Crime Junkie - MYSTERIOUS DEATH OF: Jeannette Bishop May & Gabriella Guerin

Episode Date: June 30, 2025

In 1980, the ex-wife of a British aristocrat and her Italian friend vanished from a small ski resort town during a snowstorm in the mountains of central Italy, and investigators had a simple theory—they got lost and had some kind of accident. But when mysterious messages arrive, clues lead them on a decades-long deep dive into the art world jet set, the mafia underworld…and even the Vatican.If you have any information about the deaths of Jeannette Bishop May and Gabriella Guerin, you can email the local prosecutor’s office in Macerata, Italy, at [e-mail] if you or anyone you know is thinking about suicide, please be aware that emotional support can be reached by calling or texting the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline at 988.Follow this link to listen to our Fan Club episode about the 1983 disappearance of Emanuela Orlandi. Source materials for this episode cannot be listed here due to character limitations. For a full list of sources, please visit:  https://crimejunkiepodcast.com/mysterious-death-of-jeanette-bishop-gabriella-guerin/Did you know you can listen to this episode ad-free? Join the Fan Club! Visit crimejunkie.app/library/ to view the current membership options and policies.Don’t miss out on all things Crime Junkie!Instagram: @crimejunkiepodcast | @audiochuckTwitter: @CrimeJunkiePod | @audiochuckTikTok: @crimejunkiepodcastFacebook: /CrimeJunkiePodcast | /audiochuckllcCrime Junkie is hosted by Ashley Flowers and Brit Prawat. Instagram: @ashleyflowers | @britprawatTwitter: @Ash_Flowers | @britprawatTikTok: @ashleyflowerscrimejunkieFacebook: /AshleyFlowers.AF Text Ashley at 317-733-7485 to talk all things true crime, get behind the scenes updates, and more!

Hi, Crime Junkies. I'm your host Ashley Flowers. And I'm Brett. And girl, the story I have for you today is wild. It's like Agatha Christie meets Italian mafia kind of wild. Like it has art world, like heist drama. It has mysterious telegrams, a snowstorm, ransom plots. And somehow almost no one outside Europe has heard of this story.

So if anyone out there listening is the type of person who loves a good string board, you're gonna wanna clear the wall because we are going all the way in on this one. This is the story of Jeanette Bishop May and Gabriella Guarine. Music On the morning of Sunday, November 30, 1980, snow is falling in Sarnano, Italy. It's this medieval hilltop village turned ski resort tucked into the base of a mountain range. The kind of place that looks like something out of a fairy tale almost.

I think my daughter would call it Arendelle, essentially. But this isn't a picturesque blanket of snow that we're talking about. Right now, there is a full-on snowstorm, one that is worrying a local surveyor, this guy named Nazareno Vinanzi. And he's worried because just the day before, so that would have been Saturday, November 29th,

two women walked into his office to hire him for a project. And in conversation and over snacks, as they like went about their stuff and talked about what they were doing, it came up that they were planning to take a drive up into the mountains later that afternoon, which he was like, absolutely not a good idea because of the impending snowstorm. But he was afraid that maybe they hadn't listened because after they left, he expected to hear from them again.

But it was now 24 hours later, full storm here now, and he hasn't heard from them. And are these two, like, locals who would be used to the weather know what to expect? So one is and one isn't. 40-year-old Jeanette Bishop-May, she lives in London normally, but she just bought a country house nearby. She was trying to line up contractors and stuff for renovation.

That's actually why they were meeting with the surveyor. Right. But her friend with her, a 39-year-old Gabriella Guarine, she lives in Italy. Like not this part exactly, but she is there with Jeanette to translate for her. So when the surveyor guy starts getting nervous, he starts making calls first to the boarding house where he knew that the women had been staying, and they confirm his fears.

The owner says that the women never came back the night before. So then he tries the man who sold Jeanette her house, maybe, just maybe she decided to spend the night at her new place. But he says no. And he adds that Jeanette actually asked to meet him yesterday, but then she never showed up. So now Nazareno's really worried. And so he goes straight to police and reports Jeanette and Gabriella missing. And at first, police are probably thinking the same as most people probably would, right? Two women,

And at first, police are probably thinking the same as most people probably would, right? Two women, unfamiliar with the area, they drive into a mountain snowstorm and they get stuck. Maybe they lost their way, maybe they pulled over to wait it out. Now when they're reported missing, like the storm is still raging. So they can't do anything in that instant. But as soon as it calms down a little bit, police launch a full search effort. We're talking helicopters, dogs, ski patrol, volunteers. Like they're all scouring the mountain for these women

or even their car, which is this small, dark colored hatchback with license plates from a city called Siena. And Siena is about three hours away. So a car with those plates would kind of stand out here. It's not like they're unheard of, but like easier to look for. For sure. And at the same time, investigators start piecing together the women's last known movements.

And some of it tracks, right? Like witnesses report seeing their car heading down toward the mountain at around 1 p.m., which was like right after Nazareno said that they left. But then either they changed their minds or they went up the mountain and came back and like it was just like a quick trip because somebody sees them again at 415 in town. And it's this employee of a construction store and he knows it was them at 415 because he actually saw them earlier with that surveyor. They had like come in to pay an invoice. But the interesting thing is that he says at 415, Jeanette is wearing different clothing than she was before.

So I don't know that that means they did or didn't go up the mountain. Like I said, it would have been a short trip. But if she changed, she at some point in time had to go back to like where they were staying to change her clothes. Correct. The thing is though, we don't have any sightings of them between 1 and 415. Especially like we don't have anyone at the boarding house who saw them in that time. There are, however, people who saw them after that. Witnesses remember seeing them heading to their rooms and they remember seeing their car parked out front of the boarding house at around

5 p.m. And this is notable because this is about when the streetlights come on. And around this same time, they see the women actually like driving away from the boarding house. So like, we know they're there after four, we know at five they're driving away, but we don't know where they go at five o'clock. There aren't any other sightings of them

or their car for the next two plus hours until around 720 p.m. when their car is seen heading downhill from the town center with two people inside. But, okay, if they haven't been to the mountain yet, why would they wait until 720 to leave then and go to the mountain? Presumably, like, this is happening in a snowstorm. Right, and it makes you think that they didn't go before, because if you did, then why would you go back in a snowstorm? Right. And listen, I don't know for sure if they were going to the mountain at that time.

Right, like you said, they could have gone up and come back already. Right, like the way it works is you have to like go down the hill to like the base and then go up into it. So just because they were going down doesn't mean they were, but it's kind of like the assumption everyone is making. And to your point, it makes no sense to do that when the storm is like beginning. Like, you know you're gonna be putting yourself

in a bad spot. Like you're already warned at 12.45 when you leave, don't do it. Why would you do it at 7.20? So police don't know where they were going if it was even then. But in all this time that they're searching, there is still no sign of Jeanette, Gabriella, or their car.

And by this time, it's Sunday afternoon and the storm is picking back up. So the mountain search is temporarily called off. Now it's around this time that Jeanette's husband, Steven, arrives in town. Now he's been notified about her disappearance. He's ready to help any way he can, starting with more background on his wife,

who turns out is the ex-wife of Evelyn de Rothschild, one of the richest men in the world at the time. Jeanette and Evelyn met when Jeanette was a model and they were married for five years. That's actually how Jeanette and Evelyn met when Jeanette was a model and they were married for five years. That's actually how Jeanette and Gabriella met. Gabriella worked as a cook for the Rothschilds in the UK. And even after Jeanette and Evelyn divorced in 1971, Jeanette and Gabriella stayed close. So close even that Jeanette is the godmother of Gabriella's daughter.

And then Jeanette met Steven a few years after her divorce, and then they got married in 1977. Now, Jeanette's mom said in an interview with The Evening Standard that her and Evelyn's relationship post-divorce was amicable. So if she had enemies, they probably weren't in her past marriage, right? But her being the ex-wife of a Rothschild is enough to draw attention and set off a media frenzy because abductions for ransom are happening all over Italy at this point. I mean, a lot of people know about John Paul Getty, but I had no idea that between the 1960s

and the 1990s, over 700 people were abducted by organized crime syndicates in Italy and they were held for ransom. So if someone thought a member of the Rothschild family was alone in a small town village, like that is a potential goldmine for the wrong person. I mean, and you're not even gonna believe this. So just a year before this, a British businessman named Rothschild was abducted in Italy by

criminals who thought that his name was Rothschild. I mean, you truly can't even make that up. I know. But all I have to say, would they even know that she, like, at one point in time was a Rothschild? She hasn't been married to one in years and you can't, like, Google her right now. Yeah, not just, like, by her walking down the street or something, but her passport still says Jeanette de Rothschild with...

It just has, like, this note that she now uses the last name May. So the thinking is, I believe, that if someone would have seen documentation, right, she checks in somewhere, somehow they see her passport, like, that's a dead giveaway. Okay, well, if this is a ransom abduction, there has to be a ransom demand. Like has that happened?

No, that's the thing, it hasn't. And from the jump, Steven's not even buying this theory. He says that he and Jeanette lived comfortably, but they weren't as wealthy as people might think. I mean, he works in HR department store. And according to Town and Country Magazine, Jeanette's divorce settlement from Evelyn had been modest. Like she got a home in London

and then a small investment fund. And since then she's like built a career as an interior designer, like an antiques dealer. Okay, but all of that is kind of internal knowledge, right? Like it's totally possible for someone to see her passport, realize who she is or who she was married to, and think that she's a lot wealthier than she actually is. Right. Again, like Stephen's saying, it doesn't make sense for them, but I think the whole point is, like, if someone thought

she was connected to someone else still. Right. Still could be, like, something that someone thought and acted on. Well, and it's especially believable when a new witness comes forward. He says that he saw two cars at around 4 p.m. on Sunday. So this is the day after they go missing. And he sees them in a town about 10 minutes outside of Sarnano. He said the first car was a bigger car with Sienna plates, and there were two people inside.

One of them looked like a woman, the other person he couldn't tell. And then the second car was a small dark hatchback, also with Sienna plates, and like that matches up with what Jeanette's car was. And that car also had two people inside, and one of them looked like Jeanette. So we talked about this a little bit,

but are Sienna plates really that out of the ordinary, like in this region? I'm thinking about like seeing a Michigan plate or Illinois plate or an Ohio plate here in Indiana. It's not a ton, but it's not unheard of. Yeah, and it is a ski resort. So like one or two cars with Sienna plates, like it's probably not a big deal. But I think it's just the fact that they're seeing them like together, they're seeing

the hatchback, like it's all the things. And there are a few people in Sarnano that start recalling this same thing, that in the days before and after the women disappeared, there were a lot of cars with Sienna plates. So it must've been like more than usual, enough that it raises eyebrows. Now police can't link any of those specifically

like to any of this, but it kind of gets them thinking. So what if Jeanette and Gabriella were in two separate cars? Like not that they brought two cars, but like that that sighting was real. Like, did someone follow them? Did someone come? Like, did they get separated somehow? And if that sighting is legit and you combine it with everything else that stood out to an investigator we spoke to, like them missing the meeting with the homeowner and possibly going to the mountains more than once, then

maybe this wasn't just a wrong turn in a snowstorm. Maybe, now they're thinking, they were taken against their will. Did they ever fully search the boarding house where the women were staying? Like, was anything missing? So, from what I saw, it doesn't look, from what police can tell, that anything had been disturbed. I don't know how much they actually tore it apart, though, and did a detailed search.

I get the sense it wasn't very much, because something interesting is found there that doesn't come to their attention until December 4th when Stephen finds it. And what he finds in their room was this handwritten note, seemingly written by Jeanette. And it lists a few phone numbers, and it has a line that just says,

please do not hesitate. Hesitate to do what? Yeah, so I've gone in circles with so many things on this. This is one of them. One of our writers I was talking to thought that maybe it was like a note for the front desk. Like, hey, if these people call, like, don't hesitate. Like approved numbers.

Yeah. But A, why wouldn't it be with the front desk is my question. B, even if it was going to be given to the front desk, like it just hadn't yet, wouldn't you put someone's name and not the number? Like if this person calls? What if it's like the opposite, like maybe don't hesitate to reach out to these people for in case of emergency?

I don't know. Exactly, like reach out to them for like, for what? It doesn't give enough information, like, and it doesn't add up. Doesn't even make more sense after they find out who those numbers belong to. I guess one was to a beach club two hours south of Rome, and the others went to like three different men

who they were able to, or they were at least able to find two of them that I know of. And it doesn't seem like any of them have anything to do with any of this. And it doesn't seem like any of the numbers or people connected to the numbers get tied to an incoming telegram that gets

delivered to the boarding house from Rome shortly after. And this telegram is addressed to someone named Jeanine May. And this is where things get so weird. Because right off the bat, like the telegram itself is strange. Like it feels like it's for Jeanette May, but as far as police know, nobody calls her Jeanine. So like, where did that come from? Yeah, that's off already.

All this thing says is, I am waiting for you. And then it's followed by a Rome address and it's signed by someone named Roland. And is this address a house, a business? Does it exist at all? Is that your question? Yeah, I know. So this is where things get super weird. Not only does the address exist, they don't even have to look up the address to know that

it exists because the address is already on their radar in connection to another crime. On December 3rd, so a couple of days after the women disappeared, but before that Janine May telegram was received, another mysterious telegram was the center of an investigation unfolding in Rome. This one was sent to a director of the famous auction house Christie's

at its Rome headquarters. And it said something like, recovery is possible. And then it directs them to the address that was on the Janine May telegram. But this one was signed by someone named Rodrigo. Okay, but recovery of what is possible? Probably art. At least that's what police think because-

Because of Christie's. Yeah, and because the night after Jeanette and Gabriella went missing there was a major art theft at Christie's in Rome. Like things are feeling like a little backwards but art probably. Wait so these two women were somehow tied up in an art theft operation? Is that what you're saying? I don't know if they're tied up in it necessarily but it sure like seems like the two events have to be connected in some way. Right? Right. We have this address. Same one being used. I mean, that alone is enough to sell me on it. But on top of that,

it turns out that Jeanette does have some connections to the art world through her interior design work. So it's not like it was completely foreign. It's not like if all of a sudden people are asking for ransom and tying me to the art world, like, go, go. But then things get more complicated, because while police are trying to wrap their heads around a connection between these two telegrams, they learn that three more have been sent to families of prominent people

who have been abducted in Rome. And again, they instruct them to go to that same address in all of them. And they were addressed to the family members telling them again, specifically to go to this address or was it like Jeanette's where it was like addressed to her? So I know one of them was addressed to the family members. I don't know about the other two. So I know one is different than Jeanette's, I don't know about the other two.

So I know one is different than Jeanette's. I don't know about the other ones. And it's weird because like they, when I say ransom, they weren't even making straight up ransom demands. They were actually like more similar to the Christie's telegram saying like, go to this place if you want answers kind of thing. And I don't know if those families went to the address or what happened. If they did.

I just know that one of the people who'd been abducted, this industrialist, is eventually found dead. He had been shot in the head even after part of the $450,000 ransom had been paid. The other two people, however, did eventually get released. But police are probably feeling like time is running out to track down whoever sent these telegrams. Like how dangerous are these people? They're able to figure out that the addresses that the telegrams were supposedly sent from, because they're like they're from address, there were a couple different ones, they were different like numbers, but all on the same street. Surprise, surprise, like they don't exist. Or like the numbers don't. The street itself though does exist.

And so police obviously like search it, except they don't find anything or like find anyone who knows about like the person who would have sent this. Except when they're doing this like canvassing, they do find interestingly that another director who works for Christie's art house or auction house do find, interestingly, that another director who works for Christie's art house or auction house actually lives on that street.

Oh. Yeah, which is, you know, a huge red flag. And police search his apartment where they find illegal firearms, they find narcotics. They also search his girlfriend's place. And according to Corriere de la Serra, there they find a diagram of Christie's alarm system. So it's looking more and more likely

that this director may have sent the telegram to the other director, as well as maybe even planned that heist. But even like with all the weird things they collect, apparently there is nothing concrete to prove that this guy was involved, and none of the art that was taken is ever recovered. So they can't tie this director to any of the telegrams

or the ransom plots either. And even though police do arrest him, he is eventually released. And all the while, police are still wondering if he has any connection to Gabriella and Jeanette's disappearance. I feel like the key to all of this is this address that everyone was told to go to.

Go to, right. Like that was involved in all the telegrams. Which I told you was real. What is that? Yes, okay, so when they go to this address, it does not disappoint. According to the Manchester Evening News, they find at this address a group of South Americans living there, one of whom is a woman out on bail who had been charged in 1976 with abducting an ambassador to Rome.

Oh, I know. Like kind of the thing we're looking into. Yeah. So she and everyone else in the apartment end up getting arrested when they find narcotics in the place, right? They can't time to the abductions, yes, but they like find narcotics. Any connection to the Christie's director with narcotics at the other address? No. So like, well, I don't know that it's different, but I just know they didn't find any connection to him. Like, except for the telegrams. But on paper, no.

No connection except for all the connections. But when police start digging into the people who live there, they uncover this whole other layer. So they learn that two people in the apartment had some kind of beef with another woman and that she might have sent the telegrams to set them up. She knew police would investigate and that they would get raided. Okay, but you gotta be real lucky

if you just like guess addresses that tie back to the street where the Christian guys lived and that guy also turns out to be shady. Like that's a lot. I agree. I will say sometimes things can be stranger than fiction because when they start like going down this road and looking into this woman what they see is that the Peruvian

embassy was on the same street as that like Shady Christie's director and this woman that they suspect was the sender was from Peru so they're like I mean it's a street she would have been familiar with. Or she's connected to the guy too, two birds, one stone. Police don't think so. They think that she probably saw these big cases in the news and took advantage of that because she had some kind of axe to grind. And police just write it off, like, just like that. I know.

So just to recap what they're writing off. Finding a known kidnapper at the address that the telegrams referenced. Finding a director of the auction house, like where the heist happened, on the same street as the other address referenced. All coincidence. I'm having trouble like I know. Like, I'm not assessing that many coincidences. I know. But police now are of the mindset that the telegrams were just some kind of hoax.

And so they put that line of investigation to the side. And maybe because at that point, they have a bigger, better lead. Almost three weeks after Jeanette and Gabriella went missing, we are now December 18th, the women's car is found. It's spotted by police on a snowy roadside, about 20 to 30 minutes from the boarding house. And truthfully, I don't even think they know it's a car at first.

Like it's almost completely buried under a pile of snow. There's just like this part of it that was reflecting the sun, which is what caught police's eye when they were up in a helicopter. But when search teams dig it out, they know for sure it is Jeanette and Gabriella's car. Doors are locked, but they can still see the keys inside, along with some valuables. The car is in neutral with the handbrake pulled, and when they later examine it, the car is

totally fine and working. And importantly, when they got to it, they noticed that the wheels are on top of asphalt, not a huge layer of snow, which means that whoever drove it was driving on a at least clear-h road. They stopped intentionally on that road and left it there before the storm came down. And is this like up the mountain or like down in the valley like on the way? Yeah, so it's up a mountain road about four miles or like 12 minutes from the closest town and not too far from where they were staying.

So, okay, the cars parked on, again, clear-ish road at least. If it wasn't snowing so bad, why would they stop? I don't know. And I mean, I should clarify, just because they're not on top of a ton of snow doesn't mean that it wasn't getting bad. But you know, we were in Indiana. Like it takes a minute for the ground And just because they're not on top of a ton of snow doesn't mean that it wasn't getting bad.

I mean, you know, we were in Indiana. It takes a minute for the ground to actually freeze up hard enough to hold snow, especially on a road that's being driven. So really, what police are thinking is that they pulled over because it was getting really bad. In my mind, it had to have been really bad for them not to be able to go 12 minutes back to the nearest town. You know what I mean?

But they talked to some workers who say that they got stuck in a snowbank on the same day that the same women went missing near where Gabriella and Jeanette's car was found. So like I said, police are just thinking that the women, which again, why do you go out at the time? Like it's getting bad. It's so bad in the 12 minutes it takes to get there, but whatever. Police think that like they saw it getting bad. They like stopped. They pulled over to wait it out, because you are in a mountain, maybe you don't want to drive down in white out conditions, unfair.

Sure, but then why leave their fully functioning car to venture out into the snow? You and I are super familiar with snow. You don't just get out of a car to wander, to go someplace to maybe maybe find something TBD I know so yes, like I understand that sitting it waiting Kind of if they decide to go what is the snowstorm? They're 12 minutes. We don't feel safe. Sure pull over they think they got out because

Not too far off the road It's like a short walk from where the car is parked. Police end up finding this house. So they learned that the owner of the house used it as a place for shepherds to stay during the summer, which is like a line straight out of the Bible. But in the winter, it's typically empty. And the house owner even confirms that it should have been empty that November slash December, because repairs were being done on it. Except when police go to this house, they searched the house,

there were signs that someone had been there recently. Like the fireplace is full of ashes and there's burnt furniture and there are used plates and silverware. Is there any like fingerprints or DNA? So there's actually a note about them finding unknown fingerprints in the car that they sent off to agencies across Italy. I mean, they sent Interpol, Scotland Yard, all of that.

And they never say if anything comes of that, though I know Jenna actually borrowed the car from a guy, it could be his, blah, blah, blah. All that to say they never say anything about prints in the house, which I think is kind of weird because I know they searched it pretty well. Like enough that they did find hair in the bathroom that they think might belong to Jeanette or to Gabriella. But in 1980, it's not like they can say for sure it's theirs with DNA.

They're just doing like a visual comparison. Yeah, maybe under a microscope or something. So they think that the women had been there. Like, again, they pull over, they go to this house. They even think that maybe they tried to signal for help by lighting fire on the balcony because they found burnt wood out there too. Which how would all the searchers miss that?

Well, from what I can tell, this house is in a remote spot and I think it got buried in snow during the storm. Like, I don't even know how long a fire outside would have lasted. Okay, but there's fire inside too. You said there's ashes there, like smoke from the fireplace inside? Yeah, but if you remember, they don't start the search right away. And even when they do, they have to call it off for a little bit because the storm picks up again.

And so maybe, I don't know, I'm just guessing, but maybe when there is a fire going on, there's no helicopters to see the smoke, no one out there to see the smoke. And then by the time that second storm passes through, everything's buried in stone. You're not setting fires on anything. So because they're not there, then police wonder, okay, did you see that all your options for sending for help are gone? Did they possibly try to venture out on their own, like to one of those nearby towns, right? Carsbury, can't use that. So they go to this like other local town, which is another ski

resort, to try and piece together what other locals might have seen. But that honestly ends up muddying the waters even more. Because no one reports seeing Jeanette and Gabriella after the storm. Instead, there are even more reported sightings from the day they disappeared. Two hunters tell police that around 3 p.m. that day, they saw three people. Two that they think were women,

standing near a dark colored car, close to where their car ends up being found. And then the manager of a hotel in town claims that he saw Jeanette and Gabriella three times that same day, between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. when they came into his hotel for a drink. And when they left, the manager noticed Jeanette speaking to a man outside in a car.

Now I don't have a full description of this guy, but Generale Carlo Felice Corsetti, that is a mouthful, but he was an original investigator on the case, told us that the manager described this guy as well-dressed in a way that stood out to him. So we've got that and then around 8 p.m., the manager was driving down the mountain to Sarnano when he passed three cars, one of them a dark color car like Jeanette's. Now, this doesn't totally add up because police double check with Nazareno and the owner of the boarding house.

And they both say that the women didn't leave the boarding house until around 9.45 a.m., which automatically doesn't make that the manager's timeline work if he's saying he starts seeing them at like 10. And because of that inconsistency police decide to toss his whole statement which sends them back to square one. But that sighting of her at 2 p.m. I think is really interesting because we don't like right we have that window. It's in the middle of that one to four. Right, so is this where they went in that time?

Did they not go up the mountain, but they went to this ski resort at that time? For what? I don't know. Now, at this point, Jeanette's husband, Steven, had to go back to London. So police traveled there to talk to him. In the time since he's been back, he's been looking into Jeanette's finances, and he tells police that she had a few bank accounts, some in England, some in Italy, but there hasn't been any activity in any of them since the day she disappeared. And none of the travelers checks that were issued to her in November had been cashed

either. But in this meeting, he also mentions that Jeanette did some business with a gallerist living in London who happens to share a last name with a Sicilian crime family. And this starts to make police rethink those telegrams, even if they still can't make a clear connection to the Christie heist. This is like, I don't know, another red flag.

They know mafia bosses apparently used stolen art to launder money. So did Jeanette somehow get mixed up with the wrong crowd? Which, don't get me wrong, I would love to go back to these telegrams. I think they're very interesting and I have so many questions. When it comes to Jeanette, everything else seems to be pointing to an accident. Well, it's almost like, it's almost like police are going around and around, like in circles, right? Like back and forth between theories because even in accidents, like there isn't one single

theory that totally fits. Accident, why stop the car? Why take shelter? And then if you're going to take shelter, why leave? Right. And then what are those like possible sightings of them with other people, other cars? If you go foul play and heist or whatever, like, then why do they find stuff at that house? I mean, what if they were like held there though? I mean, that makes just as much sense as like anything else to me, but by who? Right. That's what they can't get a firm grip on.

And listen, they keep getting tips about possible suspects and they run them down, but then it ends up being nothing. Like there was one woman who implicated her ex boyfriend said that he was a Brazilian gem dealer who bragged to her about killing two women, but they ended up arresting him on something else. They show his picture around to people. None of those people can confirm that they ever saw him with the women.

And they end up releasing him, because according to a Scottish newspaper, the ex-girlfriend eventually even admits that she made it all up to get back at him for their breakup. And amidst all these bogus allegations and false leads they're chasing down, probably the most promising one gets totally missed. On January 30th, 1981, so this is almost two months exactly after Jeanette and Gabriella

disappeared, someone calls the Daily Mail's Rome office late at night claiming to have information about the women. The tipster says that his name is Ian Sayre and that Jeanette got a telegram the day she disappeared. Another telegram. Well, no, no, no, this is the first telegram that she got. But he says that he knows about that telegram

and he says another telegram has been sent to Christie's. The important part of this is that none of this had been made public yet. Now, because it had not been made public, the editor didn't take this seriously. So we know this is important. But the editor who took the call didn't and was like, ''LOL, what are you talking about? Bye-bye.''

Yeah. Thank you, but no thank you. So this just stays in the back of this editor's mind. Doesn't even mention it to anyone. But as more and more time starts passing, as police start getting hard up for leads and they eventually start telling the public more and more about the case. He finds out about the telegram.

Yes, and that's when he's like, oh shoot. So the editor first tries calling this Ian Sayer fellow at the number that came through on his old school telex. The number was for an Austrian hotel. And magically, Ian is still there. He is there researching a book with two journalists. But get this, when the editor has a reporter reach out, this Ian guy tells the reporter, I have no idea what you're talking about. I didn't call you. I don't know anything about missing women in Italy or telegrams or Christie's auction house.

But whoever made that call had to have made it from the hotel that Ian was staying at. It's not like they could just like say that because the way that it came through on the Telex like I was talking about, it's basically like a fancy typewriter that automatically records the number that the message is coming from. Oh, so it's not like the guy even like left the number. It came out of the machine.

Yeah, you can't fake it back then. Right. So when they're kind of just like stumped, right? Like they're like, okay, I don't know what this means. That's when the editor eventually passes this on to police who go and question Ian and the two journalists that are with him trying to establish some kind of connection between him or Christie's or the women or freaking anything in this story.

And it turns out Ian grew a door-to-door parcel business into this huge logistics company. Christie's was one of their clients, but they had like tens of thousands of clients. So like that doesn't seem like a good enough connection. His wife was a model like Jeanette was at one point in her life, but he told police and us cause girl, like the team put in the work on this episode, they were making international phone calls. He said that he had never met Jeanette or Gabriella, who by the way, like, Jeanette

met Gabriella like long after her modeling days. And while we couldn't talk to the other two journalists that Ian was with because they've since died, their statements are in court documents and both of them say that they had never heard Ian even mention Jeanette or Gabriella or this case until after that call from the Daily Mail came in. Yeah, because he was like, dude, this is weird. So they've got nothing here. And it like, it kind of just goes away.

But they still will like follow up and question him for years afterwards. Like just seeing if this makes sense, like seeing if they miss something, seeing if stories change, but eventually they completely move on from this tip. Which I kind of agree with. I feel like we can cross him off the list, right? Ian didn't have anything to do with this. He doesn't, like, it seems super bizarre that he's even involved. But, I mean, someone staying at his hotel knew about those telegrams they called. Or somebody like passing through. I mean, they don't have to be staying at the hotel, but they had to like been around Yeah, even if they're just passing through how do you know?

Ian's name to I know this what I'm saying. It feels like such a spiderweb Like it's no wonder people get tangled up in this case Cuz you want to just say like oh someone maybe knew Ian and knew he was staying there and use his name No, like we know it had to have come from the hotel. So someone had to like know he was staying there and been there. So what is this person doing in Austria then two months after the women go missing? It's not even like this is like a bad hoax. This person had to have actually known legit information that wasn't public. Right. Because the telegrams weren't public yet. Okay. So did police look at other guests at the hotel?

Did the hotel keep records of who did what calls? Were any of the employees looked at maybe? Generali Corsetti told us that he straight up flew to Austria. Actually he flew to many countries as part of his investigation, but he actually couldn't say much more than that. So I don't know what that entailed. I have to imagine you look at everyone who was in that hotel or whatever. Especially if I'm thinking like employees who are at the hotel would have access to

the phones, would have like- Who knows there? Exactly, who knows who's staying there? From the court, I will say, I don't know what they did. From the court records that we have, the things I can actually see, it seems like police were focused on Ian. I don't know how much they checked out other possibilities, if at all, and I just know that Ian doesn't go anywhere. So, months pass, the snow melts, seasons come and go,

winter comes again, and there's still no Jeanette or no Gabriella. So on January 14th, 1982, Stephen decides to make a broadcast, like a public appeal for information. And Britt, I'm going to have you read the sections for me one sec. It has now been a year since the mysterious disappearance of my wife, Jeanette, and Gabriella Guérine in the mountains above Sernano

in the Marquee region. Gabriella's two small children, 12-year-old Ottavio and four-year-old Joya, lost their father almost four years ago in a car accident. Now they have been without their mother for over a year, and it is not fair to ask them to go on living in the uncertainty of what might have happened to her. My wife's family and I too have endured the anguish

and false hopes of a year marked by uncertainty. Despite repeated searches and police investigations, and despite the generous help of volunteers and local residents, this tragic disappearance remains a mystery. What could have happened? Surely someone must be able to release us from the torment and uncertainty of not knowing the truth.

Was this disappearance the result of a terrible crime or is there another explanation? So I'm really glad that he brought up Gabriella so much in this statement, because it really does seem like all the focus has been around Jeanette, especially when it comes to all the foul play stuff. Did police ever really dig into Gabriella's life?

So this is one of those other things where it's like, if they did, I don't know about it. Like it's not in any of the official documents or the reporting that we looked at. I think that police were much more heavily focused on Jeanette because like the world that she was in, right, the Rothschild. It felt much bigger.

Right, like the world she moved in just had more connections to what they think could be possible. I mean, Gabriella lives a relatively simple life in comparison. She just provides for her kids the best she could after her husband's death. She didn't have enemies. She wasn't moving in the same world. It seems like the consensus was that she was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. We even tried to reach out to her family to ask some of these questions, but we couldn't get in touch with anyone

who knew her or her kids well. So this statement goes out, because if anyone is still holding on to tips, police and Stephen wanna know. So Stephen offers up a reward of up to 100 million Lire, which is like, it would be today, like $235,000. And he's basically looking for any information that will help solve this case.

And he says there'll be even more if it leads to finding Jeanette and Gabriella alive. And this money, this is everything Stephen has to his name. And he is willing to give it all up to bring them home. And maybe that's what it took, because within two weeks on January 27th, he gets his wish, but not what he'd actually hoped for. Hunters hiking up the mountain find objects scattered across the snow in a ravine,

in this like densely wooded area about eight miles from where the cabin was. They're finding boots, purses, clothing, and then bones. When police get there and do a formal search, right away, they zero in on a couple of things. First, they find a fork that looks just like the ones at the house that they believe Jeanette and Gabriella sheltered in during the storm. The second thing was inside the purses,

which by the way nothing is missing from, they noticed two watches that they believe belonged to the women. According to a local Italian newspaper, Jeanette's watch is manually wound and Gabriella's is like a battery powered watch. Jeanette's stopped on December 12th, 1980 at 720 a.m. Gabriella's stopped a week later, December 19th at 730 a.m. So a week and 10 minutes apart exactly. It's kind of spooky, I know.

And when was the car and the cabin found? So December 18th is when they found those things. So basically, Jeanette's manually wound watch stopped two weeks after they went missing. Gabriella's battery one stopped three weeks after and just one day after the car was found. So I mean, if they would have waited just a little longer, they might have been found. Maybe if you want wanna stick to the theory that they took shelter from the storm in the cabin and then they ventured out to get help, which is clearly what this is meant to look like, but there are some real problems with that theory

now that they have located the women. First of all, if the bodies were there the whole time, why didn't anyone see them? The investigator that we talked to said that that area that they were found in, it was outside of police's official search radius. But a local veterinarian says that he had set a fox trap less than 15 feet away from where they found the remains, but he never noticed a smell there. I mean, he even remembers the exact spot when he goes back with police.

And sure enough, there is still a bit of traps sitting tied to a nearby shrub. Also, okay, fine, the guy didn't notice him. What, they both just laid down and died in the exact same spot? Like, I mean, animals had gotten to the remains, right? Like some of them had been scattered, like bones, but they're still pretty much intact in their

clothes with their bags. Nothing seems to be missing. Well, and I'm thinking also they were found in January and not that January. Time had passed. Like you said, seasons had changed. Again, I think it's weird that they weren't found, but I'm just like, I also, you think about two women, okay, we're gonna venture out to get help They just like what are the odds?

I'm saying that they like even like succumb to the elements at the exact same spot Together and lay down like what if I can see one of them was like, okay Well, I'm gonna keep going and I'm gonna get help because now the situation is even more dire, right? I'm like you need help. I need to be able to bring people back to you And like the even the watches, I mean, maybe it's because one was wound, one is battery, who knows? It's, I just like, I think about other cases we've done where people have, where they think that they die in the snow. They're not all found in the same spot. If bodies are found together, it usually means they died together.

And that seems really unlikely when exposure is the cause of death. Yes. And then more holes are poked in the exposure theory when police talk to a mountain rescue volunteer who helped with the original search. He remembers that when the searchers went out, the snow was so deep that they could only get through on skis. So again, the women are waiting until after the storm, theoretically, to venture out to get help because they don't think anyone's coming. He doesn't think the women could have even physically made it

to where they were found in that ravine on foot, especially because, by the way, didn't mention this, Gabriella was wearing a skirt. So I don't think she would have made it eight miles. And I go back to like the fact that they're found together, Jeanette is not wearing a skirt, like she was in pants or something. So theoretically in my mind,

she could have gotten farther if they did at least try, but I don't think they get the eight miles to begin with. And there was even still some uncertainty over whose remains were found. Like there's no DNA testing yet. So Jeanette ends up getting identified through dental records. There aren't any on file for Gabriella, so it seems like police are mostly just relying

on her clothes and stuff to identify her. And eventually forensic testing confirms that the remains belong to a woman, but that's like it. I mean, police seem pretty sure it's Gabriella. I mean, that's who went missing with Jeanette and they have Jeanette. But they also don't look at any other possibilities based on the court documents that we read. But that ends up being a huge open question to her family. Well, yeah. And again, I have questions about all of this. Honestly, especially these hunters

that found them, they just happened to stumble on these remains conveniently right after a reward was announced. Oh, which they fully expect to cash in on by the way. Just two days after finding the bodies, one of those hunters writes a demand letter to Stephen's lawyer for the reward money. Remember like all the money to Stephen's name. And Stephen's lawyer is like, no, you

legally have to tell police if you find human remains. Like that's a civic duty, not information. Yeah. And even though Stephen's still willing to pay them a portion of the reward, the hunter ends up suing him for the full amount and wins. He sues this grieving husband who put this money up to find his missing wife. And he, like I said, he ends up winning. He gets the full reward plus interest. But it doesn't seem like police ever look into any of the hunters as suspects. And maybe that's because at this point, they're not looking at this as a murder at all anymore, especially when the medical examiner's report comes in on April 3rd.

It shows there is no physical evidence of trauma, so like no blunt force injuries, no stab wounds, bullets, and which again, we're just probably dealing with bones, but you can see that on the skeleton. And so going up with what he has, the medical examiner thinks that the cause of death is probably just exposure. And based on what, quote unquote, he says this logic, he believes that the women likely died sometime right after they went missing. But there's no way, he says, to tell how long the remains had been in the ravine where they were found. So the ME rules their deaths as accidental deaths

from exposure to snow. Stephen gets permission to fly Jeanette's remains home to London where they're cremated. Gabriella is buried in her hometown and a prosecutor moves to close the case. Close the case with so many open questions yet? Mm-hmm. I'm with you. Stephen is with you.

According to Town and Country Magazine, in 1982, he reaches out to two journalists at the Sunday Times who have been reporting on the case. And he, like, he can't let it go. So he asks them to do their own investigation. And after months of work, the journalists come up with a brand new theory that they publish in this 20 page feature on November 7th, 1982.

You ready? Sure. So they think that Jeanette set up a meeting in the mountains to sell an antique, but who she thought was a buyer was actually part of a Sardinian abduction ring. And they abducted Jeanette and Gabriella. And when the abductors thought that the women knew enough to identify them, they killed them. Right? Like we know there's no ransom note.

Right. But the journalists allege that if a note went to a family like the Rothschild, the journalists say that they would keep that kind of thing quiet. Why? Partially for safety. Like, they have money to hire people outside of law enforcement to advise them on things like this, right? Like, so why risk getting police involved if kidnappers are threatening who they think is your family member, who was your family member? Like, kind of keep it in the family. Yeah. And plus, like, I remember this from the Getty kidnapping. The Getties didn't want to publicize or pay the ransom at all

because they thought that that would lead to more family members getting kidnapped. Yeah. Like, I would think that, like, at least they would tell Steven, but again, maybe Steven would tell police, because it kind of seems wild to me to, like, protect your whole family and just, like, leave her family wandering forever, but this is the theory. And whether that theory is true or not, it gets enough attention that investigators actually do take a deep dive into the evidence and re-interview witnesses. So like closed no more. This time around, they notice another problem

with the initial like theory or ruling or decision. And it comes to something so basic, it turns out the women probably couldn't have seen the house from the road where their car stopped. I had this question to begin with because they pull off on the side of the road because it's so bad. It's so bad and they don't want to stay in their running car. I've driven in really, really bad snow and visibility is like zero. It's so bad they don't want to drive 12 minutes back to the town. Right. They get out of the car because why?

In theory, they're going to seek shelter in this house. But if it's so bad that they can't drive the 12 minutes back, how can they see the house? They can't. So they're just getting out of their car into the white void of a snowstorm? So when you put it that way, like, yes, they would have left their perfectly fine running car to just walk into the woods in a snowstorm. Which is? Bananas.

Bunker. All that to say, when they're found and their stuff is found, there is a fork from the house. From the house. So they were there. And there are hairs in the house. They make it seem like they were there, right? So How did they get there if they went there or who took them there? Because you would have had to know that this house was there to get from the car and house in a snowstorm It makes me wonder like is the house not a shelter place, but like a meeting place. Mmm So it was like a pointed place that they were going to.

Or someone took them, right? Like someone took them there. Like a rendezvous point. Yeah, I don't know, I don't know. So listen, okay, so they're looking into this now because they've realized they had this big flaw in their initial theory. Yeah.

And when they did, like when you actually go down this road, the police end up learning that there may have been a connection between Jeanette and a very dangerous man who, they discover, also has ties to the Christie's heist. Christie's is back. Christie's is back. So as they're interviewing and then re-interviewing people for this new investigation, police speak to one of Jeanette's friends

who they show photos of people that they think she might have known. And the friend recognizes one of them, this guy named Sergio Vacari. He is an Italian antiques dealer and reported drug dealer who'd lived in London until he was stabbed to death in his apartment on September 15th, 1982,

which is after the women have like disappeared, whatever. So police in London were still investigating Sergio's murder when they searched his safe deposit box and found photos of stolen antiques, some of which by the way, were taken during Christy's heist in 80. They shared that with the Italian police looking into the heist, which is how Sergio got on their radar. So thank God they had reopened this investigation, because I almost wonder if it had been closed

and nobody was thinking about it. Would this have ever been brought up, tied back together? So they keep going down this road. I mean, this finally feels like it has some real weight to it and like, maybe can explain the things we couldn't before. And it keeps getting more solid. Through a man who knew Sergio, they find out that there was a name written in Sergio's diary.

Jeanette. No last name, though. And that guy remembers that next to her name, he saw a phone number. Problem is, police can't track down Sergio's diary, so they can't track down the number or tie it to Jeanette in any way. But even without the diary, the more police look into Sergio, the more they think they may finally be on the right track. Because Sergio may have been involved in another mysterious death of an Italian banker.

So I know I'm getting on a little bit of a tangent, but you've got to understand who this guy is in the world that we're operating in. So a British journalist tells police that a source, he can't say who, but it's someone in the antique dealing world who has come up in the investigation before. This source told him that Sergio had something to do with the death of man named Roberto Calvi. Roberto was the chairman of a Vatican-backed bank that collapsed in June 1982 after an investigation showed that the bank had committed massive financial fraud

involving like secret offshore accounts, unauthorized loans, and I mean, they had ties to mafia groups. After all of that, this Roberto guy fled to London, and then he's found hanging under a bridge 12 days later. His death gets ruled a suicide, like all done. Now, this journalist's source says that he knows Sergio is connected to Roberto's death,

because once, when he was in Sergio's car, he had opened Sergio's bag. This is the point where he's alone in the car with the bag. And he says, a few photos fall out. One of them was Roberto. And then there was another photo of Jeanette. And the journalist tells police that the source was still in the car

with the pictures when Sergio came back. And Sergio actually told him that he was involved in Roberto's death. What did he say about the picture of Jeanette? According to the source, nothing. Which makes this a great lead that they can't do anything. Right, that's kind of a dead end. Even though they are now more convinced that the women met with foul play,

they still can't say when or how. Even the why still feels fuzzy, and they definitely can't say who. So without any suspects to charge, even though they feel like something different happened, the case still gets closed out in October of 1989. Okay, do police ever retest the physical evidence from the house or the remains or anything? Not that I can tell. I mean, certainly not before 89, like there wasn't a whole lot new they could do.

I know that according to an Italian daily newspaper, so in 2005, a biology professor actually reached out to Gabriella's family asking to analyze her remains. I think they were hoping once and for all to confirm whether or not the remains belonged to Gabriella. Remember, there's kind of like a question about that. So her family lets this guy exhume the remains. They also give him a DNA sample. But this is so weird.

When he runs the tests, it's only Gabriella's DNA that is present. No one else's. Which like feels like you're like, yeah, so what, no big deal. You would kind of expect something from Jeanette, right? Because like back in the day, like think about it.

Right, like this is happening in 80s, so they're kind of just like pushing everything together. Not even pushing everything, like even with how they were found, like animals could have moved stuff or whatever. Back in the day, like what they had wasn't advanced enough, like their type of tech or whatever to like separate the remains when they were processed, right? You have like certain bones and you can probably guess based on height or whatever. But I think everyone kind of expected some mixing.

And like we said, like, Jeanette's remains end up being cremated and Stephen refused to provide any samples, though, like, I don't even know what samples he would have. So answers about what could have been hers or not hers, like, that's long gone. It's just like a weird thing. Again, I don't know that it means anything. It's just like strange. And if you look into this case,, you're gonna see it pop up. And for people who want to get really conspiratorial, I think it lends to that. Like, was Jeanette actually dead?

Again, they ID'd her though through dental records. I don't know. I don't know. But it's like things I've seen people spiral on. So this testing gets done, but it doesn't bring police any new leads. And the case again goes cold. And interest wanes until 2013. That's when a photographer named Marco Eccetti makes some wild claims,

which brings the Vatican back to this case and an old crime junkie episode. So we did a fan club episode about the 1983 disappearance of Emanuella Orlandi. She was the 15 year old girl who went to a Vatican City school. I'll link to it in the show notes if you guys need a reminder. But Marco is the guy who claimed responsibility for her kidnapping while he was

already in prison for running over a 12 year old boy. So when police had questioned him about Emanuella, Marco says that in the 80s, he was involved with this secret group that acted on behalf of religious figures who opposed mainstream Vatican politics. And he says, like back to this case, that they wanted to recruit Jeanette for some kind of blackmail plan. Like they wanted her to falsely accuse the president of the Vatican Bank, and this is the bank that Roberto Calvi chaired. They wanted her to accuse him of sexual assault, which so he throws that out there.

And then he makes a 180 degree turn and says that they never actually got in contact with Jeanette and that her death doesn't have anything to do with him. So why bring her up at all? But okay, is there any connection between Jeanette and Emanuella? Or does this guy just confess to everything for fun? Yeah, I don't- Like if I remember correctly, like he, they never actually found a connection. No, I don't think there's any connection

Besides like him right like it is just like bringing it up in both his versions like Jeanette and Emanuella were like Tangential pieces in his group's Vatican blackmail plot and like when I tried to like see if there's any like ties like the only thing I could find was that Steven hired the Same lawyer as Emanuela's family, but that's about it. And Emanuela's family has been clear that they think Marco made up the allegations involving their daughter for attention. So if that's true, it's very possible he's doing it again. But I mean, it's a click baity story. So it's no wonder that the media just kind of runs with it when it happens Which like you know, it's like double-edged sword, right? Like it's it's media attention, but it's like the wrong

Yeah, the wrong direction, but it does bring attention back to the case and Maybe because of that maybe because of something else that's happening that we don't know I do know that just in November of 2024, Jeanette and Gabriella's case got reopened as a double murder investigation. And the one thing they said is they did this based on inconsistencies that they found in witness statements, which like- Which witnesses. When? Yeah.

Would love to know. But like, we're seven, eight months now into the reinvestigation and they haven't shared much more than that. Like, I spiral and I'm like, okay, are we talking witnesses that get tied up in this art, whatever? Are we talking about like... The people in the town? Like, there's so many options for...

I know. ...witnesses. I know. And if what we need is stuff from witnesses, like, time's running out to get to the bottom of this mystery. Steven is still alive, as is Gabriella's daughter, Gioia, but so many people, some witnesses included,

maybe even suspects, are being lost. Two families have been waiting for answers for over 40 years now. According to what Gioia told an Italian news outlet last year, hope is a hard thing to have anymore. She's been let down too many times. But she also said that knowing the truth, whatever that truth is, might finally lift the burden that she's carried for over 40 years. So if anyone listening has information about Jeanette and Gabriella's case,

it is not too late to come forward. You can contact the local prosecutor's office in Italy. We're going to list their contact information in the show notes. You can find all the source material for this episode on our website, crimejunkiepodcast.com. You can also follow us on Instagram at crimejunkiepodcast. We'll be back next week with a brand new episode, but we've got something extra for you. Please stick around for some good news. If you're new here, hi, welcome. We have this segment we do called The Good, and it actually started with a Slack channel

that we have at the AudioChuck office. We have so many listeners and fans who write into us, who send us letters, who DM us, who contact us in some way, telling us about the way crime junkie, the life rules, the shows, the information. Has done something good in their lives. Yeah, and it can be, you know,

related to cases sometimes, but a lot of times it's been like really unexpected ways in which the show is like out there making the world a better place. And so we started a little segment where once a month we share with you guys some of the stuff that we're all sharing internally on a daily basis. So this is what we call the good. Okay, Ashley, are you ready? I know this is like your favorite part of recording. Hello, crime junkies. 23-year-old female crime junkie based in New York City here. My mom and sister have been huge crime junkies

slash fan club members for years now. I was always resistant thinking I'd find the episodes too scary until that one April Fool's episode that my mom sent me. as I fell a long time Swiftie, I was hooked. If you know, you know. Fast forward to last Thursday, I had met a friend for a wellness class followed by an impromptu dinner. When we finished up, it was around 10pm, so I decided to walk home up 5th Avenue rather than take the subway.

Keep in mind, I had showered after our class and was walking 16 blocks with semi-wet hair in February. Maybe it wasn't the best idea. It was freezing. But I was almost home and turned down a side street to walk my final block home. That is, until I saw this woman who looked my same age. She was sitting on the concrete with her knees bent, propping up her crossed arms, where she buried her head so I couldn't see her face with throw-up all over her and all around

her. It was an unusual amount of throw up even for a drunk person, and she was there on the side of the street all alone in the freezing cold, having clearly been there for some time. Now, I've lived in New York City for years and see weird stuff all the time, but I just had this strong feeling that this woman needs my help, and if I leave her, who knows what will happen to her. While she was conscious and coherent to a point where she would likely be fine in the morning, I was more concerned about the fact that her vulnerable state had made her a clear

target for other external dangers, especially being a young woman. Having listened to so many crime junkie stories, I know how important it is to not ignore one's intuition, whether we are in danger or someone else is. And I was thinking of the yogurt shop murderer who waited for all the other strangers to leave before committing their gruesome murder. I had walked up just as she was telling another man who stopped by asking if she was okay, never lifting her head, I'm fine, go away. In a deep kind of voice, I would also try to use to appear tough when approached by a man I didn't know. I asked her to. Same response. I'm fine. Go away. As the other

man left, I just had this feeling that I can't leave this woman. After some gentle prodding, she agreed to let me call someone for her and sit with her until her emergency contact arrived. I just knew that the only reason she let me assist her was because I was a peer, and more importantly, not a man, which would later be confirmed as she told me, sorry, men scare me. This was one of the few things she would say to me during our whole 45 minutes together. After I called her emergency contact, I immediately FaceTimed my friend John, another crime junkie, to tell him where I was and what was going on. He stayed on the phone

with us the whole time. I also shared my location and sent messages about what I was doing with my mom, boyfriend, and two roommates. In an effort to keep another safe, I also had to watch my own back. Again, the scene I walked up to was attention-grabbingly grim. And as you can imagine, now two young women on the side of the road in the night-fallen city, we solicited a lot of unwanted attention. As we sat there, everyone who walked by had something to say. And most of my job, sitting there with her, was fending off random people and getting them to leave her alone. I was shocked by the men who came up to hit on her while she was clearly so unwell. Really bro? Seeing how insistent some of these men were being,

I couldn't help but wonder what would have happened to her if I hadn't been there. Anyway, as we sat together with John on FaceTime, we said very little, but I knew she appreciated me being there, as she would later say, Please stay. I would reply, You're going to be okay. I'm going to stay. After her emergency contact came to take her home, I finished my walk home down the block to my apartment. I think I'm still unpacking everything that happened that night, but I wanted to say a huge thank you to Ashley and Britt and the Crime Junkie staff for all that you do. You seriously changed my life, making me so much more aware of the ways to protect myself and those around me and the necessity of this.

Just getting this one woman home safe has already made the world a so much better place. It is like it's like the little stuff of like that like the stories where you can easily say like well nothing happened and like that's the point. Exactly the best stories are the ones that nothing happens. Yeah and if like like in a world where like we're losing community like right we're all so isolated everything's online community's so hard to come by. To be able to help a stranger. To reach through that separation, that divide. The world's really dark and it's like, the good segment gives me hope again.

Crime Junkie is an AudioChuck production. So, what do you think, Chuck? Do you approve? Oh!