00:41:17
the swamp land." >> Yeah. >> In the marsh land. If he went to the carnival, then it's reasonable to
00:41:25
believe and actually everything would point to she's absolutely innocent. She's surrounded by people minutes after
00:41:32
she she's only there for what? We went through the timeline what 30, 45, maybe 60 minutes.
00:41:38
>> Yeah. >> She didn't have time to do anything. So, it's reasonable to conceive.
00:41:45
It's reasonable to believe the idea that whether or not he was at that carnival,
00:41:49
his remains were probably placed where they were found either a short time before she went to
00:41:55
the carnival or somebody else did it and they were placed there not too long after the
00:42:01
>> he once she says my son's missing now we have searches and she's basically in
00:42:10
she's basically in police custody for the rest of the night. She doesn't even have her vehicle once she goes back from
00:42:19
the carnival. So, yeah, like you said, the the crux of all this is did Timmy go to that carnival or not?
00:42:27
>> This doesn't have a lot of what to do with what we were just talking about, but back to the trial and you had
00:42:34
mentioned the passage of time between the time he goes missing in ' 91 until when you have a trial in 2016.
00:42:41
the coroner who worked the case in 92 himself, he could not testify. He was deceased by
00:42:50
the time of the trial. So on the stand, you have somebody testifying on his behalf based off of
00:42:58
reviewing photographs and the reports, right? And on top of that, you have a defense
00:43:05
that's saying, "Well, you the coroner himself in 92 couldn't tell us how the boy was killed." It's reasonable based
00:43:13
on the findings and where you found the boy and the the situation and the state of the remains to conclude homicide. I'm
00:43:20
not arguing that. But this is just another incomplete portion of the case because he himself in '92 couldn't
00:43:29
conclude how the boy was killed. So, the person on the stand isn't going to be able to do it either.
00:43:34
>> Yeah. To me, this is just part of the prosecution's job is to paint a picture, but the picture that
00:43:43
they're painting is just too blurry. We don't have enough details. >> Yeah. And one of the more interesting
00:43:50
parts of the trial was Michelle's defense team called a man from Arizona. This is a a man with a fairly extensive
00:43:57
criminal background. He testified that a former cellmate, the cellmate had lived
00:44:03
in Georgia but ended up in a cell with him in Arizona. I believe they that he that this man the cellmate confessed to
00:44:10
him to raping and murdering a young boy near Atlanta City. Okay, so this is very
00:44:17
strange because they're not even in the same state as New Jersey. The man who he's accusing of saying this to him
00:44:24
never says the name Timothy or Timothy Wiltsy and says if if he did say this to his
00:44:33
cellmate. He says he raped and killed a boy a young boy in or near Atlanta City.
00:44:42
So then he learns about the Timothy Wilty case and says, "Oh, he didn't mean Atlanta city. Nobody that lives in
00:44:50
Georgia says Atlanta City. He must have meant Atlantic City, which would be close to where this boy went missing,
00:44:58
>> right? >> This But again, so we got a blurry case. Uh the prosecution has a blurry case,
00:45:06
but the defense is uh putting on their defense with a blurry case. >> Yeah. And I
00:45:12
>> No details here. I hesitate to I'm not going to say the guy that was accused because he did go to the trial and he
00:45:19
took the stand and he's like, "Look, I I didn't kill a kid in New Jersey. I I don't even you know I don't even know."
00:45:27
>> Yeah. >> I I I didn't kill a kid in New Jersey. I don't know what you thought I was going
00:45:30
to testify to, but >> But did he uh admit to killing a kid? >> No, >> I killed a kid, but it definitely wasn't
00:45:36
New Jersey. >> Just Just to back Just to tell you how truthful I am. >> Yeah. I mean, when I'm killing my kids,
00:45:42
I don't want >> It was in Atlanta City. It was in Atlanta City. I was telling the truth
00:45:46
the first time. After the testimony of 68 witnesses, the jury began the deliberation. This is in May of 2016.
00:45:53
During this deliberations, a juror member told the judge that the foreman was secretly conducting an independent
00:46:02
investigation. When the judge talked to the foreman, the foreman admitted to researching FBI evidence collection
00:46:09
protocols. So that foreman was dismissed and an alter an alternate juror was seated in his place. Of course, the
00:46:18
defense moved for a mistrial, which they should, but the judge denied it, which probably should have been done as well.
00:46:24
And just before the 25th anniversary of Timothy's disappearance, again, this is May of 2016, the jury returned a guilty
00:46:32
verdict for firstdegree murder. >> Jesus. >> Now, because of >> because of the problems, the
00:46:39
complications with the jury, we're going to take it's going to take almost a year
00:46:43
to get to sentencing. So, it's January of 2017. The judge sentenced Michelle to 30 years
00:46:51
in state prison without the possibility of parole and she began serving that sentence in New Jerseys in a New Jersey
00:46:58
women's prison while her appeals move forward. >> Again, I'm not saying she didn't do it.
00:47:05
I'm just saying you got to prove it. >> Well, I I and I'm with you. I don't, regardless if you think she's guilty, I
00:47:12
don't think that there's evidence, enough evidence presented to say beyond a reasonable doubt that this
00:47:20
woman killed her son. I >> Well, and also, let's just reiterate something, though.
00:47:27
>> Other pieces of evidence in this case that I think paint a a more detailed picture that she is more likely guilty
00:47:36
of this than innocent. Those weren't allowed at trial. So, it's even I don't know. It's It
00:47:45
doesn't seem like enough evidence to me. >> Right. Do you think she's innocent or
00:47:49
guilty regardless of what was presented at trial if you had to pick? >> I mean, I'd have to lean towards guilt
00:47:58
because I have no 100% proof that this boy was even there. And there's so many things like if she would have if this
00:48:08
would have happened, right, and and she was looking for her son and then she comes across people she knew, right?
00:48:18
Like like they they see her actively looking, but does that make any sense? I I just think there's all these missteps
00:48:26
and then the changing of the stories and then then her behavior afterwards. I I don't know. I just think it's it's
00:48:34
all very bizarre. But then this case is really difficult to me too because I also question did her actions and what
00:48:42
she said and and the untruthfulness quote unquote untruthfulness did that all stem from feeling like she was under
00:48:51
a magnifying glass by law enforcement like it's the chicken or the egg? I don't know that you could win or should
00:48:59
win an argument in the court of law that she killed Timothy, but I absolutely believe in my heart of hearts that she's
00:49:07
guilty. And I base this on two solid factors of reasoning for me. Just applying logic here, some simple logic.
00:49:17
One, I think her absence is a huge indicator of guilt to me that she did this. And what I mean by her absence is
00:49:24
one of the versions, probably the most violent version and one of the final version she gives of he was abducted
00:49:34
story is that she feared that the abductors would harm him. But the abductors also told her that if she kept
00:49:43
quiet or if she played along or whatever the words were or made up to be that they
00:49:51
would return him in a month, in one month's time yet she moves. I get that you may have financial difficulty and we
00:50:00
said in her defense maybe she had to move because she couldn't make the rent. The land lady thought that she was
00:50:05
innocent. The land lady who later decided that she questioned Michelle and if Michelle was guilty did not know any
00:50:11
of that information about the changing stories or the failed polygraph examinations at that time. The land lady
00:50:18
a may have given you a break. You've relied on your father for help financially multiple times in your short
00:50:25
23-year life and as an adult and as a mother. That's when you call dad and say, "Dad, I got to stay here. They're
00:50:31
going to return Timothy. I got to be here when he comes back." Where would you The most likely place if they were
00:50:37
going to return him would be via a phone call to her home or on her doorstep somewhere that they knew that if that
00:50:47
were true that she would find him. So her absence is a huge indicator. And later we learn a couple of things even
00:50:54
after that month passes. Okay. So, shortly after he disappeared, one thing that we learned at uh this was either
00:51:03
during the trial or during the appeals process was she was having the neighbor check her answering machine. You're not
00:51:10
pulling me. The only way you're pulling me from that answering machine if my kids's missing is if I'm out boots on
00:51:17
the ground looking for the kid myself. >> Right. >> Number two takes goes on two trips
00:51:24
before the body is found. We know one of them she went to Florida for 2 weeks and
00:51:28
and the statement the claim was that she was seeking counseling while she was down there and she went I don't know
00:51:34
where the other trip was but it's been reported that she took two trips between the time that her boy went missing and
00:51:40
when his remains were found 11 months later. So her absence is a huge indicator to me that she did this. And
00:51:47
and it's twofold. one that if you really if you were told and you really believe
00:51:52
that he would be returned, you would be where he could be returned to you. You wouldn't leave the area. Number one. And
00:51:58
number two, her absence is an indicator that she couldn't take the heat. She need it was the her only reprieve,
00:52:08
my friends, was to go down to Florida where she wouldn't have to beounded or questioned by she wouldn't have to come
00:52:13
up with answers. Yeah. But >> she wouldn't have to make stuff up to to satiate the the police in their
00:52:21
investigation and their questioning of her. She could get a two week reprieve where she could go down there, buy some
00:52:29
time, collect her thoughts and try to get a clean break, a a real true story and narrative that will that she can
00:52:37
tell them that they will understand and believe. >> Yeah. In her defense, we're assuming
00:52:44
that these individuals that have this horrible thing happened to them have the mental and emotional the mental and
00:52:52
emotional capabilities to handle the situation. >> Yes, I am I am making that assumption.
00:52:58
>> Yeah. >> But >> but we all do it, right? We go >> She wasn't a mother yesterday. She had
00:53:04
been a mother for five years. Mhm. >> She's a mama bear and been a mama bear for almost six years at this point. He
00:53:11
disappeared in May. He has a birthday in August. When you know I I I just I don't
00:53:17
understand how that mama bear part of her. Look, some people never have that. There
00:53:23
are of course there are good parents and there are bad parents. We went out of our way and we made sure to include
00:53:30
rightfully so the people who presented her as a good mother. My other thought too, Captain, is she's too resourceful.
00:53:39
She makes fake FBI business cards. She fakes her own abduction. She does this, that, and the other thing when she needs
00:53:48
to save her own butt, cover her own hide. Where was all that resourcefulness when her son was missing? She sat on her
00:53:56
hands. >> Well, in fairness, >> she moved out of her apartment. >> If she took us right,
00:54:00
>> she went down to Florida >> would know she's guilty. >> In the end, >> through the appeals,
00:54:07
>> at the end of the day, yeah, >> it was later determined, it was argued and argued and reargued in October of
00:54:15
2021. The court concluded that even if homicide was assumed that the state had not proven Michelle's state of mind an
00:54:23
essential element for purposeful murder rather than lesser offenses such as reckless or negligent homicide. The
00:54:30
court stated that even viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, no rational jury could find
00:54:38
without speculation that Michelle purposely or knowingly caused Timothy's death. Michelle was released from prison
00:54:45
that evening in October of 2021. >> Her attorney said she cried when told the news and called the decision a
00:54:55
victory for convictions based on evidence, not speculation or emotion. Michelle's brother, Michael, who
00:55:04
believed that she was in fact guilty, criticized the ruling, saying [music] it denied justice for Timothy. Want
00:55:23
[music] to thank everybody for joining us here in the garage each and [music] every
00:55:29
week. Thanks for sharing these stories on social media. The best way to support the show is join us on Patreon or Apple
00:55:35
[music] Podcast subscription for our bonus content and the first 50 episodes of True Crime Garage. Colonel, do we
00:55:43
have any recommended reading for the beautiful listeners? Yes, sir, Captain, we do. This week, our case, The Murder
00:55:49
of Timothy Wilty, is one of New Jerseys most notorious cases and murder mystery.
00:55:55
So, in that vein, how about a book from one of True Crime Garage's favorite New Jersey True Crime authors. Cheers to
00:56:03
Jesse P. Pollock. This is one of Jesse's latest works titled Room 100: Sid Nancy
00:56:11
and the Night Punk Rock Died. Room 100 chronicles the tragic story of Sid Vicious and Nancy Spongen's well,
00:56:20
her murder. punk rock's very own Romeo and Juliet. Through a wealth of archival material, plus new and exclusive
00:56:29
interviews from rock luminaries, critically acclaimed true crime writer Jesse P. Pollock's book is the first to
00:56:36
be solely devoted to popular music's darkest hour, the murder of Nancy Spongen. Did Sid kill the love of his life in a
00:56:47
drug induced stuper? or had Nancy been the victim of a robbery gone wrong. This one, it's a very good book, an
00:56:56
incredible mystery by one of our favorite New Jersey true crime authors, Jesse P. Pollock. Check that one out.
00:57:05
We'll have it listed on our website on the recommended page. That is Room 100, Sid, Nancy, and the Night Punk Rock
00:57:11
Died. >> And until next week, >> be good, be kind, and don't litter. Heat. Heat.
00:57:21
[music] [music] [music] >> [music] >> For those crazy busy, crazy hungry days when cooking family dinner is off the
00:57:56
table, there's Applebee's all you can eat. A table full of unlimited favorites for just $15.99. You get all the tender
00:58:04
signature riblets, all the crispy boneless wings, all the golden brown double crunch shrimp and endless classic
00:58:10
fries at a familyfriendly price. Applebee's all you can eat for just $15.99 per person per order. Now that's
00:58:17
eating good in the neighborhood. Limited time only. So hurry into your nearest Applebee's today.
00:58:22
>> Courage. I learned it from my adoptive mom. Hold my hand. >> You hold my hand.
00:58:28
>> Learn about adopting a teen from foster care at adopt us.org. You can't imagine
00:58:32
the reward.