48 Hours - Post Mortem | The Hunt for Sarah Yarborough’s Killer

Episode Date: November 21, 2023

On a cold December morning in 1991, Sarah Yarborough was murdered at her high school campus. Despite DNA evidence left at the crime scene and two eyewitnesses, Sarah’s case went cold. Correspondent Natalie Morales along with producers Chris Young Ritzen and Lauren Clark discuss how a man who’d been in and out of prison for crimes against women was able to slip through the cracks for decades, and that forensic genetic genealogy ultimately connected him to Sarah’s murder. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can listen to this podcast ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app today. Even if you love the thrill of true crime stories as much as I do, there are times when you want to mix it up. And that's where Audible comes in, with all the genres you love and new ones to discover. Explore thousands of audiobooks, podcasts, and originals, with more added all the time. thousands of audiobooks, podcasts, and originals, with more added all the time. Listening to Audible can lead to positive change in your mood, your habits,

and even your overall well-being. And you can enjoy Audible anytime, while doing household chores, exercising, commuting, you name it. There's more to imagine when you listen. Sign up for a free 30-day Audible trial and your first audiobook is free. Visit audible.ca. In 2014, Laura Heavlin was in her home in Tennessee when she received a call from California. Her daughter, Erin Corwin, was missing. The young wife of a Marine had moved to the California desert

to a remote base near Joshua Tree National Park. They have to alert the military. And when they do, the NCIS gets involved. From CBS Studios and CBS News, this is 48 Hours NCIS. Listen to 48 Hours NCIS ad-free starting October 29th on Amazon Music. Welcome back to another episode of Postmortem. I'm your host, Anne-Marie Green, and today we're answering your biggest questions from our latest episode,

The Hunt for Sarah Yarborough's Killer. Joining me are 48 Hours correspondent Natalie Morales and producers Chris Young-Ritson and Lauren Clark, who reported and produced this episode. Welcome. Thank you, Anne-Marie. Hi, Anne-Marie. Hi, thank you for having us. So, you know, one of the reasons why this story kind of really hits you is because you almost feel like you knew Sarah in high school. She's the kid that

you wanted to be friends with. She has everything going for her. She's an incredible young woman. Everyone agrees. Big plans for the future. And then it is ripped away from her. So before we dive into postmortem, I just want to play a little bit of an overview from this week's episode. We used to hop the fence right here and cut through here. On December 14th, 1991, 13-year-old Drew Miller and his friend were walking through Federal Way High School outside Seattle, Washington, when they noticed a man in the bushes. He's just staring at us from the bushes. That was pretty jarring. He's just staring at us from the bushes. That was pretty jarring.

The mysterious man walked away, but he left behind a horrific scene. There in the bushes where the man had just been, the boys discovered the body of a young woman, 16-year-old Sarah Yarbrough. It was absolutely horrible. Drew says his shock turned to fear when he realized the man, who was now just feet in front of him, was staring directly back at him. Does that look still haunt you? Oh, yeah, yeah. It's frozen in my mind. The boogeyman, then? Legitimate boogeyman.

The boys raced home and police were called. Detective Scott Strathy with the King County Sheriff's Office was one of the first on the scene. Even for experienced investigators, this scene was really hard to deal with. Just the innocent nature of this young woman in her school drill team uniform with her hot curlers still in her hair. This was just pure, unadulterated evil. Sarah had not been raped, but the killer's DNA was found on pieces of her clothing. It sounded like they had so much evidence. Sarah's friend, Amy Perotti, had hoped that the killer would quickly be found.

For at least a short while, it felt like, of course they're going to catch him. Amy Perotti had hoped that the killer would quickly be found. For at least a short while, it felt like, of course, they're going to catch him. And then when they didn't and they didn't, your expectations change. Sarah's friend, Shannon Grant. You don't know if it's your next door neighbor. You don't know if it's some random stranger. There was that constant fear. Is this going to happen again?

You know, Natalie, Drew is an adult, right, as he's speaking to you. And so you sort of have to remember that he was a 13 year old boy at the time. And as he goes through the episode and describes, you know, what he saw and how it changed his life. One thing that I never really considered is that he felt incredible pressure. He felt because he had seen this guy, he should be able to help them solve the case. Yeah. I mean, he was under such tremendous pressure and he still feels that all these years later, nearly 30 years later. You do have to remember he was 13 years old, but yet he locked eyes with this guy. He and his friend, they got a clear look at him. And as he said, that look would forever haunt him. Detectives worked with him over many years to get what they thought was

a really accurate sketch. But yet at the time, when you think what that picture looked like, as Sarah's friend said, when they look through their high school yearbook, it could have been anyone from those yearbook pages because, you know, that's what everybody looked like back then. They had the mullets. That was the style. That was, you know, the hairstyle back then. What was it like for Drew to testify at trial to lock eyes with this man again? It was a lot. Drew had really been anonymous for many years because he was a minor at the time. His name wasn't publicly released. He kind of knew who the Yarboros were, but he wasn't friends with them. And he felt kind of isolated. So at the

process of going into trial and knowing he'd have to testify and that he'd have to be there on the stand looking at Patrick Nicholas, it was a lot. But the community that developed at trial, like so many of Sarah's friends and family and neighbors, just people wanting to support the Yarborough family, but they also ended up helping Drew too. For so many years, he had this horrible image of Sarah in his mind. He saw her in death, but then through getting to know her family and her friends, they filled in who she was in life. And that has meant so much to him. Even at the sentencing hearing, some of Sarah's friends gave him like a packet of photographs of Sarah. And he talks about that all

the time, that the image of her in his mind has now changed. And that's really part of the healing that he needed for himself and his life. When we did our interview with Drew, we did it at Federal Way High School. And there in the courtyard of the high school is a memorial bench that's dedicated to Sarah. And it was emotional because Drew brought a flower and he put the flower on the bench and he sat there and he had his head in his hands. And it was a very emotional moment because you could just see him reflecting and you could really see how this all affected him. So it didn't make the show, but it was a very emotional moment. It's so interesting how these tragic moments create

almost kind of a new family. This one family is completely ripped apart by the loss of their daughter and all these other people now, even though the connective tissue is tragic, are now part of her legacy and part of that family. So Natalie, what was your biggest takeaway from this case? For me, it was, you know, there was so much initially. There were eyewitnesses. There was DNA evidence. So why? Why did it take investigators nearly 30 years to find Sarah's killer? Police did receive leads and tips, but Patrick Nicholas, the man who ends up being the murderer, was never named. That's so interesting. Let's listen to a clip. By the early 2000s, investigators had received over 3,000 leads and advances in technology made them hopeful.

They entered the DNA from the crime scene into the recently established CODIS system, a national DNA database that includes profiles of convicted offenders. The strategy was to continually try to see if there would ever be a match while also investigating leads. tried to see if there would ever be a match while also investigating the leads. But over time, there appeared to be no match. For us to have DNA evidence from the suspect but not have that linked to anybody, it just didn't make sense. It seemed hard to believe that the suspect hadn't committed any other prior crimes where his DNA wouldn't be in the system.

The suspect hadn't committed any other prior crimes where his DNA wouldn't be in the system. Patrick Nicholas had a criminal record and he had attempted to rape a his DNA was not entered into the CODIS database back then. He also had another charge, first degree molestation of a minor back in 1994. But he was able to plead that down. So he ended up not having to submit his DNA. So that's why he got away for nearly 30 years. And, you know, at the time of Anne's crime and her attack in 1983, there was no CODIS database.

That wasn't established until 1999. So, you know, it seems like an outrage now, but back then it just wasn't part of the standard. It was really frustrating learning that he had attacked another woman, another young woman, Ann Croney. I want to play a little bit of her sound. I noticed his voice was getting shaky, and I told him I had to go.

I went to close the door, and he put a knife to my throat. Everything kind of stopped at that moment. He told me to take my clothes off. Nicholas stuffed Ann's underwear into her mouth to prevent her from screaming, forced her out of the car, and led her to the riverbank. We got about halfway down the bank,

and he told me to stop. I ran and dove in the river because I was thinking he couldn't swim. Swim as hard as I could. Swim for your life. I swam for my life. It's incredible that Anne has the presence of mind to know, hey, jump into the water. I just had a conversation with this guy.

He says that he can't swim. I'm throwing myself in there. It's really remarkable. It's truly incredible. In fact, Anne is just one of the most courageous people I have met. And I've met a lot of survivors over the years of reporting on these kinds of stories. There was also a moment that she revealed to us in our interview that she wanted to take back that part of her life. wanted to take back that part of her life. And in order to do that, she decided to do a triathlon over the summer, diving right back into those very waters that saved her life. She swam this time to

accomplish an incredible goal, completing a triathlon. I think you hear a lot of survivors saying, I wanted to get myself back, my power back. And in that moment, she did just that. I was so moved by the fact that this moment in her life didn't define her at all. She could talk about it. It's not like she was putting it in a black box and not acknowledging it. But she didn't let it be anything more than a speed bump in her life. You know? Yeah. Natalie, that's a great story. After Nicholas was convicted for attempted rape of Anne Crony,

the judge sentenced him to 10 years, the maximum sentence. But then Nicholas is released early on parole just three and a half years later. Did anyone even call Anne Crony to let her know that he was out or was that not the protocol? No. Ann Marie, unfortunately, the answer is no. She was not notified at all. And she just told us that, you know, she assumed that Patrick Nicholas had served most of his sentence. And that obviously wasn't the case. You know, he was only in prison for three and a half years. And I think this speaks to the way that victims were treated back then, You know, he was only in prison for three and a half years. And I think this speaks to the way that victims were treated back then, you know, 40 years ago. Ann told us she was quite

upset when she found that out, thinking, I got justice for what happened to me. And thinking that he had served that whole time and then finding out that that had not happened really crushed her. And it's particularly devastating because if he had served the full sentence, he would have still been in prison in 1991 when he attacked Sarah Yarborough. And then we wouldn't even be talking about her murder. Why was he released so early? I mean, we got the records from, you know, back then and they really, you know, like he went through the parole board process. They considered him, you know, he didn't have any major infractions on his record. He admitted to everything that he'd done.

He admitted to Ann's attack. He said he had a problem. He realized it and he wanted to get help. So part of the terms of his parole was that he would enter into a treatment program, that he would be getting this help that he needed. But as we see, it wasn't enough. But he did actually meet the standards at the time. When we get back, we're going to get into Sarah Yarbrough's trial. Forensic genetic genealogy was at the heart of this case. But with Nicholas's attorney

really calling into question the technology, would the jury believe the science? We're going to get into that after the break. testifying against a brother, a lack of physical evidence. Crosley Green has lived more than half his life behind bars for a crime he says he didn't commit. Listen to Murder in the Orange Grove, the troubled case against Crosley Green, early and ad-free on Wondery Plus and the Wondery app. Hot shot Australian attorney Nicola Gaba was born into legal royalty. Her specialty? Representing some of the city's most infamous gangland criminals. However, while Nicola held the underworld's darkest secrets, the most dangerous secret was her own. She's going to all the major groups within Melbourne's underworld,

and she's informing on them all. I'm Marsha Clark, host of the new podcast, Informants Lawyer X. In my long career in criminal justice as a prosecutor and defense attorney, I've seen some crazy cases, and this one belongs right at the top of the list. She was addicted to the game she had created. She just didn't know how to stop. Now, through dramatic interviews and access, I'll reveal the truth behind one of the world's

most shocking legal scandals. Listen to Informants Lawyer X exclusively on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify, and listen to more Exhibit C true crime shows early and ad-free right now. Welcome back. Lauren, you were in the courtroom during the trial. What were her friends and

family's reaction to finally seeing this case go before a jury? I mean, it was big for them. They'd waited a long time for this. And, you know, Natalie and Chris and I know we cover a lot of trials. Court can be like a very cold and intimidating environment. But I got to say, I have never seen a community come together the way they did at this trial. It was not just Sarah's friends and family. It was neighbors. It was members of the Yarborough's church. It was Sarah's former classmates, adults.

They're in their late 40s now. They came together from around the country. People flew back to be there for the Yarborough's and support them through this. Everybody kind of, amongst Sarah's friends, they all had their little roles. One friend, Liberty, who we interviewed, she had a snack station set up outside that courtroom every day. She and her husband, they had bottles of water.

They found out what candy Laura Yarboro liked. It just, it made such a stark experience feel warm. You know, you would think that so many people have gone on with their lives to return to this area for this special. They did. But also, you know, this was they were teenagers when this happened. A lot of them kind of carried this internally with them for so long. And so, I mean, it was like a therapy session almost. These people are incredible. And Anne Crony showed up as well.

What was it like when she came to the courthouse, though? Well, it's interesting because nobody knew who she was. Anne tells us about how the first time she went, there weren't any seats on the side of the Yarborough. So she sat on the other side and she could tell she was getting some looks. The people were kind of looking her up and down, trying to figure out who is this person. And then, you know, out in the break in the hallway, some of Sarah's friends actually approached her and said like, how are you connected with the case? And she introduced herself and she said, you know, I'm the one who got away.

He attacked me back in 1983. And they all described it as just hugs immediately. And like, we're here with you. We're so happy you came. Thank you for being here. Like, it's so important to us that you are here. And during the sentencing hearing, she shared a very powerful victim impact statement because she was not able to testify at

trial because none of Nicholas's previous criminal history could be entered in as evidence. Why couldn't it be talked about? Yeah, you know, it's at the discretion of the judge in every case of whether prior bad acts are going to be allowed in as testimony at trial. In this case, the prosecution put forward motions that they wanted to have Nicholas's criminal history entered into trial, and the judge ruled against allowing it because this case was going to be decided on this crime singularly. Forensic genetic genealogy played a vital role in finding Sarah's killer, but the defense really put it into question. Let's take a listen. Patrick Nicholas's public defender, David Montez,

challenged how forensic genetic genealogy was used to first identify Nicholas. I want to dig into the science. The first time that kind of defense had been used in Washington State. They used technology that is not only unproven, but just wacky, really. He's not the person that killed Terry. The police needed an answer more than they needed the right answer. And so they turned to new, novel, untested technology. Genetic genealogy is a new field. It really hasn't been tested out. Should we be making important decisions based on something that is not well or deeply understood? Hey, listen, if any of you are on any of these genealogy databases,

I am. I'm all into this stuff. I'm on like two of them. But you get notifications all the time that you got an eighth cousin or a tenth cousin. You know, we're related to everyone. So you can kind of see where he's coming from in terms of this argument. But is it a strong argument? How reliable is the science behind genetic genealogy? Well, you know, it is a relatively new way of cracking cold cases, perhaps the most notable being the Golden State Killer case. The forensic genetic genealogist in our story, Colleen Fitzpatrick, she is considered one of the pioneers at the forefront. I think a lot of our 48-hour viewers may recognize her because she has been on a couple of past episodes as she is so well-known in this field. And she spent years

searching, building out a genetic family tree of the possible killer. And she narrowed it down to these two brothers, Edward and Patrick Nicholas. Interestingly enough, Edward's DNA profile was in CODIS for a sex offense that he had committed, but he was not a match. Patrick wasn't in CODIS at the time. So investigators still needed a true DNA sample. And so detectives surreptitiously collected DNA while Patrick Nicholas was at a laundromat. He dropped some cigarette butts. They picked them up and it was a perfect DNA match. And if anybody wants to argue with the science, here is the number for an exact match. One in 120 quadrillion.

I can't even tell you how many zeros that is, but that tells you how exact of a match this is. Should viewers be concerned about law enforcement having access to their DNA? I think this is something that law enforcement wants to be very clear on now because there have been a lot of kind of guide rails put up, particularly since the Golden State Killer was arrested. You know, now it's really only you have to opt in for your DNA to be searchable on one of these databases. But like in general, they're not searching Ancestry and 23andMe. They have to be these certain opt-in databases. That's interesting. Ultimately, the fact that Nicholas's DNA matched the sample found on the body rendered the defense's argument moot.

He was found guilty of first and second degree murder, but he wasn't found guilty of premeditated murder. Why is that? In this case, we didn't interview any jurors, but Lauren did speak to a couple of them after trial. Basically, they told her that there wasn't enough evidence to prove, you know, how much, if at all, that Patrick Nicholas planned the murder. But then they also said, you know, after the trial, they were told about Nicholas's previous criminal history. And when they heard about kind of his pattern of behavior, they said, you know, maybe that could have changed things for us if we had known that maybe we would have gone the other way on this. But it's just it's so hard

to tell. I want to talk about the judge, Judge Wiggs. She spoke really passionately at sentencing about how Sarah was just a child when she was murdered. She sentenced Nicholas, though, to 46 years, not life. Did the length of the sentence surprise any of you? This actually is on the higher end of sentencing. Judge Wiggs, who is an incredible judge. I mean, you saw the power. She kind of slams her hands down and says, this was a child. And she like hit the table with her fist.

You felt that her outrage when she was looking at Patrick Nicholas. She went above the sentencing guidelines because of Nicholas's other crimes, including the attack against Anne Croney. She was able to share during the sentencing. Yeah. And, you know, Patrick Nicholas was 59 years old by this time. So it's effectively a life sentence for him. It was bittersweet because, you know, Patrick Nicholas, he lived a free man for 30 years. And Sarah didn't have that time. Yeah, Sarah didn't have that time. So it's a life sentence, but it was bittersweet for the family and the friends.

What was it like talking to the people who knew Sarah best? She's still such a huge part of their lives. They talk about her as if it was just yesterday. These memories are still so fresh in their mind. It was such a formative time in their lives for all of them. They all were victims in a way. These young women had to live life thinking that, could that be the guy next door? You know, could it be him?

I walked away feeling like I could have been friends with these women. I mean, we're all somewhat of a similar age group looking through their pictures and the photo albums. It was like looking at a slideshow of my own youth growing up and just feeling like I was a part of that in a way. This murder took place on the campus of a high school. So, I mean, it's not just the people who were friends with Sarah, but all of these kids had to, I presume,

at times walk past this location. I mean, how did the school handle it at the time? So this crime took place on a Saturday morning. And what we learned is that school was back in session just two days later on that Monday. Can you imagine? So these kids all had to go to school, walk by the police, the media, the yellow tape, the crime scene every single day. And for so many of them, they were traumatized. Sarah's friends told us that they really leaned on each other. And one of Sarah's friends told Natalie that her teacher basically made an announcement and said, we will not be learning much for a very long time, except basically how to deal with trauma. One of the things that I thought this hour kind of reinforces is the ripple effect of a crime. But instead of being defined by that moment, they created a community out of it.

They supported each other. They pulled together closer. What will you guys take away from covering this case? I think that that is the greatest takeaway right there, Anne-Marie. It's the people she loved, the friendship she formed. Those are the people who are her legacy and continuing her story and her journey. And they are together for life in this. I mean, it's really created these bonds and helped them heal in a way that I don't think everybody gets. Sarah left a legacy of love. Simple. So true. Simple. That is it for this week's Postmortem. Natalie, Chris, Lauren, thank you so much for joining me. Thank you again. Thanks so much, Anne-Marie.

Lauren, thank you so much for joining me. Thank you again. Thanks so much, Anne-Marie. Be sure to watch 48 Hours, Saturdays at 10, 9 Central on CBS and streaming on Paramount+. And be sure to follow 48 Hours wherever you get your podcasts. And you can also listen ad-free

on the Amazon Music or Wondery app. If you like this podcast, you can listen ad free right now by joining Wondery Plus in the Wondery app. Before you go, tell us about yourself by filling out a quick survey at wondery.com slash survey. In the Pacific Ocean, halfway between Peru and New Zealand lies a tiny volcanic island. It's a little-known British territory called Pitcairn, and it harboured a deep, dark scandal. There wouldn't be a girl on Pitcairn once they reach the age of 10 that would still have heard it. It just happens to all of us. I'm journalist Luke Jones, and for almost two years I've been investigating a shocking

story that has left deep scars on generations of women and girls from Pitcairn. When there's nobody watching, nobody going to report it, people will get away with what they can get away with. In the Pitcairn Trials, I'll be uncovering a story of abuse and the fight for justice that has brought a unique, lonely Pacific island to the brink of extinction. Listen to the Pitcairn Trials exclusively on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

As a kid growing up in Chicago, there was one horror movie I was too scared to watch. It was called Candyman. It was about this supernatural killer who would attack his victims if they said his name five times into a bathroom mirror. But did you know that the movie Candyman was partly inspired by an actual murder? I was struck by both how spooky it was, but also how outrageous it was. Listen to Candyman,

the true story behind the bathroom mirror murder, early and ad-free, with a 48-hour plus subscription on Apple Podcasts.