Crime Weekly - S3 Ep359: The Skelton Brothers | A Thanksgiving Mystery Finally Cracks Open

Episode Date: November 19, 2025

A major development has cracked open the 15 year mystery of the Skelton brothers: John Skelton, the father of Andrew, Alexander, and Tanner, who vanished in 2010 while in his care, has been charged with three counts of open murder and three counts of evidence tampering, just days before his planned release from prison. A judge legally declared the brothers dead, though at that time ruled there was not enough evidence to confirm their father was responsible. Try our coffee!! - www.CriminalCoffeeCo.com Become a Patreon member -- > https://www.patreon.com/CrimeWeekly Shop for your Crime Weekly gear here --> https://crimeweeklypodcast.com/shop Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/CrimeWeeklyPodcast Website: CrimeWeeklyPodcast.com Instagram: @CrimeWeeklyPod Twitter: @CrimeWeeklyPod Facebook: @CrimeWeeklyPod ADS: 1. https://www.UncommonGoods.com/CrimeWeekly - Get 15% off your next gift! 2. https://www.SurfShark.com/CrimeWeekly - Use code CRIMEWEEKLY for FOUR extra months of Surf Shark VPN!

Hey everyone. Welcome back to Crime Weekly News. I'm Derek Levasseur. And I'm Stephanie Harlow. And today we're going to be giving an update on a case that we haven't covered on Crime Weekly, but Stephanie was telling me she covered it on her channel many years ago, right? Mm-hmm. Yep. I exactly. I mean, it's been a long time. time. It was 2020. I covered it. Yeah. Okay. So I'm going to give a little bit of a backstory here, just a little bit of a sample size. So for anyone like me who doesn't know the story, you'll have just an idea of what we're talking about here. I'm going to give a little bit of a deeper kind

of recap as you do, as you do. Okay, so back in 2010, three young brothers from Morency, Michigan, nine-year-old Andrew, seven-year-old Alexander, and five-year-old Tanner Skelton vanished over Thanksgiving weekend after a court-ordered visit with their father, John Skelton. For years, he's told shifting stories about handing the boys off to an unknown woman and a shadowy underground group, but he was only convicted of unlawful imprisonment for failing to return them to their mother. Now, nearly 15 years later, that's changed. Prosecutors in Lenoir County have charged Skelton with three counts of open murder and three counts of tampering with evidence in connection with his son's disappearances

just days before he was set to walk out of prison. Tonight, we're going to quickly revisit the basics of this case and then break down what led to the new charges, what investigators say they've learned, and what this could mean going forward. Yeah. So this case has, it's bothered a lot of people for a long time. It's been decades. And I mean, when I covered it in 2020, it was because a lot of people had requested it. And I think we all knew. We all knew what happened here. But the fact that John Skelton seemed to have gotten away with it really discouraged everybody. And we all kind of thought like, man, he's never, he's never going to face justice for this. He's never going to have to.

answer for this. So let me give you a quick recap of the case for those who don't know about the case and also for those who haven't really visited the case in a long time. So it was late November of 2010 when 32-year-old Tanya Zuber's did wish she had done countless times before she dropped her three sons, nine-year-old Andrew, seven-year-old Alexander and five-year-old Tanner at her parents' house in Morency, Michigan. It was Wednesday, November 24th, the day before Thanksgiving. She and her estranged husband, John Skelton, were in in the middle of a messy separation and custody battle, but he still had court-ordered visitation. The boys were supposed to spend the holiday with their father and be back in their mother's care that

Friday afternoon. So she hugged them, she kissed them, she told them to have a good Thanksgiving with their dad. She had no way of knowing it was the last time she would ever see any of them. Horrible. So the Skelton family lived in the tiny town of Marence, which is right on the Michigan, Ohio border. John Skelton, a Jacksonville, Florida native and former Army servicemen, had bounced around the country before marrying Tanya in 2002 and settling there. Between them, they had older children from previous relationships, but together they had three boys. That's Andrew Alexander and Tanner.

Now, the boys were known around town as normal active kids, always outside, riding bikes, playing soccer, camping with family, begging for McDonald's, like all other kids. Sounds like my kids, yep. Uh-huh. Andrew was the- Especially the McDonald's part. I don't know about the riding bikes and all that. Maybe not the McDonald's for sure. The McDonald's part.

Andrew, he was the quiet thoughtful one. He was the oldest. Alexander was the daredevil middle child obsessed with gadgets and phones. Tanner, the youngest, was imaginative, cuddly, and he loved spinning stories just to make adults laugh. Now, behind that picture of a small town family life, the marriage between John and Tanya was crumbling. John had lost his job as a truck driver after a DUI. He was struggling with money. Sometimes he was failing to pay bills or buy groceries, but he still managed to supply himself with cigarettes and beer.

He'd already served time for failing to pay child support for a daughter that he had from a previous relationship. Tanya, for her part, carried a serious mistake from her past. In 1998, years before she even met John, she pled guilty to fourth degree criminal sexual conduct for a sexual relationship with a 14-year-old boy who worked on rental properties that she and her then husband managed. So, yeah, both Tanya and John, maybe not the best parents. Yeah, not upstanding citizens, we'll put it that way. And we, by the way, over here at Crime Weekly, we treat both the same because if we reversed genders there, we'd be saying this person's a monster and shouldn't even have kids. I mean, this woman being in a grown adult, having some type of sexual relationship

with a 14-year-old boy, while she's married, scumbag, sorry to say it. Well, she's married, just, I mean, in general. In general, but scumbag. So I'm calling it balls and strikes both ways. Pretty gross. Pretty gross. I do not condone that. So Tanya had disclosed this to John before they got married, which also I think is a red flag, that he was like, yeah, that's cool because then he went ahead with the relationship. Huge. Yeah. Not only did he go ahead with the relationship, but he had children with her. And he never raised this issue as a problem until their breakup. So the real escalation started in September of 2010. On September 12th, after talking vaguely about wanting to move the family to Florida, which remember, That's where he's from. John went to the boys' school.

He pulled them out early, and he told staff they were going on a vacation. In reality, he tried to take them to Florida without Tanya's knowledge or consent. Tanya found out from the school. She contacted the police. She scrambled to get a lawyer. By sheer bad luck, the attorney that John had scheduled an appointment with was the same one Tanya's daughters hired first. So they hired him first, right? So obviously, you know that this is an issue.

You can't in a divorce, even I think in a lot of states, even if you just talk to a lawyer and you pay them any kind of money, then your spouse cannot ever use that lawyer. So this enraged John when his appointment was canceled. He stormed out of the house with Andrew and Alexander, speeding away in his van while Tanya's friend physically held on to Tanner so he couldn't be taken. Five days later, Tanya tracked John and the boys to a woman's apartment in Florida. They went down there with court papers, and a judge ordered that once they crossed back into Michigan, all three boys would be in Tanya's custody. Okay. So this is something we hear about all the time up to this point. These child custody issues, it's a constant game on both sides. They're using the judicial system to their advantage. Sometimes it's one party more than the other. Seems like here you just have someone who's trying to keep the rules the same in Tanya and John's trying to bend them. He's trying to take off with the kids and leave her in the other. dust. Exactly. So we have a little bit more to talk about as far as this backstory. Let's take a quick break. We'll be right back. This episode of Crime Weekly is brought to you by Uncommon Goods. And listen,

the countdown is officially on. The pressure is also on holiday shopping season is here. And if you're anything like me, you want gifts that feel thoughtful and personal without running around from store to store. Uncommon goods takes the stress out of gifting with thousands of unique, high-quality finds that you won't see anywhere else. Don't wait. The most meaningful gifts get scooped up fast and now is the perfect time to cross names off your list. Yeah, I've definitely been on uncommon goods a lot lately. And I feel like you have been as well because every time we talk, you're like, oh, hey, I found something else on uncommon goods that I'm going to pick up for Christmas. Yeah, it's because when you're scrolling through, because they're so unique and sort of special

that you're like, oh, my God, Derek would love that. Oh, my God, my mom would love this because it's impossible not to feel that way when you're looking through this. Like, I found this handmade constellation map, totally customizable. I immediately thought of my sister. It's one of those gifts that feels personal and one of a kind. And it was created by an independent artist, which I love. It feels less commercialized. Yeah, and that's what really stands out for me with Uncommon Goods.

It's not that generic gift basket stuff that people just throw away. It's things that they'll actually remember. Yeah, and they'll know that you thought about them and that you know them, which is a gift in itself. Uncommon goods looks for products that are high quality, unique, and often handmade or made in the U.S., and Uncommon Goods has something for everyone. Moms, dads, kids, teens, book lovers, history buffs, foodies, gardeners, if you love sports, stuff like that, literally everyone. Yeah, and when you shop there, you're supporting real artists and independent businesses. Yeah, small independent businesses. Many of their handcrafted products are made in small batches.

So you really do want to grab your favorites before they sell out. And Uncommon Goods gives back. With every purchase, they donate a $1 to a nonprofit partner of your choice. And they've donated more than $3.1 million so far. So don't wait. Cross your names off the list before the rush. To get 15% off your next gift, go to Uncomndogoods.com slash crime weekly. That's Uncommon Goods.com slash Crime Weekly for 15% off.

Uncommon Goods were all out of the ordinary. So once everyone was back in Morency, John suddenly wanted to work on the marriage, but Tanya no longer trusted him, obviously. So on her lawyer's advice, she tried to keep things calm by agreeing to therapy and allowing him regular visitation, hoping that this would keep him somewhat appeased, and that would prevent him from trying something reckless again. They actually live very close. They only live two blocks apart. So John stayed in the marital home on Congress Street, and Tanya moved with the boys into a vacant nearby house, owned by her daughter. Now, the boy stayed with Tanya during the week. They went to their father John's on most weekends. That uneasy status quo lasted only about two months. Then the weekend

before Thanksgiving, John told the boys about Tanya's sex offender past, terrifying them and shattering what little goodwill remained between Tanya and John. Obviously, Tanya was furious. She decided she would no longer go out of her way to accommodate him, including denying his request to keep the boys longer that coming Thanksgiving weekend. Now, I actually have a question for you. What John did by telling his sons about Tanya's past, considering their ages, do you agree with that or not? Because it seems to be a ploy at this point to alienate. It's not like I want to keep you safe. It's like, I want to tell you something about your other parent so that when it comes down to custody, maybe it will go in my favor. No, I completely disagree with it. They're looking at it

from the sense of what you just said, but you're traumatizing that kid by doing that, no doubt about it. We look at our parents in a way where we see them as superheroes. We should. We have to. As we should.

And then unfortunately, sometimes their actions lead us to feel otherwise, right? When I say looking at them as superheroes, it's like when we're first born as we're growing up as babies and we don't know anything other than our parents. And then to have one parent talk this negatively about another parent, it's almost like learning certain people, don't exist. I'm not going to... Like certain holiday people. Yeah, it might not exist. And that can be,

I know how I felt when I learned it and it's not a good feeling. Crush. And that's something that's just once a year. Imagine the person you're with every day and you think they can do no wrong. So I absolutely disagree with this. I've dealt with this in my life with other relatives of mine. And what's even worse is when the other parent embellishes or flat out lies about the other parent. And in this case, he's not lying. He's not lying. He's telling the truth, but that doesn't make it okay. However, there's no reason for his kids to know this. No, the number one priority for John and Tanya should be their children.

And if you have half a brain, then you know that talking this negatively about their mother is not going to have a positive impact on them mentally. So for that reason, it shouldn't be done. Yeah, I mean, I understand like some parents. I mean, some parents are bad and have bad things in their past, but that should be up for the kids to learn on their own and experience on their own, unfortunately, as, They get older. But when we've got John over here, who's kind of acting erratic, you know, trying to take the kids to Florida, their sense of safety is already shattered with one parent. And now you've done it with the other, which leaves these three boys completely at bay, you know, unanchored, unmoored. And now I'm going to say something a little controversial, but it's more of a question and then I'll let you go with it.

So, and you kind of preface this, right? John knew about her past before they had children. Before they got married. So he can't say shit. However, once they have children, is there a small part of you, even though based on why we're covering this case today, we know John's a scumbag, right? Is there a small part of you or anybody listening or watching this where you could say, oh, I could see how John wouldn't want these young boys with this woman because of her past? No, because, one, John already was a parent before he met Tanya. So you already had that parent's a fact.

Yeah. You already had that parent's mentality. You still married the woman knowing what she had done and then agreed actively to have children with her. So it was never an issue for you. You were never concerned. It's not like he didn't have kids and he wasn't a parent. And then they had kids together. And he's like, oh, as a parent, I see this so differently. You already were a parent. And as a parent, you should have never married her and had kids with her. If it was ever a concern for you, which lets me know, it probably wasn't. Which also lets me know what his judgment is like because it would have been a big concern for me personally. Yeah, I'm with you. I think it wasn't a concern originally. And then when things went south, now he's using it as an excuse. And he's just trying to make their mother look bad by telling them, which back to what we were originally talking about, it's not right. Exactly. So despite Tanya being upset and saying to John, no, your request to keep the boys longer on Thanksgiving weekend is denied. The original plan still held. So on Wednesday, November 24th, Tanya dropped the boys at her parents' house so that John could pick them up there for the holiday. On Thanksgiving Day, she spoke to John on the phone, heard the boys playing video games in the background, and fielded more questions from John about whether their relationship had a future, which is another reason I don't think he gave a shit about that because he's still trying to reconcile with her. Now, Tanya still wouldn't give him the answer that he wanted. Now, in her head, she's like, I don't have anything to do with this dude, but once again, she's trying to keep him calm so that everything goes to plan, which sucks to be in that position to begin with. So the next morning Friday, November 26th, she texted and she said, hey, can I pick the boys up earlier than 3 p.m? I haven't seen them all weekend. I missed them. John told her that he and the boys weren't home, but, because remember, she lived so close to him, she could see his van sitting in his driveway from her window. So when she called him on the obvious lie, he pivoted and said friends had picked the boys up and taken them elsewhere for Thanksgiving. Then the story shifted again. He claimed a woman named Joanne had the boys and would bring them back to Morenzi by 3 p.m.

I would have been losing my mind as Tanya at this point, right? Of course, I completely understandable. Especially what John has already done. So Tanya didn't really know this Joanne person. Months earlier, a woman calling herself, Joanne Taylor, had friended Tanya on a parenting site, which is Cafe Mom, but Tanya had never met Joanne in person, and no one in Mrenzi seemed to know Joanne either. Now John was telling Tanya that their three boys were with this stranger.

So as the hours passed and the kids didn't appear, Tanya's panic. grew. John himself, he eventually ended up at a hospital in Toledo, Ohio. His explanation to staff and later to police was that he had tried to hang himself and he injured his foot in the process. So when Tanya called her lawyer, she was told to give it until 3 p.m., which was the technical time that she was supposed to get the boys back, and then call the police if her sons still hadn't been returned. At exactly 301, Tanya called Morency Police Chief Larry Weeks. So Larry Weeks drove to the hospital to question John. There, John claimed he'd been overwhelmed.

Facing the loss of his marriage, his kids, and his financial stability, he decided to end his life on Thanksgiving. He said he didn't want the boys to witness it, so he arranged for his friend, Joanne, to pick them up and drive them to his parents in Florida. Which he's not supposed to do anyways, but that's neither here nor there. According to John's story, Joanne agreed to drive the three young boys whom she'd never met 15 hours away on a holiday, and he never contacted the authorities about his alleged plan to die by suicide. To Chief Weeks, the story made no sense. To everyone listening with two brain cells to rub together, the story makes no sense. So an Amber Alert was issued for Andrew, Alexander, and Tanner, and for a silver van allegedly driven by this Joanne person. And then the FBI joined the case.

All right, I know you have thoughts about this. I can see it. We're going to take our last break quick. We'll be right back. Before we get back to the episode, we have to talk about something that Derek and I take really seriously, and that's online privacy. Because when you spend as much time online as we do, researching cases, polling court documents, digging through archives, you start to realize just how much personal information is out there. Every click, every search, every login. It's all traceable unless you protect yourself.

And it's not just for people who do what we do. everybody's online constantly, and most of us don't think about how exposed our data is. Exactly. And that's why we both use Surfshark VPN. And it's super easy to use. It keeps your data private by encrypting everything, your passwords, your searches, even what sites you visit, text messages, photos, videos, the whole nine. It hides your IP address so your information actually stays yours. Yeah, and I like that if you're traveling or using public Wi-Fi, airports, hotels, coffee shops, whatever it is. No one can snoop. No one can steal your info. Also, let's be be honest, how many times have you clicked on something and gotten the not available in your

region message? It happens to me all the time. I'm a big college basketball fan, so I don't necessarily watch professional basketball, but I love college basketball. I use the watch ESPN app. And it feels like every time I want to watch a Syracuse game, because it's close by to me, and they want people to actually, like, go to the games, so they'll block me out, and I can't watch it through the ESPN app. So I just use surfing. because with Surfshark, you can change your virtual location in one-click. And then you can also unlock content from over 100 countries, including different Netflix libraries, BBC, IPlayer, Hulu, all of it.

Yeah, and one account covers unlimited devices. So phones, laptops, tablets, smart TVs, everything in your house stays protected. It goes even further than that because Surfshark is truly unlimited with their subscription. So if you want to protect your mother's phone and her computer, if you want to protect your kids, PlayStation, Xboxes, which is something. something so important because these kids have the ability to talk to other people in these games now and they're always down there talking to each other. And if somebody they're talking to has the know-how, which a lot of people do, they can figure out where your kids are connecting from.

They can get their, you know, their location, stuff like that. So always make sure with this unlimited subscription, you're putting it on your kids' video game consoles. That's one of my favorite parts as well. And Surf Shark has a strict no-logs policy. So they're not tracking or storing anything you do online. Plus, there's a 30-day money-back guarantee so you can try it completely risk-free. So, Derek, tell them how they can check Surf Shark out for themselves. That's right. Go to Surfshark.com slash Crime Weekly and use code Crime Weekly at checkout to get four extra months of Surfshark VPN. That's surfshark.com slash crime weekly, code crime weekly for four extra months free. Thank you to Surfshark for sponsoring today's episode and for

helping all of us browse safer and without limits. All right. Yeah, we're back. And what I'm about to say may seem obvious based on why we're covering this today. But this is concerning if you're looking at it just in the moment because in many instances what we see is after doing something bad to your children, the parents will try to take their own life. And so even though we don't have the children, we don't know their whereabouts, the fact that he's attempting to kill himself, allegedly. I don't know if he actually did or not, but it's not good. It's not good. And the fact that he's not good. And the fact that he's not. that is best reason for where the kids are some unknown person other than Joanne being her name that she can like you said drive them 15 hours to Florida on Thanksgiving like like like it was said here to weeks it doesn't make sense it doesn't make sense what I just said makes more sense than what he's describing to chief weeks yeah but not good not good at all and investigators obviously quickly zeroed in on John's house and then his movements a neighbor and a family friend, Gail Johnson, reported seeing the boys on Thanksgiving afternoon.

She said all three of them were in pajamas, all three were acting normally. Now, Gail is believed to be the last person other than John to have seen these boys alive. So when police forced their way into John's home, they found it in shambles. Furniture, broken, dishes, smashed, mattresses slashed open. It looked like the aftermath of a violent outburst. So they collected a rope as well, a noose, bleach, and cleaning products, and they found a bullet on the stairs. John offered strained explanations. He said the noose was for a project, the ropes were for a climbing harness, the bullet from an old gun collection, but nothing that explained where his children were.

Cell phone and GPS data showed that in the very early hours of Friday, November 26, that 4.29 a.m., John's phone left his Morency home and traveled south into Ohio. Around 5 a.m., the phone was either turned off or went dead, and it didn't come back on until 6.46 a.m. when it pinged back in Michigan. So the last known tower hit in that dark window was near Holiday City, Ohio. That two-hour, 17-minute gap became the focus of this search. Law enforcement and hundreds of volunteers scoured back roads. They scoured campgrounds like Lazy River, Harrison Lake State Park, wooded lots, and even a suspicious shallow grave. Cadabber dogs were brought to the local landfill. Nothing tied to these boys was found.

As investigators dug into John's story, that whole Joanne Taylor narrative collapsed. There was no record of any real relationship with a woman by that name. When they examined his devices, the police discovered that John himself had created a fake online persona using the name Joanne Taylor and had used it to be friend Tanya on Cafe Mom shortly after she filed for divorce. In other words, this mysterious friend appears to have been an invention from the start, either to monitor Tanya or to lay the groundwork for the story that he would tell when the boys disappeared. Probably, in my opinion, both. So John then shifted to a new story that Joanne, she was a real person, but she was linked to a secretive, quasi-religious underground group that helps rescue children from abusive homes. He began talking about shadowy figures with names like Virgil and Elijah, business cards for United Foster Outreach and Amish-style coats allegedly brought to his home so the boys could wear them and blend in. Jesus.

I know. Absolutely ludicrous. Yeah, I mean, there could be a combination of things. going on here, some type of mental health struggle, but more than likely, it sounds like you have a motive. He probably wanted to be back with Tanya, have the kids all under one roof, and when he realized that wasn't a possibility, it's one of these classic examples where if I can't have what I want, then nobody will have what they want and I'll take everything from you. And it sounds like what happened here with the kids. This is very common, actually. The whole like creating these fake profiles in order to communicate with your partner that you're going through a divorce with.

It's just a- Oh, don't we know. Yes, exactly. It's a very scary thing. It's a scary sign. And I don't think it was about John wanting to be back with Tanya and having the kids altogether. He just wanted control. He didn't want to lose control. Remember, he's financially strapped. He can't really take care of himself. He stayed in the family home, made Tanya and her kids leave. This is a selfish, controlling, bad person to begin with. So in this version of this secret underground group that saves abuse children. John claimed he truly believed Tanya was abusing the boys, something every investigation and interview with the children had failed to support. And he said

he had handed them over to this organization to keep them safe, and he was expecting regular updates and contact. He said he wrapped the boys in blankets, placed stuffed animals in their arms, and watched them go. Then he added the chilling detail that the boys would need to hibernate until they graduate, implying they would be hidden away for many years. When confronted with his own internet searches that the police found that John had made in the weeks before the boys vanished. This is searches like rat poison. Will rat poison kill children? And can I break someone's neck with my hands? Well, he claimed he'd only been Googling answers to questions his sons had randomly asked. Yeah, your sons are random. Your little sons are like, hey, do you think

we can break someone's hands with our necks? No, get out of here, John. So he also dropped off the boys winter coats and toothbrushes with his aunt after Thanksgiving, allegedly telling her that the boys wouldn't be needing them anymore and that he didn't want Tanya to have the memories. Control. Remember. Control. All of it pointed away from any genuine child rescue effort and toward something much darker. Now throughout the searches, Morenzi and the surrounding communities poured their time and energy into finding Andrew Alexander and Tanner. Volunteers walked fields in ditches in freezing weather, plastered the boys' faces on posters and followed every possible lead, including a later unconfirmed sighting of three boys with a tired, disheveled woman

at a donut shop off the Ohio turnpike. But as the winter settled in, the hope of finding the brothers alive faded. In mid-February 2011, on a snowy day when he knew local children would be home with their families, Chief Weeks finally told the public that he'd been privately believing for months that the investigation has shifted from a missing person search to a likely homicide case. Despite that, the bodies of Andrew, Alexander, and Tanner have never been found, and John Skelton has never given a verifiable account of what he did with his sons. Now, we do know he was arrested.

He was sentenced to 15 years in prison for unlawful imprisonment. So he did get that sentence. That was pretty much as much as law enforcement could do with what they had. Now, on November 12, 2025, in Lenoir County, Michigan, John Skelton was charged with three counts of open murder, which is a no-body murder, and three counts of tampering with evidence in connection with the disappearance of his three young sons from November of 2010. These three boys were legally declared dead in March of 2025, though their bodies have still not been found. And at that time, a judge stated there was not enough evidence to prove

the boys had been murdered. Obviously, the timing of this is notable. Skelton had been serving a sentence for unlawful imprisonment of his sons. He was due for release November 29th, 2025. This is just weeks after the charges were filed. So obviously, police are like, hey, we don't want him to be released. don't want him to get out. They've pointed to a series of red flags. John's changing stories about where his sons were. That van trip into Ohio, the early morning of their disappearance. At his home, police found the strange and disturbing physical evidence, the noose, a Bible opened to a verse with a passage circled, a note allegedly saying, you will hate me forever. And I know this, which was addressed to Tanya. Investigators also flagged those internet searches

about the rat poison, will rat poison kill children? Can I break someone's neck with my hands? Now, law enforcement states they never found the boys. There's no physical remains, but obviously they believe that sufficient evidence exists for prosecution. So I guess my question would be what changed between March of 2025 and November of 2025, where a judge did declare these three boys to be deceased but said there wasn't enough evidence to bring murder charges. And now in November of 2025 there is enough evidence, or are the police just like, hey, we have to do something, right? We have to at least try with what we have to take John Skelton to trial for murder because that's a better alternative than letting him walk out and not ever face accountability for the

murder of these three children. So I have a few things here. First off, I want to double back to what you said a couple of minutes ago regarding him dropping off the toothbrushes and saying that they would no longer need them. It sounds minute. I think it's a big detail because if the kids were being transported somewhere, what are they going to still need to do every day? Yeah, they still need their toothbrushes. They don't need to brush their teeth.

So the fact that the toothbrushes weren't with them, that is something you would pack, whether they're going overnight to a sleepover or on a long trip to Florida and you may not see them for a while. When you're searching that house as a police officer, I'd be looking for evidence to suggest that they were moving. And I would venture to say that there was probably evidence to suggest that the boys never left that house or, didn't leave there alive because of their belongings still being in that house. I also would want more details on his explanation as to why he took that trip in the morning to Ohio. I know we're going over it really just surface layer here, but I'd love to know what his explanation for that was, although I can almost guarantee you it won't make sense.

The next thing you had said, I'm not a lawyer, and so by no means am I an expert in this area, but when a judge declares someone dead, I don't think they're in the people. position to say whether or not the person who's potentially responsible for that death, whether there's enough evidence or not to charge them, that's usually done by the prosecutor's office. So maybe that was taken out of context. Maybe that was like the impression he or she gave, but I don't think that's there. Or maybe he was just, I sort of like communicating the DA's feelings. But ultimately, to answer your last point, whether law enforcement feels they have enough or not. I agree with what you said there as far as the reason behind this. The evidence is not

going to change, right? They were hoping to find the boys after all these years and they waited until the very last moment in order to do so because you only get one shot at this. So their rationale was, hey, he's in prison for 15 years. That gives us 15 years to hope that a lead comes forward or we get lucky and we find the boys and it gives us our strongest case against him to charge him with triple homicide right that didn't happen unfortunately so now i think this was the game plan all along wait until the last moment and then you know what whatever we got we got we go in guns blazing we hope for the best but even if it doesn't work out it won't be for lack of effort because they literally waited until the last month before charging him hoping they would gain more

evidence but now they got to go in with what they have many people i shouldn't say many but people have been convicted with no bodies before in a homicide investigation, I think this case is pretty strong. It's a circumstantial case, but I think it's a strong, I think it's a strong circumstantial case. I don't think the absence of evidence automatically indicates exoneration. I don't think the absence of evidence is a sculpatory in nature. I have such an issue with that where it's like, well, we don't have evidence of that because we couldn't find it.

Like, for example, we don't have the boys. We don't know for a fact that they're dead. but common sense has to come into play here. And common sense would tell you that more than likely they're not alive. So that's a perfect example of we don't have evidence, direct evidence, that they're dead, but that doesn't mean that they're not. And so that doesn't clear him of being charged with homicide. So I know there's probably some defense attorneys out there that will strongly disagree,

but from where I'm sitting, yeah, I think this is absolutely the right move. Yeah, it is helpful also to. to know that John's stories never checked out, right? So they found out that this Joanne person wasn't real. It was actually John himself. That's a huge red flag. And then this whole underground society thing that stole the kids that he claims, has the kids, they looked into this, right?

They looked into this. And the police and the FBI have, you know, ways of sort of finding these underground places. And they have, like, people who are kind of planted into the lower echelons of society, where these kinds of things happen, the secretive areas of society, nobody's ever heard of this thing. Nobody has any. It's literally as if they don't exist. So if they do exist, then only John Skelton knew how to find them. How did John have the knowledge and the know-how to find these people and find this group, but the FBI and the police can't? That's a big thing, too, which likely

means his story is completely false. But I did look at the statistics and whether or not anyone would agree or disagree with you about how easy or hard it is to prosecute a no body case. There's not an exact total available, but over 570 people have been found guilty in no body murder cases that went to trial with an 86% conviction rate for those specific cases since 2012. So this is actually higher than the average conviction rate of 70% for all murder cases. Yeah, that's actually strange. I think that once you have a very strong circumstantial case where it's like kind of like a no da thing, right? Like, the jury's going to hear this story and they're going to be like,

I just don't see any other option. I don't see what else could have happened here besides this was John Skelton's doing. He's got the motive. He's got the means. And he had the opportunity. Yeah. Yeah. It's pretty much set. You think about reasonable doubt and you talked about the police department's inability to find this underground group. Let's even step back a little bit more. Forget the underground group for a second. We're talking about this woman, Joanne. That allegedly exists. So you go to John and you say, hey, John, okay, you made this decision that Joanne was going to transport your sons to this underground group or whatever in Florida, okay, or his parents in Florida, whatever it was. How did you get in contact with her? Oh,

I called her by phone. Well, she doesn't exist. They found out she didn't exist. Well, that's my point, but just to break it down here. How did you get in contact with her? Oh, by phone. Okay, what's her phone number. I don't have it. Okay. Well, how did you meet her? Well, she, I met her over here. You probably go confirm that's not true. Did you, I went to her house at one point, or she lived in this area. You go over there. She doesn't live there. So you've established that the conduit, the liaison to this underground group doesn't exist. And therefore, well, what is that, what does that even remind you of? Does it remind you of Casey Anthony and Zanny the nanny? Oh, I mean, of course. Yeah, it's just a path. But to me, not being able to charge someone because,

their story is so outlandish and the fact that you haven't found the body is not fair to the victims because that because that just means that unfortunately they did a good job of hiding the bodies so you don't get rewarded for that in my opinion yeah and john was ex-military so you know i mean and also he's he traveled two hours and 13 minutes somewhere that's a big area to have to track and cover and search especially if they're buried underground or they're in some type of body of water. It's going to be hard to find them. What I'm wondering for you, a question for you, is it possible because, yeah, a trial could go the right way, which is convicting John Skelton, because I think we all agree he did this. But could the prosecutor

say, John, listen, you could be convicted, right? Everybody knows about this case. It's very widespread, especially people in the area where you're going to go on trial. Now, his lawyers may try to get a change of venue. They're screwed if they do it in Morancy, right? Because this community remembers these boys. They still think of them. He might try to get a change of venue. But if the lawyers say, if the prosecutor say, listen, this thing is not going to go well for you. I don't care what you think. Give us information and we'll take life in prison off the table. We'll give you a deal. Tell us where your sons are. Is that a potential? I don't think he'll do that. It's a potential. It's a potential they could give him that, but I don't even think they will. Listen, he's going to try to take

his chances like Casey Anthony did, right? This is the first time I've ever heard of this case. Okay. first time you've given me a just a basic understanding of this case if I were a jury member I'd be looking for an alternative as to what could have happened to these boys there ain't one there isn't one right so guess what reasonable people are going to come to the same conclusion that I just came to in the last 30 minutes unless you offer an alternative that actually make sense, it will not rise to the level of reasonable doubt, which would lead to a non-guilty verdict. I would venture to say he's going to be found guilty. I hope so. That's what I believe, especially when we consider what we know right now and the circumstances surrounding this case

and surrounding cases like this in general across this country. You just said the percentages, right, 80-something percent? Yeah, I think it was 86 or something's pretty high. If he had offered something like, I was at a grocery store, and there's some evidence to suggest that in that small window, the kids could have been kidnapped or anything like that, then maybe. He would have been better, yeah. He would have been better saying, I was asleep, I woke up, and they were gone. Because the opportunity for someone to break in and abduct your children is more likely than you creating this person who has already been proven to be a fictional character.

And a fictional society, underground society that saves abuse children. And you can't go back now. What you said back then is going to be what is used now at trial, and I think he's cooked. And my girl's going to love that I said that word because that's their word. So shout out to Telly and Payton. We got it into an episode. Bro, we're cooked. That's their thing.

Whenever I'm like, why didn't you guys pick up your stuff? I hear Peyton or tell me go, bro, we're cooked. We're cooked. Shout out to them. I hear it. I hear it in my house too. Yes. It's often it's often ate in.

saying to me, you're cooked, though. Yeah, I mean, I'm like, oh, I forgot to do that. You're cooked, man. The big thing for Disney, the basket, where we're in a line waiting, I'm like, Tenley, we're cooked because the line was so long. But no, I'm trying to end this on a positive note because I hate these cases to think that these little boys, especially when you consider the searches, what could have happened on that morning?

I don't even want to think about it. We're too close to the holidays and it's too much evil in the world. But I am glad to see that law enforcement did it the exact right. way. It sucks for the family that it took this long, but law enforcement did, and a lot of you might not want to hear this exactly what they're supposed to do. They understand this is a one-shot deal. They waited as long as they could, and it just didn't work out, unfortunately, but they haven't forgot. They're not quitting, and they're still going for it. Yeah, and right from the gecko, law enforcement knew what happened here. 100%. They knew who John was. They knew what he was doing.

They'd seen cases like this before we all have. If you're into true crime, you've seen cases. like this before they were hoping to find the boys and they they even waited to declare them dead probably for a you know emotional reasons but also from a legal standpoint declare them dead in 2025 you waited until the very last moment now that they've been officially declared dead you're going down for it buddy hey surprise you're not leaving prison you thought you were about to walk out those doors nope now you got another 30 or 40 coming hopefully well let's see well if if he is found guilty, he's facing life in prison. But yeah, at his age, at his age, it probably won't be.

And that's another reason why I don't think he'll take the deal. He'll say, let me take my chances. He's going to roll the dice. Yeah, let me take my chances with the jury. His lawyers will tell him, let's take our chances with the jury because this is a circumstantial, no body case. He is 53 years old. He's only 53 years old. Well, maybe another 40 years, 30 years he'll be in prison.

But, you know, let's tie this back to something you said at the very top of this show and to the reason he won't admit to this ego even knowing his life may end behind bars his ego won't let him admit this out loud because then the perception of him from the outside community changes right he wants people out there to continue to think he's a victim i mean the perception of him sucks already yeah so he's not going to admit it because even though that would give closure to everybody else it's always been about him so he's lorry vallow yeah he's lorry Valour for sure. Absolutely. Any other words before we wrap this one up? No, I just, I can't wait to see or hear what everybody thinks about this. Yeah. I'm going to definitely be following it. Now,

you had said before we started, I should have covered this on Detective Perspective. I wish I would have known about it. Now that there's been an arrest, there's really no need to cover it. I believe we got the guy. So there's no need for help here. But we'll keep an eye on it. If there's a major update, we'll let you guys know. We'll be back later this week with BTK Part 4, Audio on Friday, YouTube on Sunday. Until then, everyone stay safe out there. We'll see you soon.