Crime Junkie - SERIAL KILLER: The Alphabet Murders Part 2

Episode Date: February 26, 2024

Dozens of commuters see a young girl fleeing a car on the side of the expressway in Rochester, NY, but no one pulls over to help. The community is devastated when her body is discovered just days later, but it’s assumed to be a tragic but isolated incident. But when more young girls go missing…only to have their bodies discovered within days in a similar manner…the community must ask: is a serial killer stalking the streets of Rochester? And is he choosing his victims based on a seemingly random characteristic?If you have any information relating to any of these cases, please contact the New York State Police Department at [phone], or email them at [e-mail] out Alphabet Killer: The True Story of the Double Initial Murders by Cheri Farnsworth.Check out Nightmare in Rochester: The Double Initial Murders by Michael Benson. And be sure to listen to CONSPIRACY: North Fox Island & The Oakland County Child Killer Part 1 and Part 2  if you haven't already!For more information about or to donate to Season of Justice, please visit www.seasonofjustice.org.  Source materials for this episode cannot be listed here due to character limitations. For a full list of sources, please visit: https://crimejunkiepodcast.com/serial-killer-alphabet-murders-part-2/ You can learn more about The Good segment and even submit a story of your own by visiting The Good page on our website!Did you know you can listen to this episode ad-free? Join the Fan Club! Visit https://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 | /audiochuckllc Crime Junkie is hosted by Ashley Flowers and Brit Prawat. Instagram: @ashleyflowers | @britprawatTwitter: @Ash_Flowers | @britprawatTikTok: @ashleyflowerscrimejunkieFacebook: /AshleyFlowers.AF Text Ashley at [phone] to talk all things true crime, get behind the scenes updates, random photos of Chuck, and more! 

Hi, crime junkies. I'm your host Ashley Flowers. And I'm Britt. And this is part two of this week's case covering the murders of Carmen Cologne, Wanda Walkowitz, and Michelle Maienza, the three girls from Rochester, New York who have been bound together in history because of their location and the similarities in their attacks, and their double initials, sparking a debate about exactly how many monsters were on the loose killing children in the 1970s. Were there separate killers, or was there just one?

We're picking up right where we left off in part one. So let's dive in. වවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවවව� The young witness who'd come forward after Michelle's murder said that she was on a street corner near a shopping plaza when a light-colored car driven by a scary man careened by, screeching as it jumped onto the sidewalk where she was standing. She said it almost ran her over and then almost caused an accident with other cars that had to slam on their brakes. And through the window, she could see her friend Michelle's crying, scared face as the car sped away. After investigators speak with the little girl and her mother on November 30th, other witnesses actually corroborate this story, including the drivers of the other cars who had to slam on their brakes.

The problem is, no one got a great look at the actual driver, the man. It all just happened so fast. Wait, you said November 30th? Mm-hmm. That's what, like four days? Four days after the incident, yeah,, the story's making it to police. So why did it take four days for the story to get called in? It's a million dollar question. Because again, if you remember from the last episode, she

went and told her mom about it like right that afternoon as soon as she got home. When it happened. Yeah, she was so scared. She was like hiding in her mom's closet. I think the mom might have just kind of wrote it off. I don't know, but I just know they don't come forward then. And it's only like a few days later when the girl brings it up to her again. And now at that point she has the full context of Michelle's disappearance. And that's when she's like, oh my God, we have to go to the police. Something isn't sitting right with me here.

This doesn't make sense, I guess. Yeah, my problem with it is like, if it would have just been like something she saw, I can see like a busy parent like writing it off, you know what I mean? Like, okay, whatever. But she recognized Michelle. I know.

And just to be like super clear, like there's no suggestion of wrongdoing or involvement by the mom, like whatsoever. This is honestly just one of those cases, this whole case where I swear everything that can go wrong does. And in those moments when people have the opportunity to do something to change the course of things, they just don't. But it isn't long before another witness comes forward with an equally compelling story, one that might finally put a face to the horrors that have been plaguing the streets of Rochester. According to the book Nightmare in

Rochester, this guy says that around dusk, the day that Michelle disappeared, he had come across a light-colored car stopped on the side of the road. Now, he didn't know it at the time, obviously, but it was near where Michelle's body would eventually be found. Now, he didn't know it at the time, obviously, but it was near where Michelle's body would eventually be found. Now, assuming this driver was having car trouble, this Good Samaritan like pulls off to offer assistance, just trying to be helpful. But instead of being grateful, the driver of this other car got super confrontational with him when he approached the car. He like put up his fists and told him to buzz off, and he also tried to block him from seeing the little girl that he was with, with his body, kind of hiding her

behind himself. And it was a little girl who matched Michelle's description to a tee. But not knowing that a little girl was even missing yet, this Good Samaritan did what he was told. He buzzed off. But even then, the whole thing bothered him, especially now that he knows what he probably actually saw. The witness agrees to sit down with a sketch artist and they spend more than a day working toward a composite he's comfortable with, a composite that if you're listening in the app, you can see right now.

Michael Benson describes the suspect in his book as quote, six feet or taller, maybe 170 pounds, dark curly hair, medium complexion, clear skin, hair down on his forehead, dirty, disheveled, unshaven, with long fingernails. Long fingernails, like ones that left scratch marks all over Carmen's body? Exactly like that.

And investigators are thinking the same way. When the sketch is published on December 3rd, it sparks another witness to come forward, one who tells investigators about a bizarre encounter he had with a guy bearing a striking resemblance to the man in the sketch. This witness is a security guard for Gannett Rochester newspapers. His name is Gilbert, and at 7 p.m. on December 1st, this guy had come up to his guard booth asking if there were any updates in the Michelle Mayenza case. The guy seemed nervous. He even stuttered when he said Michelle's name, and Gilbert's like, okay, like, hang on just a

second. I'm going to check with the paper, see if I can's name. And Gilbert's like, okay, like, hang on just a second. I'm gonna check with the paper, see if I can find anything. But instead of waiting, the other guy started to walk off. And Gilbert's like, hey dude, like, stop. And I'm not sure if he was getting weird vibes by this point and just didn't want him to go away, or if he was like, what the heck, hold on, I'm looking. But this guy starts booking it.

He takes off. And Gilbert tries to chase him, but the heck, hold on, I'm looking. But this guy starts booking it. He takes off and Gilbert tries to chase him, but the other guy's faster. And apparently he ran to a parked car nearby. And before Gilbert knew it, a light brown Ford Pinto was peeling away. Now he didn't see the guy get into this car, but I mean, he says there's no one else around. So he's sure that the car and the guy are like the same thing.

Like that's who it was driving off. And this guy looked like the suspect sketch. Oh, almost exactly. Gilbert said that he had a little more facial hair than the guy in the sketch. And he doesn't remember him being quite as tall as the other witness said he was. But actually both of these things can be explained away

because facial hair grows as time goes on. And Gilbert, his guard booth is actually elevated, so it might make the other guy seem shorter. You know what I mean? Okay. Yeah, he's like looking down on him, so he might not look the full six feet plus or whatever. Yeah. Now, just a day after Gilbert gives his account, another witness comes forward. This time, a woman who thinks that she saw Michelle with her killer at a fast food restaurant the day that she disappeared. Oh, the cheeseburger. This woman says that she had pulled into a restaurant called Carolls and parked

next to a beige car with a little girl who looked just like Michelle sitting inside. But again, at this point, no one knows Michelle was in danger or missing, so she thinks nothing of it. When she got out of her own car to go into the place to put in her order, she walked past this dirty looking guy coming out with a bag of food and a drink, and he got into the beige car

and handed both things to the little girl and then drove away. Now this woman also sits down with a sketch artist in the coming days and the end result is much more detailed than that first one. For one, it's in color. For another, it's like a full body sketch. They guessed they like superimposed this face

from the sketch onto the body of an actual officer with what she said was a similar build, wearing the clothes that other people had said he was in. If you're listening in the app, you can see that on your app right now, but this is also in the source material or on the blog post for these episodes. Now, if the other sketch is on the generic side, this one is downright eerie in terms of how life-like it is. And Gerald Goldberg reports in the Democrat Chronicle that when investigators talk to the restaurant staff, one of the employees even remembers serving this guy. And she especially remembers his long, grimy fingernails.

So, can we take a second and can you just give me the timeline here? Yeah, so Michelle leaves school between 3 and 3.30. This is November 26th. And I don't have an exact time for this next part, but soon after that 3 or 3.30, that's when her friend, that little girl, sees that car speeding away with Michelle inside crying. So call that like 3.30-ish a little bit after. It was 430 that Michelle and her abductor are spotted at Carroll's, and then by 530,

that's when they're pulled over to the side of the road in Wallworth, which is near Macedon where her body ends up being found. And Wallworth is where the Good Samaritan had his encounter when he pulled over. Okay, is it just a little bit strange that she's crying in the car at 330 Walworth is where the Good Samaritan had his encounter when he pulled over. Okay. Is it just a little bit strange that she's crying in the car at 330 and then is fine at the restaurant? Or is that just me?

Like sorting through this timeline in my mind? I agree because like, right? Like she's obviously terrified, but again, this might be his ruse, right? He learned that he had to like, if you calm down, I'll get you a cheeseburger. Yeah. Like, I'll take you. See, I'm not a bad guy. I'm gonna... I'll take you to get ice cream. I'll take you to... He figured it out. Like, honestly, if this is the same guy, he figured it out. Now, in all of this, there is one other sighting, and I was gonna leave it out because it kind of

confuses things for me, but I don't know. We're already eyeballs deep in like a part two of this, so I'm just gonna give you all the rabbit holes. So in Sherry Farnsworth's book, is kind of confuses things for me, but I don't know, we're already eyeballs deep in like a part two of this, so I'm just gonna give you all the rabbit holes. So in Sherry Farnsworth's book, she says that Michelle's path home from school would have taken her past where her uncle worked at this gas station. And it says that he had a clear view of the road

or the sidewalk or wherever where he would have seen Michelle's mom and his niece go to and from school every day. Now where it gets muddy is I don't get the impression from the book that Sherry did an interview with this uncle. It seems like she's taking accounts from reports and newspaper articles, basically what we're doing here, which I think leaves room for people to kind of insert themselves a little more. You know what I mean?

So just keep that in mind. But she says that he may have seen Michelle's mom pass by without Michelle, so you'd think he'd be expecting to see Michelle walk past him at some point. I'm just going to read a quote directly from the book. When questioned the evening his niece disappeared, Mayenza said he didn't see the girl pass, according to a Times Union article of November 27, 1973. The very first article released regarding Michelle's disappearance. But in a March 1, 2009 Democrat and Chronicle article called Double Initial Murders Remain

Mystery after 35 years, Stephen Mayenza, Michelle's older brother, told staff writer Gary Craig that their uncle Philip did in fact see and speak to Michelle at the Plaza that afternoon and even offered her a ride home, but Michelle refused the offer. So I don't know if that matters or not. It doesn't really change anything to me. It just gives a little more context because it says that the reason she was even over by the plaza where he says he sees her was because she's looking for her mom's purse that her mom had lost a couple of days before. The thing is, I don't know how anyone actually knows that because to me, that's all speculation because like nobody talked to Michelle after she went

missing. You know what I mean? I don't know if that's just the theory they've come up with to explain why she would have been over at the plaza because that's where her friend sees her. But the Plaza isn't on her walk home. So like, there had to have been a reason she was over there. Well, and even if her uncle did or didn't see her, how close is he to the school? Is it like right there? Is it walks away closer to the house? I guess it doesn't really matter, like you said, either way. Yeah. I actually found a senior project from a college student named Sarah Rose George

who did an internship with the police department, like the Rochester police department. Oh, you went deep on this. I know, I got lost a little, but she did her whole senior project on this case, which like, that's the dream, girl same. She like did her internship, they like showed her the case file. But in her report, she says that Michelle's mom was the one who went looking for her purse. And that's why she didn't stick around and wait for Michelle. She was like, I gotta go find this.

So to me, it's a little confusing. I don't know what all the purse stuff is about. Again, I think it's putting her at the plaza, but if her mom was the one going to the—I don't know, it's weird. I can't quite piece it all together. But it's not like anyone sees her get taken from there. She's already in the car by that time. Yeah, I mean, so in theory, she could have been taken somewhere else.

But I think the general consensus is that she was kidnapped at the plaza because all of the commotion that the car caused. Like, he pulled her in. That's why she's crying. He's like trying to like, careen the car away. So again, those are the rabbit holes I go down. You guys like, welcome to my head. Now within just a few days,

as they're still like in a thick of piecing together Michelle's last movements and gathering witness statements, they hear from that good Samaritan again, the guy that pulled over on the side of the road and had that interaction with the man. Which by the way, if there was ever a question about whether or not to give credibility

to this man's statement, all that questioning stops when they find Michelle's coat near the area of this interaction. So like whatever he saw was legit and it was Michelle. So anyways, this dude calls back and he's like, you're never going to believe this. I saw him again. And this time I wrote down his license plate. So the police tracked down this guy,

20s unemployed divorced, Sherry Farnsworth book says that he had a record, but nothing like sex crimes. So they go to question him. Cause really, I mean, this lead comes from one of their few witnesses who not only saw him, but had an actual encounter with the man. So this dude's name has never been released

as far as I can tell. And he swears up and down, he had nothing to do with any of these girls, any of these killings. And specifically for Michelle's, he offers an alibi. He says that he was home making calls looking for work, which was substantiated by his phone records. Apparently they have records of long distance calls

at 218 and 315. Though, take this for what you will, he had relatives that he lived with. They corroborated his story of being home and making calls, but also like who's to say they weren't making those calls? You know what I mean? Mm-hmm. Yeah, a little side eye at the salivary.

Well, ultimately, he agrees to and passes a polygraph, and that is enough, again, for police to write him off and keep searching for the person who, I guess, won't pass a polygraph? I don't know if that's what they're looking for, but he's done. A number of other suspects are brought in for questioning, and a few of them bear more than just a passing resemblance to the composite sketch. But as hopeful as investigators are that they've found their guy with each new lead, each suspect is ruled out one by one, whether it's because they have an alibi, or they passed the test,

or both. But then, this one suspect pops up on their radar that they can't give a polygraph to, because by the time they hear about him, he's already dead. This guy is a 25-year-old firefighter named Dennis Termini. Dennis was known to target teen girls and adult women, so at first glance, I don't think anyone would have looked twice for these cases that we're talking about. But the timing was interesting. All of his attacks happened between 1971 and 1974. In fact, they ended on New Year's Day, 1974, because Dennis actually ended up dying by suicide as he was about to be caught by police.

But the investigation into him continued even after his death, and it's then that the investigators on the girls' cases get flagged. Because even though the victim profile doesn't seem to totally line up, there are these hints of a possible overlap. For one, his car is similar to the one described by one of the witnesses, like apparently right down to a quote, distinctive dent in it. And his role as a firefighter could be the answer to one of the big question investigators keep getting stumped on, like how does this guy get these girls into his car in broad daylight without anyone seeing anything? I mean, the first possibility is that they all know the guy,

but I mean, they've looked, there are no other overlaps in their lives. So that seems like a slim possibility. So maybe this person who gets them in their car was someone who would make them feel safe. Maybe this person had some kind of uniform, which Dennis was known to keep in his vehicle. But beyond all of that, it turns out that Dennis was known to keep in his vehicle. But beyond all of that,

it turns out that Dennis was a cat owner and the cat's hairs are found in his car. White cat's hairs by chance? You better believe it. And investigators also find human hair in his car that is determined to be consistent with Michelle's. Determined to be consistent? That's kind of just like an eyeballing it type of thing, right?

Right, like just consistent with looking at it, again, under a microscope, whatever they were doing in the 70s, it's not anything you could like hold up in court now. Now, for the life of me, I could not find a picture of this guy despite anything. And what got edited into the script, it says, I did find a yearbook photo.

I just wanna give a little bit of credit to our fact checking team. A lot of people don't know the time and attention that goes into every episode and making sure every detail can be corroborated. And sweet, sweet Camille, I just wanna give her a little bit of credit. She went down a rabbit hole and backtracked his birthday to figure out how old he was

and then went to like, found out where he would have lived in high school, went and got that like yearbook. Then she found this like really fuzzy picture that she thinks is him. And so then she goes to a Facebook page for that graduating class. Long story short. I'm already tired. I know. Long story short, we actually did find a picture of who we believe to be the Dennis Termini. I mean,

again, it says his name right underneath it. But that's all we got. Yeah. And again, I have it. He's like 25 at the time that all this is going on 25 ish. The pictures when he's 17, he matches the general description of the guy that they're looking for. I mean, again, in a class picture, you got a suit on, your hair is like combed over. Again, you guys listening in the app can see the picture right now. But if you imagine like someone in, I don't know, his life obviously didn't turn out well. This dude is like attacking women. If you make him disheveled, if you give him long fingernails, like, yeah, I can see it.

And for a number of years, the general consensus among investigators is that Dennis is probably their guy. For Wanda and Michelle, at least. But they're still separating out Carmen. I think so, although I'm not sure how strong the consensus on that part really is. I mean, it almost seems like it depends on what source you read. Like Peter Pritchard quotes one of the investigators in the Democrat and Chronicle in September of 74 saying, I don't feel there's a connection.

Because of the physical evidence, the brutality, the skull fracture, the body badly abused, there was more force used where apparently the other two were conned, given something to eat. But again, to me, that's like a huge assumption for all the reasons that we've already talked about. And it's something that the press isn't necessarily buying either. I mean, you pointed it out earlier, but Carmen was the only one who escaped as far as we know. So if this guy lost his temper, that could explain the extent of her injuries. Same with the strangulation being manual from the front, in my opinion. And like we've said, there's no doubt this guy would want to avoid a repeat of that,

which again explains why the other girls were fed. So I mean, everything he lists as a reason it's not connected is also kind of a reason that they are. Exactly. But I think really, again, they're not saying this in the paper, but looking back on the case, and again, people like kind of say stuff later on, I think they're really separating out her case because they're really still looking at Miguel for Carmen's case. And I can't tell exactly when in the timeline this other guy pops up on their radar, but there was another suspect momentarily in Carmen's case as well. I think pretty early on,

it was this guy named James Barber. He had a criminal past specifically related to sexually abusing young girls. And he looked extra suspicious because apparently right after Carmen's murder, we're talking within a few days, just like Miguel, he high-tailed it out of town, basically quitting his job without notice, leaving all of his possessions behind in his apartment. And when they went to look at his alibi,

his time card said that he was at work when she disappeared. But it was also like penciled in, not punched in like he normally would most days. So super sus. But they said he was long gone by the time that the other two girls were killed. So in their minds, even the two people that were looking good for Carmen's case, they think didn't have the motive or the opportunity to kill Wanda or Michelle. So they keep getting separated out, at least by officials, but not by the public. That same September 1974 reporting from the Democrat and Chronicle presents an angle that

will come to almost define the case in the public narrative. And that's the fact that all three girls have the same letter for their first and last names, Carmen Cologne, Wanda Walcoitz, Michelle Maenza. And this is where the killings start being referred to as either the double initial murders, and then later the alphabet murders. And if you take it a step further, Wanda was found in Webster. Michelle was found in Macedon.

Carmen is again the outlier. She was found in Raiga, but I'm convinced nothing about Carmen's abduction was planned for this guy. Riga is actually close to other towns, Chile and Churchville. And actually, the Churchville exit was literally the next exit on the expressway where all of those motorists saw Carmen running. Her body is found in a remote spot very close to the border south of the village of Churchville. So what if he's taking her there, either sea place, really? She manages to get out of the car, a zillion people see them, he doesn't have time to take her where he wanted, he doesn't know- He scraps his plans.

Yeah, he doesn't know that none of these people are calling for help, so he just bails as fast as he can, ditches her and Riga just south of the expressway instead of Churchvillard Chilei, which are just north of the expressway. I mean, that's my theory, but the official theory for those who, again, are buying this whole connection is that maybe he didn't even realize that he had crossed into Riga. This is all interesting, but it seems odd to me because for this guy to be targeting girls by their initials, he would have to have known them or find them, find out their names and plan all this even more extensively than we're suggesting.

But to me at least, all three girls seem kind of like victims of opportunity. They do, but I mean just statistically, I can't buy it. I'm sorry and I'm probably selling bananas, but there's no way that this is just like, again I don't, the coincidence, it's not, it's not. But where would this guy see their names or hear their full names? I don't, I don't know. Like, did they go to the same school, live on the same block? Do the same activities, anything?

Not that anyone has ever found. Again, I don't know how deep they dug into this. Like, I mean, they had a task force at some point. As far as I can tell, no other connection has ever been made. But that doesn't mean there wasn't a suspect that tied them together somehow. I know investigators put a list of school employees together to see if there were any that had ties to all three.

I know they did like a list of school employees together to see if there were any that had ties to all three. I know they did like a list of social workers because all three girls had some contact with social workers. None of that matched. Again, I can't find the connection either. But this is a part that's really debated online. And let's go down a rabbit hole again. Like this is a disclaimer. I'm, I'm now going into online forum territory here, but I like to see what others are saying about cases and there was this like back and forth exchange between two users talking about the statistical possibility of this. And I feel like they put all my gut feelings into words and I want to actually have you read this one, Brett.

It's from WebSloothes and it's from a user named ZiggyStarshe. Okay. It's from WebSloots and it's from a user named Ziggy Starshay. Okay, so Ziggy Starshay says, quote, to your point, it seems impossible that the double initials thing could just be chance. I've been curious to know how common double initial names were back then. So I did a simple survey of a few city schools senior classes from 77, 78, 79, which would have been close to the girls' graduating class, slash, around their same age, and 71. I counted all the females who had double initial names and compared it to the overall female count of that class. 53 of the total 728 combined girls had double initial names,

which is 7.2%. In statistical analysis, that is considered statistically significant. Stats was never my strong suit in school, so correct me if I'm wrong. Then it's my understanding this is just merely coincidental, albeit a crazy coincidence, absolutely. The girls had double initial names due to the commonness of them, statistically speaking, and they were not selected because of their names. I don't think the killer was organized enough to have a mastermind plan like that, and he was just lucky." End quote.

So it's a fair point, and I was like, oh, okay, like I wasn't doing the math, I was just going by my gut. But then a user named Milkiades jumps in and says this, the odds of randomly having a single double initial victim are 7%, but the odds of three separate random victims, each having double initials, is 0.03%, three hundredths of 1%, which is minuscule. And that's before also factoring in that all three victims were found in a town with

that initial as well. The math changes though, if the SK, and you mean serial killer, actually had five or six victims, but those have been discounted slash ignored because the initials don't line up. I don't know if there are any other similar unsolved child abductions in the area slash time, but I definitely be curious.

All this math has my head spinning. But they're making sense, right? Like, sure, 7 percent, it happens. But then of that seven percent, they get killed, and then they're left in towns. And then three of them get killed, and then three of them get killed in towns with the same initial. No. I don't buy it.

Now, to their point, if there are other cases that we're not counting, it makes the numbers not as significant. If there's not only three of them, because right now 100% of the victim count all matches this, so I understand that. But are there similar cases that aren't being connected? Well, I mean, I looked, of course, and plenty of other people have looked. There is nothing that is definitely tied. But there are some cases that you'll see brought up over and over again.

So again, none of this solidly tied to our cases. There just are some with some interesting things. And I don't want to say coincidences because that word means something to me, but just some interesting things that get brought up. And in Sherry Farnsworth's book, she brings up two of these cases. So the first was the Oakland County child killer. She calls it the babysitter murders, but I don't think that's the most common name for that anymore. And we actually did a whole episode on this back in the day. I'll make sure that's linked in the show notes if you want to re-listen. And the strong similarities are the fact that we're dealing with kids.

In that case, they were assaulted and then redressed. But in the Oakland County child killer case, I mean, they were like fully washed. Even their clothes were washed and then pressed. And when was that happening again? That one, so it's over in Michigan, and it's happening in 76 and 77. So the theory would be that the killer left New York

and then went to Michigan. So that's why it stops there and then all of a sudden two years later it picks up in Michigan. So Moved states and changed Moe because now he's washing them in Michigan. Yeah. And the victims weren't just girls too, right? Right, girls and boys. That's correct. And I don't know, again, if you're going to say that they're connected and he's changing his Mo MO, is it because he knows stuff was found on the victims in Rochester? Again, I don't really think this is connected.

It just like it's brought up as a theory a lot. The ones I find a little more interesting are some of the cases out of Connecticut with young girls, like same age range who were abducted and then found murdered. Now, the way they were killed was different, but it's the timing that's so interesting to me because there were four girls and only one of them had double initials before you ask and they are murdered starting in 1969.

But those murders abruptly stop just a year later right as the cases in Rochester begin. And then when the Rochester cases stop, two more girls are taken in Connecticut. But only one is ever found. And though she was alive when they found her, she was in critical condition and she didn't actually end up making it. So the idea of a connection to other cases is interesting, but I don't wanna get too lost

in every other child killing case across the country. I could probably, and probably should, do an episode on all of these somewhere down the line. But the long story short is that there is nothing else identical to this. So maybe the initials mean something. Maybe they mean nothing. An investigator says in that reporting by Peter Pritchard, quote, we decided long ago that the initials had nothing to do with it.

If it was the initials, the individual would have to stake out the place and wait for the girl. And you can't watch her too long or someone will notice. Who knew Wanda was going to the store? Her mother didn't even know. So that's the official stance. I don't know. I can't let it go.

I feel like there is something somewhere, someone, even the smallest detail that connects them all. And it might just be too small to even think it's significant, but, you know, no one's asking me. Me and literally millions of other people are asking you every single week, Ashley. That is fair, but I can admit that there is probably a wealth of information in this case that I'm not privy to.

So I actually don't know. And again, the official stance at the time is that this is weird coincidence. But just one more thing on this, while we're talking about weird coincidences, like it was 1974, like we hadn't fully hit the golden age of serial killers. I don't think that term was coined yet. So maybe they couldn't even wrap their heads around what

was happening because it was such a new concept. Again, I think I'm right. But what do I know? But again, they didn't. So that's kind of where things stand for a while. Investigators mostly agree that Dennis is their guy, but they don't have any way to prove it. But then there is a shakeup in January of 1979. That's when an arrest all the way across the country in Washington state brings that whole assumption into question. A man named Kenneth Bianchi is arrested for the strangulation deaths of two women in Bellingham, Washington, and word makes its way back to Rochester in a flash. Hold up, hillside strangler Kenneth Bianchi?

Mm-hmm, because come to find out Kenneth is from Rochester, and that's where he lived in the early 70s. And do it this what you will, but even though Kenneth worked mostly in private security because dude wanted to be a cop before he decided to pursue his passion as a serial killer, he also worked as an ice cream vendor at some point, even maybe while he was living in Rochester. Now, what's a little confusing is how Rochester investigators play the whole thing down at first.

They acknowledge that they're taking a look, but they also say that he was never considered a person of interest in the girl's debts at the time, and they have nothing to suggest that he should be now. But by October of 1979, reporting indicates that he'd been officially ruled out. But somehow, by January of 1980, he is back on the official suspect list, according to reporting by Sue Smith with the journal News. And that could have something to do with the major development that took place prior to September, one that seemingly ruled their lead suspect, Dennis, out and left the door open for someone else. What ruled Dennis out was a serology test

that determined Dennis could not have been the killer. So none of the source material states this outright from the way it's presented. The impression is that Dennis was found to have been a secreter while the killer we're looking for is a non-secreter. Right, but what about Kenneth? Is he a secreter? Mm-mm, Kenneth is a non-secreter. Right, but what about Kenneth? Is he a secreter?

Mm-mm, Kenneth is a non-secreter like our killer. And so this is why the focus shifts back to Kenneth. In August of 1981, he is ordered to provide wrist prints for comparison to the one found on Michelle's neck. And a fingerprint expert out of Toronto is hired to do the comparison, but it's not until March of 1982 that the official results come in. And officially, those aren't

a match. Now, the expert is careful to explain that he's not ruling out the possibility that the print belongs to Kenneth, just that he can't say 100% that this is a match. Right, because it's a wrist, not a fingerprint. Yeah, even so, though, despite that, something else happened or they were able to like find more information or whatever because Kenneth is all but ruled out by the fall of 1983. And exactly how or why isn't totally clear, but this is when the case really goes cold. New suspects continue to pop up here and there, but none actually let go anywhere.

Now fast forward to 1991, something happens that reignites suspicion of Carmen's uncle Miguel, at least for her death. He gets into a violent domestic altercation with his wife, Carmen's mom, they actually ended up marrying. And this altercation involves a gun. He shoots her multiple times before he also shoots her brother, Juan, and then he turns the gun on himself. Guillermina and Juan both survive, but Miguel doesn't. Now, even after this incident, though,

the whole family, Guillermina included, continues to believe that he is innocent, though investigators still have their doubts. Okay, big question, secretor or non-secretor? I don't know. As far as I can tell, no one bothered to check. And I also can't find a photo of the guy or even a physical description, like for the life of me.

Although I guess that wouldn't clarify much because even the investigators who think he killed Carmen don't consider him a suspect in the other two cases. New suspects pop up through the 90s and the early 2000s, but each time it's like the same old story. Each one is ruled out. Now at some point, we know in the 90s, DNA becomes a thing and they actually have a sample from Wanda's case

that they build a profile off of so just for good measure Both Kenneth and Dennis's DNA profiles are run against that sample Dennis's body even has to be exhumed in 2007 for his sample to be gathered But yet again both of those guys are ruled out no matches And the one thing I need to know is whether that profile that they have has been entered into Kodis. For some reason I cannot find an answer to that. Okay so in Kodis or not there's still other people that they could compare it to. James... Oh, James Barber in Carmen's case? Yeah, him. So he's

mentioned in Sherry Farnsworth's book. He does eventually give samples and not him either. And what about a licensed plate guy? The... Oh, the guy that the witness... The one that the witness had an encounter with on the side of the road, got the plates like a couple days later. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Honestly, like, I have all the questions.

He's like one of the people top of my list. I looked up and down, but I couldn't find anything that explicitly says that they went back around to him to rule him out with DNA. I hope so. If not, maybe someone listening has ties to the Rochester police and can just check on that, because I don't know for sure.

And I just know everyone they do test the sample against isn't a match. Like that's how it's like generalized in the reporting. We just don't have a list of who all that includes, right? Right, every once in a while they'll name someone specifically, but there's not like a full accounting. Now the next flash of hope for the case doesn't come until 2011.

That's when a suspected serial killer named Joseph Nazo is arrested all the way across the country in Reno, Nevada. Joseph is being held on suspicion for four murders committed in Northern California between 1977 and 1994. This guy is for real no good, and catching him is mostly just a combination of pure luck and dedication by a plucky parole officer who takes him into custody for a weapons violation of his parole terms over a prior theft conviction. When this parole officer searches his residence, he finds hundreds of photos of women bound in unnatural

positions, many of whom distinctly look not alive, And the searchers find this weird handwritten list labeled list of 10 that references various locations where bodies were known to have been found. And that's how he gets linked to these four murders. Okay, are any of them little girls? Actually, no, the victims tied to Joseph so far were adult sex workers. Then what's the connection, I guess?

Well, the main connection is the victims' names. Roxane Rogash, Pamela Parsons, Tracy Tafoya, and Carmen Cologne. You said Carmen Cologne. Do you need to retake that? No, no, no, but I didn't mess up. This is another Carmen Cologne. Do you need to retake that? No, no, no, I didn't mess up. This is another Carmen Cologne. Joseph lived in Rochester for years, spending the early 70s going back and forth between there and California. Michael Benson reports in his book that Joseph's biographer, C. L. Sweeney, is even able to confirm that he was in Rochester at the time of each

abduction. So you can understand why investigators in Rochester take an interest. But, and there is always a but in this case, when his DNA is compared to the sample from Wanda's case, which is the only sample that wasn't destroyed in pre-DNA technology forensic testing. It's not a match. It's not. But still, what are the chances? And how did he- Seriously. This is what I go back to.

How did he end up with these sex worker victims with the same initials? Like is it really just a coincidence? I mean, again, I know in his case, he's suspected to have more victims, who I know, like, their initials aren't the same. But I'm like, you don't know these women before you're picking them up. So, so far, no one can quite figure out how that ended up matching.

But even with Joseph ruled out and wanded his case, I've still got like a million questions about this guy. What did he look like back when he lived in Rochester? Don't worry, I looked, found a picture of him when he was younger. I don't know the exact year that this was taken, but I think he has like very distinctive facial features that no one mentions in any of the composite sketches. I don't think he looks like any of the composite sketches. Brett, you can take a look for yourself. Yeah, I guess I don't really see it, but my question is what did he drive?

I don't know that either. And I know the DNA didn't match in Wanda's case, but I keep spiraling wondering if maybe there was someone else? Like a partner he was working with? I mean maybe. I mean there was never ever talk of two people. Like no one ever, I was gonna say no one ever saw two people, but like I can spiral for like two seconds.

There's like one place that I've seen that in Carmen's case Like some of the people on the road said that they saw a woman, but like it's not reported anywhere It's like a whole messy thing, but even if it was a woman. I mean we're looking for this is the 70s We're looking for someone who would leave a seeming sample, which is likely somebody at that time Who's presenting as male so again you can see I lost myself in this case. But maybe this is what proves me the most wrong and sometimes it's just a coincidence. Like this whole Nazo thing,

maybe you can find random people who have the same initials and it means nothing. Maybe that's what this case is the ultimate proof of, that like it's just a collection of coincidences. Andidences. And that's really where the case stands today. More than five full decades after these girls were killed, investigators remain unconvinced that the double initials are anything more than a bizarre coincidence, and there continues to be a disagreement about whether Carmen was killed by the same person as Wanda and Michelle.

But can I take you down one more route, since we're already here? Go for it. So there's also this thing about threes in the case. So there's three girls, right? Uh-huh. C is the third letter in the alphabet. Okay. M is the thirteenth letter in the alphabet.

Okay. Do you want to guess what W is? The twenty-third. The twenty-third letter. So it's just another thing that people are like, when you just keep stacking it on top of one another and one another, you're like, but is it just because we're looking for it? Right. My head hurts.

Back to the DNA. I know you said that in Michelle and Carmen's cases. The samples they had were pretty much destroyed, but we know they're able to build out at least a profile from the DNA in Wanda's case. Can they do anything with that now, like IGG? That was obviously my first thought, too. It looks like it's already on the radar. So there's this 2019 article

that says the New York state police were, quote, unquote, working to develop protocols to use open- source genealogy databases to try and track the girls killer or killers down. But it's been pretty silent since then on the DNA front. And I know there's been hiccups along the way because in 2022 familial DNA stuff was legally halted by the state of New York. Then it resumed in 2023.

And that's familial stuff. IGG is a little bit of a different beast, so I don't know the exact rules. I know that New York has always had super protective laws. The only thing I could find on their government website was that it just wasn't funded by the state. And according to someone I know that works kind of in the space, they can only use like specifically approved labs.

So if funding is the issue, and again, anyone who knows Rochester police is listening, I hope they know about season of justice. There's a super simple grant that law enforcement can fill out to get money from the nonprofit that will fund these exact types of advanced testing and the genealogy work. And just a reminder to you guys listening, those grants can only be funded with donations

from listeners like you. To date, Season of Justice has funded over $1 million in grants for over 170 separate unsolved cases. So maybe these cases will be next. You guys want more information or to make a donation, please go to seasonofjustice.org. You can find all the source material for these episodes on our website, crimejunkiepodcast.com. And be sure to follow us on Instagram at CrimeJunkie Podcast.

We'll be back next week with a brand new episode, but stick around. We have the good for you. Music Alright crime junkies, it is the end of February, so let's talk about something good. Can you believe we've already been celebrating the good for a year? I love this segment so much. Has it been a year for real? Yeah. Yeah. Oh my God. Time has flown by, but this really has become such a special part of our episodes

each month, so I hope you guys have been able to feel the joy, feel the impact that our community has been able to create together with what we do. And I don't think we're going to be stopping this anytime soon. So Brett, what do you got for us this month? Okay, here we go. Dear Ashley Flowers and Brett, side note, love that this is just like how we go by now. I was just going to say like full intro. I wanted to reach out and let you know

that I've been an avid crime-jockey listener since I was in the police academy in 2019. I come from a family of first responders and we all love your podcast and often have discussions about cases or crime trends regarding your work. I wanted to let you know that we are listening and even using your information to help educate ourselves

to help better serve and protect the communities that we work for. As an example of this, which is wild by the way, can I just take a quick pause that I always fangirl a little when people who are actually doing the work we talk about say that they listen or I've been in agencies where like actual detectives are like, oh my god, I listen, but I end up fangirling, because I'm honestly honored that you guys think we're doing a good job because you're the ones actually out there doing the work. Wait for this, Ashley.

Okay, sorry. As an example of this, I recently helped a young victim of sex distortion who had come into the police department where I am employed. They were courageous and told me all the details about what they were going through. I felt equipped to handle the situation with empathy and knowledge of resources. I was also happy to be the responding officer to this victim because I knew I would give them

the best service possible, help them not feel alone, and provide proper support. I even printed out the resources from your recent episode, Be Weird, Be Roots, Stay Alive, Sex Dors Sexdortion, slash Expert On, Safety from Online Sex Abuse, including the Crisis Text Line, Cyber Tip Line, Nick McTake It Down, FBI Tip Line, and Rain Tip Line. I wanted to send a warm thank you and pat on the back for everything you guys do. P.S. Santa even brought me some of your recent merch this year. Be Weird, Be Rude,, stay alive, Officer MC. Get outta here.

Oh, I love this letter so much. I'm so glad I got to share it with you guys today. Honestly, that means so much to me because like, again, we did so much educating that episode for people who've experienced extortion, but there was a specific call out to like agencies as well about how to respond it. They're listening, oh my God.

Yeah, we do those episodes, we do these episodes to help people and to hear that they're helping not just our listeners, but people our listeners interact with. Beautiful, beautiful. I love you guys. Thank you, Officer MC. Crime Junkie is an audio check production.

So, what do you think, Chuck? Do you approve? Thanks, RMC!