Anatomy of Murder - If the Shoe Fits - Part 2 (Suzanne Nauman & Phyllis Harvey)

Episode Date: December 1, 2021

For two decades, the homicide of a teenage girl goes unsolved. The clue to solving her case as well as a completely different murder was right in front of investigators in black and white.For episode information and photos, please visit https://anatomyofmurder.com/. Can’t get enough AoM? Find us on social media!Instagram: @aom_podcast | @audiochuckTwitter: @AOM_podcast | @audiochuckFacebook: /listenAOMpod | /audiochuckllc

previously on Anatomy of Murder. Suzanne Nauman was a 17-year-old kid. He made me promise him, one police officer to another, I would look into this case. Her body was mostly exposed. There were bite marks on her breast. Nearby the body, there was a man's sneaker, size eight and a half.

If you view the scene as it was and the sheer violence that was perpetrated against her is more than enough motivation to work your hardest. There was evidence that pointed to her boyfriend, the person with a motive to do something, an opportunity to do something, the last person seen with him. So I get that, but I couldn't get past the sneaker.

And I said, really? A size 11 foot stuffed into a size eight and a half shoe? I couldn't get past the sneaker. And I said, really? A size 11 foot stuffed into a size eight and a half shoe? I don't think so. I'm Scott Weinberger, investigative journalist and former deputy sheriff. I'm Anasika Nicolazzi, former New York City homicide prosecutor and host of Investigation Discovery's True Conviction. And this is Anatomy of Murder. Last week, we began our story about the murder of 17-year-old Suzanne Nauman. She was found strangled on a Schenectady, New York, public golf course back in May of 1995. But police first suspected and even arrested her boyfriend, Keith Gavreau.

But the DA, Robert Carney, chose not to prosecute. And if you need to get up to speed because you missed last week or just don't remember some of the details, please go back and listen to part one. But today, we're actually going to be starting off by talking about a completely separate case, a separate murder, and how it may relate to Suzanne. When District Attorney Robert Carney decided not to move forward with the prosecution of Suzanne's boyfriend, Keith Gavreau, the lack of any further leads or information quickly turned this from an active investigation into a cold case. And we see this so often that when there has been a direction in particular to one person and then for one reason or another, a prosecution doesn't move forward or they realize they have to switch gears, that very often it isn't because they have the next thing or the next person, it's that they just don't have anything left at all. And so at least for a while, the case goes cold.

There's no more paths, at least for that time, for investigators to go. And at least from their perspective in this one, that's exactly what happened then. It sat idle, but it was reviewed from time to time and evaluated for its prosecutorial potential. I think it's also important to talk about what the community may have been thinking

about the DA's decision not to move forward. Clearly, the arrest for the murder of Suzanne brought a lot of local news coverage. And while there was not enough evidence directly tying him to the homicide, the court of public opinion may have felt differently. Which is why, as a prosecutor, I'm the first to always say

no one should be tried in the court of public opinion. But certainly for Keith Gavro, even though the prosecution was dismissed, he still had plenty of sideways glances, believing he was involved. Fifteen years later, in 2011, another phase began. And that effort was led by Detective Sergeant Dan Cain, reopening the cold case file boxes, following through witness lists and reports, beginning to determine how to reinvestigate, in fact, reinvigorate a cold case. We all sat down and reviewed the case from start to finish. We came up with a list of persons we wanted to re-interview evidence that was here in the police department that we wanted to resubmit. There's always going to be challenges in a cold case, primarily the passage of time.

And we're talking about a case that happened in 1995, long before technology was anywhere it is today. I mean, there wasn't even smartphones back then. So when they're starting to reinvestigate, that is usually a slow process. That doesn't happen in one day. This was spread out over weeks at a time. But here, even when they started to do their reinvestigation and try to see what the file said to them, it was a slow process with few rewarding moments. No leads, no developments.

For any investigator, that can get disheartening, frustrating. We interviewed a lot of the initial witnesses that could be found. You know, you're talking many years later, a lot of people were deceased, a lot of people had moved on. But let's remember the case that they're investigating and who their victim, young Suzanne, a 17-year-old was. She was a 17-year-old girl who had had a very difficult upbringing from the time she was young that had led her down the path of sex work and narcotics. And that was the thing that kept motivating these investigators in this case to keep moving forward. The case began with a well-preserved crime scene, and that was really so important.

Lots of solid evidence recovered. Remember, when her body was recovered, she had two bite marks on her breasts, a solid opportunity in those wounds to collect DNA. We're not talking about something that was missed in the beginning. There had been a lot of advances in DNA from when the crime happened in 1995 to now 19 years later in 2014.

So they could extract DNA and do different testing now when they were looking at it again that they could never even have imagined back when Suzanne was murdered. As it turns out, the fact that Suzanne was fighting for her life with her attacker, that would end up paying huge dividends with the location of DNA underneath her fingernails.

So that obviously was a major development in the case in 2014 when a DNA mixture was identified by the state police lab. Sometimes in these investigations, you really do just end up with a bit of luck, because here's something about Suzanne's nails. They were the type of fingernails that you would really describe almost as stubs, whether they were bitten or kept short, who knows, but there really wasn't much of the whites there at all. Investigators didn't think that they would even get anything if they had swabbed and taken samples from underneath their nails, but they did just in case. And certainly in this case, now 14 years later, when they tested those fingernail scrapings, it definitely paid off.

Gavro's DNA was on file because he had served a prison sentence here in New York State that he was excluded. While it did not provide a hit on CODIS, it didn't come back to a single specific person, it did create a John Doe profile within CODIS to be matched with another time. While they didn't have the actual identity of the likely killer, that let them once and for all rule out the person that had been suspected for all those years. And that was Suzanne's boyfriend, Keith Gavro. You know, Anastig, I think we should talk about the fact that the DA here really stood his ground and did not push forward with the investigation because he believed there was not enough evidence. I think that DA Carney absolutely did the right thing. But it also talks about the type of prosecutor that he is, that it wasn't about the politics or pressure,

the way that he made his decisions. And that is sometimes hard for certain people to do. All these years later, I was glad I had the judgment I did back then. So while three years after this newly assembled team has reopened Suzanne's investigation, they've been able to conclusively rule out her boyfriend, Keith Gavreau. So while that answers one question, the bigger question still remains, who killed Suzanne? And that answer just may have been collected, this is important. I want you to follow me for a second.

They were trying to determine whether any details within those confessions had ever been released to the media. In other words, were any of the details within those confessions, could they have only been known to the killer? At some point, I sat down with Kevin Noto. He was looking for newspaper articles. He was primarily at that point trying to analyze the jailhouse confession evidence to see if there's anything that he saw that made it somehow reliable or unreliable. As it turns out, D.A. Carney told us that a lot of the details were leaked early on to the media. So while that angle wouldn't be significant, something else happened. And he discovered when he was researching the public record in this case,

he came across an editorial that had been written in the Daily Gazette, the hometown newspaper. And so here it is. They're looking at something that had been written years before, only a year after Suzanne was found murdered. And in this article, the journalist is talking about the tragedy of another homicide, a woman by the name of Phyllis Harvey. The editorial had been written in April 1996, a month after the discovery of Phyllis Harvey's body. And the editorial was titled A Tragedy in Schenectady.

And he's actually drawing parallels between the two cases. Both having prostituted themselves, both being drug addicts. Let us tell you a little bit about Phyllis Harvey, who was also from Schenectady. She was on a similar path as Suzanne Nauman, struggling on and off with substance misuse. She had studied to be a nurse and also had made several attempts to get clean. But in April of 1996, she simply disappeared. Her body was discovered March 17, 1996, on a porch, which is the Mont Pleasant area of the city of Schenectady, a different neighborhood than where the golf course is located.

She was wrapped in plastic with the carpet around her. She had been strangled. There was still rope tied around her neck. And it was clear that her body, based on the high level of decomposition, had been there for quite a long time. Her body was found by the landlord of the apartment building that that porch was part of. Were these two tragic murders the work of separate killers? Now, let's look at both sides, Anastasia.

I mean, for me, both bodies were found with ligature wrapped around their neck. The time frame was within a year of each other. That does line up with profiles of some killers who may lay low for a while until they get to thirst to kill again. They were both sex workers. They both had substance misuse issues. So to me, they do sound very similar. But there's also things that were different about them. First of all, their age.

Remember, Suzanne was just 17 and Phyllis was 37. Suzanne was found outside of a golf course in the dirt where Phyllis had been wrapped and left on a porch. Now, Suzanne's body was found very quickly out in the open by the golf course. But Phyllis wasn't left out in the open. She was to some extent hidden, wrapped, and actually part of a dwelling when she was found. And while investigators look at who could be responsible for Phyllis' murder, the landlord informs police that this porch is only accessible through one apartment. Is it reasonable to assume that the person living there would have been somehow involved?

It does when that person already has a criminal history, a very disturbing past, and he's already fled the scene. During the investigation of Suzanne Nauman's murder, cold case detectives uncovered an editorial that talked about her death as well as Phyllis Harvey. And specifically cited parallels between Phyllis Harvey and Suzanne Nauman. And that was a significant insight, which I kicked myself for never realizing. You know, Scott, I have to have you put your journalist hat on here and just talk to me about

how you may be looking at this and vote so often do very differently than investigators and prosecutors. To be fair, we were not insiders during this investigation, and there are aspects that we're not privy to. So I would prefer to approach this portion of the story as a journalist, as if I was covering the story. And I think the best way to describe the actions of investigators is tunnel vision. They had full faith in their prosecution of Keith Gavreau so much that everything else appeared to just be noise. Just the details of the crime scenes themselves deserved much more consideration and much more attention. You know, think about it for a second, how those things happen. Remember, it's not like one person's investigating all the homicides that happened.

And unfortunately, at that time, narcotics had exploded and there was lots of crime as a result. So they don't put it together when there is now another person found murdered. At that time, they were viewed as two isolated incidents. And I think that the fact that Gaffro had been arrested made it less likely that we drew the parallels that we probably should have drawn at the time. The one thing they knew was that for police, they very quickly found out who it was that had killed Phyllis Harvey. Her body was found in an upstairs porch accessible only to an apartment that was rented to a guy named Stanislaw Maciag. Maciag apparently had no problem telling a friend about a dead body on his porch.

And even though the friend may not have known whether Maciag was involved in the death, you'd think that friend would reach out to police. But that didn't happen. And by him making a statement to a friend saying that he had killed a woman and that she was actually out there on his porch, well, that already says something to me about this person, assuming that that statement is true. They're not afraid to talk to someone. And if the way that he's saying it, it sounds like he is clearly bragging, which means that he is looking at this body, this human being as two things. One, as a trophy, but also that there's a disconnect between the person whose body is lying there out on a porch and as this thing, if you will, this item, this property that he has now taken the life and has just discarded out there wrapped up in a rug.

And so I think we're going to learn some more disturbing things about whoever this Stanislaw Maciag really is. A couple of months before the discovery of her dead human body, Maciag, just in the middle of the night, packed up all of his belongings. And without even notifying the landlord of the building that he was living in, he just moved right out of the city. As a matter of fact, he moved right out of the county. But let's just talk about some of the basics to start. Stanislaw Maciek immigrated from Poland, arriving to JFK, when he was just 26 years old in September of 1985. He settled in Connecticut, but a year later, in 1986, he married a woman here in Schenectady.

Now, police were actually familiar with Maciag before he was suspected having anything to do with Phyllis Harvey's murder. In 1989, he was arrested on a burglary, broke into a place that he had broke windows. But in 1990, he abducted a woman who was most likely a prostitute, but it's not clear if she was, and he drove her to a property and forcibly raped her, along with using vulgar and crude language. And while this is, of course, obvious for anyone that may even say, well, wait a second, sexually assaulting a sex worker, of course you can sexually assault a sex worker. Anyone can be sexually assaulted. You a sex worker. Anyone can be sexually assaulted. You can be married. It can be an intimate partner. It can be someone who,

you know, trades sex for money as part of their work for whatever their reason or why. And so let's just be clear. It is a crime whenever anyone says no. She managed to escape from his car and hide in the woods. No idea who he was, but half a year later, she saw him, was able to get his plate, gave that to the police. They ended up arresting him. He pled guilty to a sex abuse charge and was put on probation. He was given the gravity of what he did, was not a great outcome. But he was arrested the next day. We violated him on probation.

He was sentenced to one to three years in prison as a probation violator. He's violated on his probation because at that point, investigators knew that he had lived in Schenectady. And when you're on probation or parole, you have to regularly report, sometimes in person and sometimes remotely. And what I mean by that is by telephone. But you have to report. And this guy just up and left town about a month after Phyllis Harvey went missing. So he's gone. So he is not reporting. And once they start to suspect him and think that he is the one responsible, well, while they're putting the pieces together to try to gather evidence for

the actual murder, of course they want to get the person off the street. And they can do that by way of the law. Because when you don't report to your probation officer, well, that is reason to violate you and you can go back to jail. And there's more to Masek than just his criminal record. Investigators will quickly learn that Masek had a history of domestic violence, specifically against his wife, the mother of his two daughters. And the details are troubling. We just want to warn you. Back in 1987, there was the allegation out there that he had punched his wife when she was pregnant. So you know that there's physical abuse.

He also had Dewey arrest, which is slang for driving under the influence or while impaired. And basically that means that someone is operating a motor vehicle while they are either under the influence or impaired by drugs or alcohol beyond the level legally that's allowable by law.

But here's the thing. In 1988, there are reports of an incredibly cruel, violent act about his wife. And it is so graphic that we're not even going to give you specifics other than to say that she was pregnant. It involved rubbing alcohol and her most intimate parts. We'll just leave it there. It was that incident that caused her to have the strength to separate from him and leave him forever. 1989, he basically had no relationship with his children, his two children.

I think he saw his oldest daughter once, but never saw his youngest child. We have done countless stories on how domestic violence or abusive relationships have led to murder. Coercive control, Anastasia, as you have labeled it so many different times. Let's now move where in 1996, remember, Maciag is now in jail on that probation violation. And detectives are at the same time building their case against him for the murder of Phyllis Harvey. But as they look into him, they continue to uncover more disturbing things about him. In July of that year, he attacked another girl who was walking home. He grabbed her from behind. She describes having him pouring liquid into her mouth. She blacked out.

She woke up. Her underwear was on backwards. For me, the biggest connection to the crimes is the M.O. of both murders. The evidence, strangulation, using a ligature that, in both cases, were tied on the same side of the neck. His connection to the community back in 1995, motive, opportunity, and means.

Those three boxes, to me, are checked. And one those three boxes to me are checked. And one thing is very clear about this guy, he is an absolute misogynist. And when you're looking at someone who is starting to commit more than one, multiple of these type of acts, well, now you have a serial predator out there. And when they are a serial predator, they tend to commit crimes similar in nature that often escalate as time goes on. But here's the detail that really made the cold case investigators in 2015 really want to zero in on Maciag as Suzanne's killer. While crime investigators were collecting evidence around the body of Suzanne Nauman, they found a single sneaker next to her body.

The shoelace from that sneaker was missing and was wrapped around her neck. The sneaker size was size eight and a half. So investigators went back to the records when Maseg went through intake at prison. And it was documented on the New York State Corrections property form that they took a pair of shoes eight and a half. The question I would be raising is how common is it for a man to have an eight and a half. The question I would be raising is how common is it for a man to have an eight and a half size shoe? I look at that in a similar way to a rare blood type. Is there enough speciality to that piece of evidence to be based just on that? Here's some interesting facts. The average shoe size for a man at least 20 years old, it's about 10 and a half with a medium width.

Worldwide, the most common shoe size for a man is basically between 9 and 12. Maceag wore an 8 and a half size shoe. So it is not as uncommon as you think. So now let's look at all the things that are pointing to the possibility that Maceag is actually Suzanne's killer. We already know about all the similarities we've talked about between the two crimes. You have this guy's background. You know that he's a sexual predator who has committed now another murder

that has, again, similar, and he wears an uncommon shoe size that is the same shoe size of the sneaker found at the murder scene whose lace was still wrapped around Suzanne's neck when she was found. But there's one challenge for investigators when they realize all this. Maciag is dead.

Back in 1996, police had a lot to connect Maciag with several crimes, including domestic violence assaults. And they really wanted to prosecute him for all his crimes, not just the murder of Phyllis Harvey. He was a serial sex criminal who had preyed on prostitutes and had contempt for them. So we had the probation violation, and then they had the case about the sexual assault against a sex worker. We brought that victim in, and we presented the case to the grand jury and returned a sealed indictment against him for sexually abusing her. So that case was pending, and on April 7, 1996, while he was at Auburn Prison, he reported to an inmate, I've done a lot of bad things. I have to pay. And while all that's pending, he died by suicide. He hung himself. So with him dying by suicide, Anastasia, is that the end of the road for a prosecution? In this case, it is because it seems that

everything is lined up, that they know that it's going to be him. And normally when the suspect, the person that all evidence is pointed to as having committed the crime, is now dead, well, now investigators will close the case because now there is no one to prosecute. That pretty much terminated the investigation of Phyllis Harvey. And unfortunately, the evidence in that case was destroyed. With your main suspect now identified and a John Doe DNA sample ready for comparison,

the likely next steps all involved DNA. And of course, the motivating factor was to keep pushing forward and getting justice for Suzanne and for Phyllis. So now you're looking at a case where Suzanne Nauman has been dead for two decades at this point. But you know, here's the thing about this case that just really gets to me and is the thing that obviously got to Sergeant Dan Kane, too, is that he kept remembering who this victim was. Let's not lose sight that, you know, we're talking about a 17-year-old girl who, you know, at the time of her death should have been worried about who she's going to go to the prom with and what's the latest trend in music and all that. And unfortunately,

due to that young lady's upbringing, she's on the street, you know, engaging in sex work activity. She has a deceased father who obviously didn't really care about her. There was not a lot of light in Suzanne's life. She was victimized from such a young age. You know, both homicide victims, Phyllis and Suzanne, they struggled with narcotics misuse. Because of their sex work, Maciag decided they just didn't matter. And he thought that society wouldn't care either. But what he didn't realize

is that we do. You're talking about an open homicide case that, from the police standpoint, we want to close it whether the perpetrator is alive or dead. And again, we owe that to the community. So that's why we care. Masek may have been dead, but Kane wanted to move it forward. But the best way forward was science. And he did have DNA. But how would he be able to match it? And what would his course of action be? Now, you may remember when we were talking about Maciek's wife,

that he also had two children, and those two children were daughters. Neither of them were in contact with him. One had met him once, and the other never even met him at all. So there's really no relationship that he has with either child. But there is one thing that all of them will still have in common, and that is their DNA. The investigative team approached Macy Egg's ex-wife and his two daughters and built a rapport with them. They had no real obligation to cooperate with us or even to speak with us. You know, Scott, obviously it's going to be crucial for them to build a rapport, not only with this man's ex-wife, but now with these two

daughters, this man who was not only violent, but was cruelly violent in the most serious of ways. And they're going to ask a big ask, if you will, from his daughters who have had no relationship with them and only know how cruel this man was to their mom. Clearly, the approach would to be talking to the daughters or the ex-wife about what he's accused of, going to their side of humanity and hoping that they may be holding the answers. Their DNA could be the key to solving this case and to bring these two families justice.

They were very gracious. They were extremely cooperative, even after the ex-wife, I'm sure, probably had an inkling as to the streak of violence that he had in him, but the daughters never really had any relationship with him. So probably all they knew about him was what their mother told them. So we are profoundly grateful for their cooperation. And based on their direct, honest approach, their ask from you will of the two daughters, they got those DNA samples from both of them. And they now tested or compared those samples from the DNA found under Suzanne's fingernails.

A lot was riding on the first set of results. Basically, if it comes back as a match, Detective Sergeant Kane has nearly solved this over 20-year-old cold case. But let me take a sidestep for a moment. DNA is a way into the family's tree of a potential suspect. It would not give the defining numbers that a direct sample from a defendant or target of your investigation would bring. But make no mistake, it's great circumstantial evidence. And in this case, it could finally define who the John Doe DNA sample belongs to, the sample taken from underneath Suzanne Naumann's fingernails. We found out that it was, one of them was 99 times, the other one was 177 times more

likely to be directly related to the John Doe profile than an unrelated person. And those results are a really big deal. I mean, think about that. You have 99 times more likely than you have 177 times more likely to be related directly to the John Doe who's clean profile. They have who we know is going to end up being the killer. And what I love about it then is this, is that they didn't just want to rely on those numbers with the family. They wanted to make absolutely sure. Stanley Maciag's body was not cremated. It was buried in a local cemetery by his ex-wife.

And we were able to get an exhumation order on July 26, 2017. And you know, DNA doesn't die with your body. You can still compare samples that are taken when someone's deceased. Now, we talked about in the case of Phyllis Harvey. Now, her body had been out in the elements for a very long time and based on the level of decomposition that they couldn't get any usable DNA. But, you know, here where someone has been buried and their body has been preserved, it can be a very different result. You know,

DNA can sometimes be extracted from the dead 10, 15, 50, even 150 years later sometimes. There's a lot that goes into getting a body exhumed. Once you get past the legal hurdles, getting a judge to issue an exhumation order, the process is sort of interesting. They go to the cemetery and they make arrangements in advance to identify the plot and to begin the process of bringing the casket up. Once the casket is brought up to ground level, and after a series of photographing and documentation the process of bringing the casket up. Once the casket's brought up to ground level and after a series of photographing and documentation the process,

it's loaded into a hearse, and it was driven to the Albany Medical Center where the process of extracting the DNA would occur. We dug up his body and took samples from his femur, and we took bite mark impressions of his teeth. In August 31, 2017, we got the DNA result back from the state police forensic center. There were two sets of comparisons done on the first round with familial DNA taken from the defendant's daughters. The 2014 DNA profile

results for 99 times and 117 times related to the John Doe profile. But the confirmation of the direct DNA sample from the body of Masek, those numbers were mind-blowing. It matched the John Doe profile to a degree of certainty of 1 to 320 billion. Anastasia, one in 320 billion. Those numbers, you know, if we weren't saying, of course, it's him with the 99 and 177 times, well, now just think about that. One in 320 billion. So that right there, it's like, of course, they have exactly who they need. We also submitted the sneaker that was found at the scene, and we got the same match on the sweat area of the sole of the sneaker. And also, Dr. Levine examined the dental impressions and found them to be consistent with Stanislaw Maciek. So now that investigators finally have an identification about who was responsible for Suzanne's murder, it's time to make the many notifications needed in this case,

including one we haven't even talked about yet. With a positive ID with multiple DNA samples and the other direct evidence, including the sneaker found at the scene, police had their man, the person they now confirmed was responsible for the murder of Suzanne Nauman, but their job wasn't complete just yet. There were many notifications needed in this case. One was Suzanne's mother. Now, according to investigators and the prosecutor, there wasn't much of a reaction from her.

Remember, she had suffered from narcotics misuse herself for years. So whether it's that or for some other reason, we don't know. But they still told her that her daughter's killer had finally been identified. But her mother wasn't the only relative that investigators went to speak to. Suzanne actually had given birth to a child. And her date of birth is September 1994, and obviously she was found deceased in 1995. That child was immediately adopted. She obviously knew that her mother was Suzanne Norman, but she never met her. She was adopted as an infant. When it comes to Suzanne,

while she died at the young age of 17, I just think of so much sadness in her entire life. And I hope that for Suzanne, at least she has more peace in death than she had in life. There was one other person detectives wanted to notify about closing this case, but they couldn't. That was Detective Roy Edwardson, the original investigator, one who carried this case for so long, in his head and in his heart. I think he told Chief Clifford that he was hoping at some point after the case was solved that he wanted to buy a headstone to put on her grave, Roy died of a motorcycle accident, I believe, before the case was resolved.

So he never lived to find out that we closed it. Just think about the investigators and their perseverance along with the prosecutor in this case. Kane, D.A. Kearney, their teams, they never gave up, pushed forward and forward, even as they dealt with frustration and roadblock after roadblock, because to them, it came down to who their victim was, and they wanted those answers for her. And then you have Roy Edwardson, who initially brought this case to Kane, because he had thought about it for so long that even in retirement, it was the thing that stuck with him as that case that he could not let go. And as we always do, we focus on the victims in our cases. And in this story, it's the women. Suzanne fought back, the DNA resulting in that critical piece of evidence that identified her killer. The woman Maciag sexually assaulted reported him

and put him on probation, which was why he ended up in jail. The victim Maciag attacked in July of 1995 went before a grand jury to help get an indictment. Maciag's ex-wife, who was abused by him, and his daughters, who didn't have a relationship with him, willing to cooperate, helping bring justice for a young girl they had never met. It's a devastating case and conclusion, but a testament to the strength of women and the determination of police.

Tune in next week for another new episode of Anatomy of Murder. Anatomy of Murder is an AudioChuck original produced and created by Weinberger Media and Frasetti Media. Ashley Flowers and Submit David are executive producers. This episode was researched and produced by Haley Lukasiewicz. So, what do you think, Chuck? Do you approve?