48 Hours - Post Mortem | The Footprint Evidence

Episode Date: July 21, 2026

Host Anne-Marie Green and 48 Hours Correspondent Erin Moriarty discuss the cold case murder of Jeanie Childs, who was stabbed to death in 1993. They discuss the investigative genetic genealogy that led authorities to a suspect, and the bloody footprints left at the crime scene. This episode last aired on 5/20/25.

Welcome back to post-mortem. I'm your host Anne-Marie Green, and I'm joined by 48-hourst correspondent Aaron Moriarty. We're going to be discussing the murder of 35-year-old Jeannie Childs. She was stabbed over 60 times in her Minnesota high-rise apartment in 1993. Her case went unsolved for over two decades until advances in investigative genetic genealogy led authorities to arrest a local businessman. and father. His name is Jerry Westram. Erin, thanks again for joining us. Oh, I'm really grateful to be here because this is one of those stories. People who love forensics love this story. We want to remind everyone, of course, if you haven't listened to this hour, head on over to your feed. You'll find this episode of 48 hours right above this one, go listen and then come on back and we can talk about it. When I started watching this, the case reminded me of actually,

the first 48 hours I ever did. Several years ago, it was the case of Angie Dodge, a teenager, an 18-year-old who was killed in her brand-new apartment, and the case went unsolved for many, many years until they used genetic genealogy

to track down her killer. It was kind of newish then. This is a very similar case. But the thing about this case is, you know, you think you find the DNA, you find the match, it's a home run. But in this case, in the apartment, there was a lot of DNA.

So not necessarily a home run. No, what's so interesting is I think jurors sometimes think that it's a slam dunk when there is DNA that has been obtained through genetic genealogy. But the truth is DNA, if it is collected and tested properly, it can show that somebody was there. But it can't tell you when they were there. And in this case, this case, as you said, Amory, happened in 1993. That was when DNA was in its infancy, at least being used as a investigative tool. And so they did collect DNA and they collected those bloody footprints that are just so important in this case. But the DNA didn't match anyone back then. They did have a person of interest. She was

living with a boyfriend, Arthur Gray. But he had an alibi. He was out of town that weekend. And they took those unknown bloody footprints and compared them to Arthur Gray and said that they did not belong to him. So the case kind of went cold. And then in 2015, just about two decades later, you know, there were so many advances in DNA technology that they did more tests. And I thought this was really interesting. As you pointed out, Emery, there was a lot of DNA there in that apartment. Yeah. According to police reports, Jeannie wasn't. as a sex worker and there had been men in that apartment. But what was interesting is that they found one unknown profile,

the specific that was not just in the bedroom, but also in the bathroom on a towel. And because investigators believe that the killer might have cleaned up in the bathroom, that was significant to them. And so that is the DNA that belonged to Jerry Westrum. But all they had at that point, really, is the idea that Jerry had been in that apartment at some point. Right.

Because just because DNA is found, you can't tell when that DNA was deposited, right? You cannot. And that's why in this case, those bloody footprints became so important. You know, normally it would be a genetic genealogy case. This was a bloody footprint case. And the prosecution said, whoever left their footprints in her blood had to be either there at the time of the murder or right afterwards. And so if those footprints matched the person whose DNA was found in that apartment, that was a pretty good indication that that person could be the killer.

Now, I think at this point, one of the most, I guess, famous investigations that was solved because of genetic genealogy was the case of the Golden State killer, Joseph James DeAngelo. Were investigators inspired by that case? And is that why they kind of went down that route? You know, that case inspired investigators all over the country. Yes. And they were inspired even to use the same genealogist, Barbara Ray Venter. I had met her on a story I was doing for Sunday morning and such an interesting woman. She was a patent lawyer, but she also had a PhD in biology.

And she loved to do, because this woman has this amazing brain. her hobby was to do these family trees. And that's how she got involved in the Golden State Killer case. So now she does these cases. And she took that profile that I mentioned that had been found both in the bedroom and the bathroom. And she uploaded it to the genealogy sites, including MyHeritage.com. And she was able to build out a family tree and came up with two suspects who happened to be brothers. And then she picked Jerry because the DNA profile indicated that it belonged to someone with brown eyes.

And Jerry Westrom had brown eyes, but more important probably, I think, for investigators was Jerry Westrom had a history of soliciting sex workers. And so that made him a suspect in this case. And remember, it's just a piece of evidence at this point. You know, at this point, Jerry Westrom now is just a suspect. Right. Because they can't bring any charges based on what Barbara Ray Venter finds out. She gives them these names and then she has no idea what happens after that until they call her and say whether they've arrested a person or not.

So, you know, what they have to do at that point is they've got to get a real DNA sample from that person. and then see if that matches the unknown DNA in the crime scene. They have to do that or they can't take this case to court. So therein lies the challenge. They have to somehow get a DNA sample from Jerry. And I thought it was really interesting in the hour how they talked about, you know, a mouth sample, a saliva sample is better than anything else. And this is the first time I actually considered why they want mouth swabs,

why they always look for, you know, something a suspect may have. put in their mouth, a drink. But they go, the FBI agents in 2019, they go all the way to Wisconsin to track him down at a hockey game. Why do they have to go that far? Well, so, yes, you're right. He's living just right outside Minneapolis and ISanti. But he is a devoted hockey dad. And I think they believed that if they followed him to Wisconsin where he was going with his family to see his daughter play hockey, you know, you eat. You're out at a hockey game. You've got these two investigators who are following him, like right behind, but they don't want him to know because what if they're wrong? They don't want to be seen. They're staying in the same hotel as Jerry and his wife are staying.

I mean, they even went. It just is so interesting after he checked out of his room. They went into his room. Now, how are they going to know that it was his DNA that he left on something? But they did just in case they could find something that they thought connected just to him. So it takes time and they're frustrated. So they finally follow him to this game, according to Agent Bokers. They follow him to this game and they finally see him wipe his mouth with a napkin and they bring it back to the lab. And according to Andrea Faya, who was the forensic scientist who tests it, it matched the

unknown DNA sample from the crime scene. So they've got more than a suspect, they've got someone they're about to charge. Wow. And so they get the DNA sample and they make an arrest. How did Jeannie's family react to hearing about who the suspect was? Well, with a lot of surprise. Number one, you know, it had been so long. This was February 2019. Geney had been killed 1993. They did not tell them that they were looking at someone. So this came out of the blue. But I think more important, especially for Jeannie's sister, Cindy, they live in Isanti. And that's where Jerry Westrom lives. Jerry ran Westrom's corner, which had a shop and a gas station, and everybody went there. Her kids knew his kids.

I mean, it was shocking to Jeannie's sister. And I should point out, I think this is very important. Yes, he might have had brown eyes. Yes, he may have had a history of soliciting sex workers, but he did not have. history of violence. And if you remember, Amory, Jeannie was killed brutally. And so I think it came as a big shock to Cindy and her mom. Welcome back. In February of 2019, Jerry Westrom was arrested when he was 52 years old and he was charged with the murder of Jeannie Childs. Now, police questioned him for 11 minutes before he asked for an attorney. I want to play a clip of that interview that didn't make it

into the show. Do you know we have your DNA? I assume so. Okay. So is there any, can you think of anything? Man, this has been a long time ago. This is a pretty significant event when you agree. I mean, the person involved in this is going to remember, don't you think? Absolutely. Yeah. And so that's kind of what we're, we're wondering if you have any of that knowledge. What was he like during that interrogation? I mean, he doesn't seem to be upset. You know, why isn't he asking why he's there?

Or not saying what we all think he would say? I didn't do anything like that. I would say so, considering the circumstances. But when we spoke with our legal consultant, Julie Rendellman, she does point out that you really can't judge somebody's affect. You know, we don't really know what's going on through his head. So this case also had a really sort of interesting piece of evidence that you talked about a little bit earlier, these bloody footprints and it was the focus for investigators. And at first I thought, oh, what a unique and perfect piece of evidence?

But then afterwards, I thought, but how do you, what do you compare that to? There's no footprint database like there is for fingerprints. So how do you even use this evidence? That was so interesting, Amory. This was the first one for me, as it seemed to be for the investigators. But, you know, remember these were actually recorded back in 1993. They were photographed. There were seven that they had labeled.

So what was interesting is we had two experts. So we had the expert for the state. And then we had an expert that had been hired by the defense. And the expert for the state said that four of those were suitable for comparison. And he decided, and he testified as such, that four of those prints belong to Jerry Westram, that Jerry Westrom was the one who left them there. That is so damaging, as you can imagine, because we know his DNA is in that apartment, but now it looks like that these bloody prints also belong to him.

But then you have the expert that had been hired by the defense. and she is an expert who teaches in Waterville, Maine, Alicia McCarthy. And she did the same work as the state expert, but she said that she only found one of those prints, E2, it was labeled E2, as suitable for comparison. She says that the state expert was not right about those other three, that you could not analyze and compare those other. the three, just E2. But what matters in this case is she also found that the print, which is right below the big toe of the left foot, just this small area she says was left by Jerry Westrom. So as you can imagine, Anne-Marie, when the defense found out that she was a green, at least on

that one part that it belonged to Jerry Westram, the defense dropped her, did not want her to testify for them, but the state said, please testify for us. She did. And I think that was very significant for the jury. So what you have is you do have the DNA, the genetic genealogy DNA that seems to place them in that apartment. And you have the area right below the big toe of the left foot that seems to also place Jerry Westrom in her blood on the day she was murdered. And then you have that interview. where he doesn't seem to show a lot of emotion. But that really kind of describes the case against Jerry Westrom. In August of 2022, Jerry Westrom went on trial for Jeannie Child's murder.

Now, the jury heard from a defense witness who told police that she saw Jeannie Childs with a blonde man wearing a trench coat on the day she was murdered. But I'm wondering if there were any other suspects that the jury did not get a chance to hear about. So I had mentioned Arthur Gray. The judge did allow the defense to raise Arthur Gray. He was living in the apartment with Jeannie. They did have a history of abuse. She had filed a police report and his hair was found on her hand.

But he had an alibi. But there were some really interesting other possible people of interest. So they found blood. right in the stairwell that belonged to a guy named John S.Y. And so they interviewed John S.1. And I should point out, none of his DNA was found in the apartment, but his blood was found in the stairwell. And they interview him, and he's a very friendly guy. But when they compared his feet to those unknown bloody footprints that came out inconclusive, the jury never heard any of that.

And a more interesting person is James Luther Carleton. So James Luther Carlton was convicted of killing a woman a year later, Jody Dover, in her apartment, and here's why it's eerily similar. In Jody Dover's murder, there were also bloody footprints found, and that's so unusual. And one of those footprints was found to belong to Carlton. We do not know whether Carlton was at all investigated or, talked to at the time in this case. But he's now serving a life sentence for Jody Dover's murder.

So the jury, again, did not hear anything about Carlton or John S. Y. And so ultimately, the jury does find Jerry Westram guilty of murder in the first and second degrees. And then on September night's 22, he's sentenced to life in prison. In 2024, the Minnesota Supreme Court reversed Westrom's second-degree conviction. But it upheld the first-degree murder conviction. I'm just curious about why they reversed the second-degree conviction. Well, every state is different.

You know, even whether you have a first-degree or second-degree murder is different by state-by-state. And I'm just going to read to you what the ruling is because I thought this was interesting that according to the ruling, in the state of Minnesota, A defendant may be convicted of either the crime charge, which was murder, or an included offense, but not both. And so every lesser degree of murder is an included offense. So they decided that that second degree murder was an included offense. So he could be convicted of first degree, but not both, not the included offense.

So that's why they reversed it. But he's, you know, he's remaining in prison on first degree. Right, right. The punishment is the punishment, and he's going to be behind bars for a really long time. I think, I know for me, the most frustrating part of this story, though, is that we don't get to hear a why because he's not talking and he didn't testify. And there was no motive. They did not present a motive. You know, there was a, in one of her date books, there was a Jerry, but, you know, nobody knows who that Jerry was. but otherwise nobody remembers him with her. Jerry just didn't come up, but no, no motive in this case, and he didn't take the stand. So even though, I mean, we really don't know what happened in that apartment or why it happened,

the fact that he was convicted after 25 odd years, does the family feel like they've received closure that there's justice, or are there somebody still unanswered questions that there can never be closure? I mean, they both have said this to Jeannie's mom and her sister. They do trust the system. They believe that he did kill Jeannie. I don't think her mom will ever stop grieving. She read to us this beautiful letter that she had written her daughter once afterwards,

so sorry that she couldn't have said all of these things to her daughter before she died. So they are left with their grief, but at least they know. longer in their minds have to worry about who it was. They feel they now know who killed Jeannie Childs. Erin, another fascinating story. I learned more about DNA and I thought I knew a lot. I learned about footprints and whether or not they make for good evidence. And thanks for joining us. You know, I love doing this with you, Amory. And I so happy you're now on 48 hours. This could not be better. Well, thank you. I really, really appreciate it. And I appreciate the listeners having listen to all of our episodes of Postmortem. Postmortem is hosted by me, Anne Marie Green. Our producer

is Annie Cronenberg. Kiara Norbitz is the coordinating producer. Jamie Benson oversees technical production. Alan Peng and Reginal Bazil are our engineers. Mixing by Pedro Raphael Rosado. Special thanks to 48 Hours executive producer Judy Tigard, Megan Marcus and Ainsley Rosito, who lead the podcasting editorial and operations for CBS, as well as the video editing team for CBS Digital. And if you like the series Postmortem, please rate and review 48 hours on Apple Podcasts and follow 48 hours wherever you get your podcasts. You can also listen, add free with a 48 hours plus subscription on Apple Podcasts. Thank you so much for listening.