Criminology - The Oakland County Child Killer Part 2

Episode Date: March 15, 2026

The Oakland County child killer was responsible for the murders of at least 4 children in Oakland County, MI, in 1976 and 1977. Technically, we don't know whether it's a single killer or multiple killers. What we do know is that these murders shocked that area of Michigan and forever changed the lives of the people there, not just the families of the victims, but the entire community. Join Mike and Morf for the second and last part of a discussion on the Oakland County child killer. In this episode we focus more on the known evidence in the case and dive into the plethora of suspects that police have identified over the years. We also had a discussion with former FBI profiler Julia Cowley, who hosts the podcast - the Consult; real FBI profilers, and we talked about what her years of experience profiling killers like this tells her about this case and the killer.

In the suburbs of D.C., a woman fails to show up for work and is found brutally murdered. I wonder what's emergency? We just walked in the door and there's blood in the foyer. For the next two decades, the case remained unsolved until new technology allowed investigators to do what had once been impossible. A new series from ABC Audio in 2020, blood and water. Listen now wherever you get your podcasts. Criminology is a true crime podcast that may contain discussion about violent or disturbing topics. Listener discretion is advised.

Everyone and welcome to episode 401 of the Criminology Podcast. I'm Mike Ferguson. And this is Mike Morford. Mr. Morford, how are you doing today, buddy? I'm doing pretty good. How are things up your way? Pretty good. I don't know if I said it last week. I don't think I did, but my youngest just turned 21. and that is a milestone that's kind of making me feel old. Just that is making you feel old? Oh, no, there's a bunch of things that make me feel old, but that is one of them, I should say.

Yeah, I definitely get it. I was just pulling her later. That's funny, but happy birthday to her. Yeah. Yeah, it was, you know, it's pretty cool, pretty cool thing. Let's go ahead and give our Patreon shoutouts. We had Donna Dornbos and Molly Burr. So great new support.

we really appreciate it. That's so awesome. Thank you so much for that. And for anyone else that wants to help support the show, head over to patreon.com slash criminology to get started. All right. We're jumping right in to part two and our conclusion of the Oakland County Child Killer case. In part one, we discussed a number of children who were murdered in Oakland County,

Michigan in the mid-1970s. Eventually, police solved some of the cases and determined that they were not victims of the person known as the Oakland County child killer. Officially, police believe that 12-year-old Mark Stebbins, 12-year-old Jill Robinson, 10-year-old Christine Mahalic, and 11-year-old Timothy King are the four victims of this killer, and their murders remain unsolved. And in the quest to solve these cases over the last 50 years, investigators were forced to look into the very dark and twisted world of child.

child sex abuse, and as they would discover at the time of these murders, Oakland County was a hotbed of this activity with no shortage of pedophiles and potential suspects. The task force that had been set up to catch this killer, worked hard and tracked thousands of leads, and combed through many tips. Some 18,000 total tips or leads were checked, and although the killer was never identified, several people were arrested on unrelated charges. thousands of man-hours were put in to bring the killer to justice. In all, 13 communities committed resources that were people to the team. The Michigan State Police oversaw the effort. In the end, the killer somehow alluded the team, and it was disbanded in 1978. There were some definite conclusions the task force came to by the time it disbanded.

All four of what we call the known victims of the Oakland County Child Killer were last seen within a mile of Woodward Avenue. All four of the murders happened on. on days that it snowed, giving the deaths the nickname, the snow killings. The four victims had white animal hairs on their bodies, but investigators say these didn't come from the same animal. They also had similar colored carpet fibers on their bodies, but investigators can't say that it was the same carpet. Despite these findings, there was no movement in the case for years. The Oakland County Child Killer Task Force

would regroup again in 2005, and the investigation was reopened as the 30th anniversary approached. The extensive investigation and hunt for the Oakland County child killer ultimately revealed a vast network of pedophiles operating in and around Lake Michigan, an organization called Brother Paul's Children's Mission was used as a front to get young children on the isolated North Fox Island in Lake Michigan. There, some of the children were exploited and abused, forced to be included in child sexual assault material. North Fox Island was purchased in 1960 by Francis Duffield, Sheldon, and his brother. They had some cabins built, at least one of which still exists today.

There was also a small airstrip to allow people to fly to and from the island. Parents would pay for their children to stay on the island. With Brother Paul's children mission, once there, the boys would be photographed news. and sometimes doing sexual acts, which pedophiles would then pay for. Now, some listeners are probably thinking to themselves, this sounds a lot like Epstein Island. And Jeffrey Epstein does have ties to Michigan. More than one woman has claimed that when she was a teenager,

attending Interlockin Center for the Arts, a private school south of Traverse City, she met Jeffrey Epstein and Galane Maxwell began to groom her. Epstein attended Interlock in when he was a teenager. And in the 90s, he began to donate large amounts of money to the school. Now, we're not saying that Jeffrey Epstein was involved in these murders in any way, but he may have perhaps gotten the idea for his island from Fox Island. The group operating on North Fox Island was not the only ring of pedophiles that police

uncovered during the course of their investigation. There was also a group of men victimizing young boys in the Cass Corridor area of Detroit. We'll discuss the second group a bit later, because the men involved were not arrested in the early stages of the investigation. It's really unfortunate, but these investigators had to watch and comb through a lot of child sex abuse material looking for any of the Oakland County child victims to see if they were in the material, but none were. Breaking up the island pedophile ring was a great victory for the

the victims being abused there, but it still didn't bring justice to the families of the murder victims. In 2010, Tim King's father, Barry, sued the Michigan State Police and was granted access to more than 3,000 pages of case files. He had to pay $11,000 for the copies. In 2012, Christine Mihalek's family sued the Oakland County Sheriff's Department and prosecutor's office. It was clear that the families of the victims were,

at odds with the investigators in the case, they didn't feel as though justice had been done and wanted to see some kind of progress, especially with advancements in science with tools like DNA at their disposal. You can't blame the families for wanting to see results of some sort or maybe an arrest made, and it's not like there weren't plenty of suspects. There were, and some even seem to be tied to physical evidence in the case. We're going to talk about some of them now. The first is a Ferndale resident, John Crosby, who had offered Mark Stebbins a ride home from the American Legion Hall and is believed to be the last person to see him alive. He was immediately suspected, and investigators were tailing him within an hour of Mark's body being found. Nothing ever seems to have come from this, though.

But he was arrested in September of 1976 for robbing his genitals against two young grills at a dairy queen in Ferndale. And, Mor, if we see this in a lot of cases, right, you are, researching one case. And during that research, it veers off into a lot of different people doing a lot of bad stuff. And I think that's kind of what investigators were experiencing. They are encountering a lot of people doing bad stuff, but they can't tie them to the Oakland County child murders. And I think that was a real problem for investigators. Because as we're going to talk about, there's a number of different people that sort of rose up on the suspect list. But for one reason or another, they were never arrested.

So the police definitely had their work cut up for them sorting through these people. The next person we're going to talk about is a man named Gerald Richards, who was a gym teacher at St. Joseph's Catholic Elementary School in Port Huron, Michigan. He was arrested and charged with criminal sexual conduct. in July of 1976, he was accused of molesting a 10-year-old boy. When questioned, he told investigators a lot about North Fox Island. Richards introduced multiple children to Frank Sheldon who owned the island. Richards was also involved in the creation and sale of child sexual assault material. He went on to testify about child trafficking for Congress.

The network he described appeared to be nationwide. Richards was given a sentence of two to 20 years in prison. He was released in 1980. Eight years later, he was arrested for trafficking child sexual assault material. In 1994, he died of natural causes in Port Huron. So, you know, this Richards guy, he was clearly a scumbag, but there was nothing actually tying him to the murders. We have to talk about Francis Sheldon, the owner of Fox Island.

He came from a rich and prominent Detroit family. He volunteered with Big Brother and would take children to the island on his private plane. One article noted that when it snowed and the airstrip on the island was covered, he didn't visit. The four victims of the Oakland County Child Killer were left on the side of the road on days that it had snowed. In late July, 1976, three days after Gerald Richards was arrested and began speaking to investigators, authorities raided the Ann Arbor home of Francis Sheldon with a no-knock warrant, but he was already gone. So were the contents of every drawer, closet, and filing cabin in the house.

He had gotten word that he was going to be arrested and fled. Sheldon was found dead in an Amsterdam apartment in July 1996. Apparently, the 68-year-old had made a life for himself there after fleeing Michigan. Once again, we have a despicable person here who did terrible things to children, but there's no indication that he murdered any. And I'll tell you why, as hard as the murders were to talk about in episode one, for me, just as hard to talk about some of these nasty people who weren't conclusively linked to the murders, but undoubtedly did just heinous things involving children.

Yeah, the fact that this guy bought an island with the intent to make this stuff, happen there. It's just, it's really gross. And the thought that parents paid money to send their children there. You know, you want to talk about guilt later on. Some of those parents had to feel awful. Although, I mean, I don't know how they would have known what was going on there. Now, we're going to briefly throw out a few names of other people who were considered as possible suspects in the murder, but there's not really a ton of evidence pointing to their involvement. Dyer Grossman was a science teacher at an all-boys boarding school in New York, and also vice president of Brother Paul's Children's Mission,

which operated out of North Fox Island. He helped Francis Sheldon purchased the island. When Sheldon went on the run, Grossman also disappeared. Adam Aristotle's Starchild, whose real name is Malcolm Willis McConaughey, is definitely an odd figure. For a few months in 1965, he was an assistant scoutmaster in Minneapolis until he was arrested in Wyoming while traveling to New York for the distribution of pornography. He was arrested again in 1967 for possession of obscene literature as well as contributing to the

delinquency of a minor. In 1968, he was arrested for criminal sexual conduct with a 16-year-old. From there, he had a long history of frauds and cons and ended up associating with Francis Shelton. When Sheldon fled the United States, he gave Starchald $2 million to create a trust for him. Starchald mismanaged it and was sued by Sheldon even as he was on the run. Starchild died in Spain in 2006. A man named Todd Worsacka was suspected of the 1972 murders of teenagers Norbert Peck and Oscar Garcia in Bay County, Michigan. Norbert Peck had been dumped in a roadside ditch.

At the age of 53, Wurzaka took his own life in 2005, hanging himself in Dallas, Texas, just before investigators were able to compel a DNA sample. They were eventually able to send his DNA to the FBI lab in Quantico, but it wasn't a match to any evidence in the Oakland County Child Killings case. One guy that was near the top of Berkeley Police Department Detective Ray Anger's suspect list was a man named David Norberg. Norberg became a suspect due to information from his ex-wife. There was the fact that during sex, he liked to use his hands to suffocate her, which lined up with suffocation of some of the victims.

He also had a small cross with the name Christine engraved on it. None of Christine Mihalik's relatives could positively identify the cross as hers, and no photos of her wearing the cross necklace could be found. He drove a small blue car similar to a gremlin. He also lived just two streets away from 12. 12-year-old Kimberly King, who disappeared in 1979 and has never been found. Norbert died in a car accident in Wyoming in 1981. In August of 1999, Norberg's body was exhumed in Wyoming. His DNA was tested and didn't match any of the physical evidence in the murders. Another guy who was at the top

of some detective's suspect list was a man named Larry A. Smith. But unfortunately, there's not a ton of information out there about him. In 1995, it was actually decided to pursue DNA testing of Smith before moving on to David Norbert. As far as we know, his DNA, too, did not match to the DNA evidence in the case. Theodore Lambertine, known as Ted, was one of at least five members believed to be involved in the pedophile ring in the Cass corridor. By the time investigators caught up to him, three of the men had died, leaving Lambertine and Richard Lawson to answer for the crimes. Lambergene had moved from Detroit, 1978, eventually ending up in Parma Heights, Ohio. He denied any involvement in the Oakland County child killings.

Lambertine was apparently willing to plead guilty to 15 different charges, but he was extremely reluctant to take a polygraph test regarding the Oakland County child killings. He refused plea deals and even offers of shorter sentences in exchange for the polygraph. He did end up taking one in 2006 and he failed. Lambertine was actually sued by Tim King's family. In late 2007, they claimed wrongful death, accusing him of kidnapping Tim and holding him captive in a home in Royal Oak, Michigan for four days before suffocating him and dumping his body in the snow.

If Lambertine was involved with the murders of Tim, Jill, Christine, and Mark, there was a possibility that the children were held. somewhere in the Cass Corridor in Detroit. Lambertine is still alive and serving a life sentence at Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility in Ionia, Michigan. Richard Lawson, the other living member of the Cass Corridor, pedophile ring, had a long history of sex crimes. He had also been an informant for the Detroit Police Department at one time.

In 1988, he was in jail waiting to face trial on four charges of criminal sexual conduct with a minor. During this time, he actually called Barry King, Tim King's father, and told him that he knew who had killed his son. He also claimed that Francis Sheldon wanted boys who looked like Tim for the movies he was making. Lawson gave the names of three suspects who he thought could have been the Oakland County Child Killer. One has never been identified. The others were Ted Lambergen and Robert Bobby Moore. Bobby Moore, who was involved in the Cass Quarter Ring and owned a bike shop along Cass Avenue in Detroit,

died in 1996 at the age of 55. He had a heart attack alone, and apparently his dogs were hungry in the time that it took for his body to be discovered, partially devouring his carcass. In 2005, Richard Lawson was arrested for the June 1989 murderer of Xavier Giller, his former boss, at the Detroit Cab Company. Giller and his wife had returned to their home while Lawson was robbing it. By the time of his arrest, he was living in San Diego, California. He was given a life sentence for the murder.

He died in prison in 2012. Another interesting name that may be connected to the murders is John Hastings, Jr. In the book, After the Snow, the Oakland County child murders, and the search for the killer. Author Julia Sciancy wrote that John Hastings, along with his father, John Hastings, Sr., were turned into police via two separate tips as possibly being involved in the murders, and that John Hastings Jr. took and passed a polygraph. But he supposedly confessed to the murders in 1991 to a woman named Helen Dagner. According to the book, John Hastings Jr. looks very similar to the sketch in the case. However, he was reportedly ruled out at some point through DNA.

The next guy we're going to talk about is named Arch Sloan, known as Ed. And there is some physical evidence that may point to his involvement in the murder. murders, he once worked as a mechanic. In Farmington Hills in Southfield, he had also coached a boy's baseball team. He was arrested in December 1978, in charge was sexually assaulting the sons of one of his co-workers. The boys were ages 12 and 14. In 1985, he was sentenced to life in prison for two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct with a 10-year-old boy. Sloan was once a volunteer firefighter. and was issued a badge as part of that work,

something he may have used to gain the trust of young victims. A thoughtfully built wardrobe comes down to pieces that mix well and last. That's where Quince really shines, premium fabrics, considered design, and everyday essentials that feel effortless to wear and dependable, even as the seasons change. Quince has the everyday essentials I love with quality that lasts, light cashmere sweaters,

short-sleeved Mongolian, casmere polos, linen bottoms and shorts. T's and 100% Pima Cotton. These are the versatile pieces that make a wardrobe actually works season to season. Quince works directly with top factories and cuts out the middlemen. You're not paying for brand markup or fancy retail stores, just quality clothing. Everything is built to hold up to regular wear and still look good. Their clothing is rated between 4.5 and 5 stars by thousands of people wearing it every day.

and the only partner with factories that meet rigorous standards for craftsmanship and ethical production. I've been wearing Quince clothes for a couple of years now. And by far my favorite is their performance flow knit line, shorts, joggers, tops. I can't get enough of them. Stop over-complicating your wardrobe. You don't need a closet full of options. You need a few pieces that actually work. Right now, go to quince.com slash criminology for free shipping and 365-day returns.

That's a full year to build your wardrobe and love it. And you will. Now available in Canada, too. Don't keep settling for clothes that don't last. Go to QINCE.com slash criminology for free shipping and 365-day returns. Quince.com slash criminology. In the suburbs of D.C., a woman fails to show up for work and is found brutally murdered. I wonder what's emergency.

We just walked in the door and there's blood in the foyer. For the next two decades, the case resists. remained unsolved until new technology allowed investigators to do what had once been impossible. A new series from ABC Audio in 2020, Blood and Water. Listen now, wherever you get your podcasts. On February 15, 1976, the day that Mark Stebbins was abducted, Sloan actually called the Southfield Police Department to let them know that there was nothing suspicious going on at McCracken Service Center where he worked as a mechanic.

He was going to be there working late so the light would be on, but no one needed to check on anything. Now, this sounds super shady, and police probably should have gone there just based on that call, but it doesn't seem like they did. He was on parole at the time, and his parole officer actually called the Southfield Police Department and gave them his name regarding Mark's murder the day after his body was found. Sloan passed a lie detector test and allowed investigators to search his car. Hairs were collected from the car, but no testing could be done on them for many years. And more if you said it sounds super shady and it really does.

It's like someone just calling out of the blue and saying, hey, just want to let you know, I'm going to be here late. The lights are going to be on. But please don't check on it. Don't check on me. Nothing to see here. Yeah, that's very, very strange. And, you know, if I'm the police, I'm cruising by there just to pop in and just to make sure that he's on the up and up.

It wasn't until 2010 and 2012 that the hair. hairs from Arch Sloan's car were tested, and these tests yielded very interesting results. It turns out that hairs found on Mark Stebbins and Tim King were a DNA match to hairs taken from Sloan's 1966 Pontiac Bonneville. But these hairs, one from Mark's clothes and one from Tim's groin area, did not match Sloan's DNA. So were probably hairs from a passenger or passenger. However, this was just a mitochondrial match.

This doesn't even confirm that all of the hairs belong to the same person. They could have potentially all come from a different person who had a common maternal relative somewhere along their family tree. So it seems that at the very least, there's a real possibility that the killer, whoever it was, had spent time in Sloan's car. But the hair also doesn't technically rule Sloan out either, just because it wasn't his DNA found on a victim doesn't mean he couldn't have been working with the person whose DNA was found. It's possible that none of his hair transferred to the victims

and some of the hair of an accomplice did. Then again, Sloan could have loaned his car to the killer. There are a lot of scenarios here, but all of them seemed to indicate that Sloan likely knew or had contact with the killer, or was involved in some capacity. Sloan drove multiple vehicles in addition to the Bonneville. Two of them, different pickup trucks with camper shell tops, matched the description of a different vehicle noted multiple times in the Oakland County Child Murder's files. A truck matching this description was seen in both areas important to Christine Mihalik, where she disappeared from, and near where her body was found. That truck never got the attention like the Gremlin had received. So more if we've talked about a number of people already, and we're going to talk about more, but most of those people, people, no doubt, were proven to have done awful things in their lives, but couldn't be really

linked to the Oakland County child killings. But this Arch Sloan guy, the mere fact that there was a DNA match from his car is very interesting to me. Now, it turns out that it wasn't his DNA. But what does that mean? Like you said, right? Did one of the killers ride in his car? Did he loan his car to one of the killers? At the very least, it points to some type of involvement. Yeah, even if he didn't know he was involved, you've got physical evidence connecting his car to these crimes.

And out of everybody we've mentioned so far, that's the first time we see a direct link. So, you know, I'm sure once investigators determined that this DNA was linked to his car, that they probably really perked up, I would guess this is one of the biggest leads they've ever had. And I'm sure they would want to pursue that. So the DNA linking back to Arch Sloan's car does seem powerful, but it wasn't the only DNA that would be linked to someone. In 2011, test determined that a hair found on Christine Mahal,

clothing was a mitochondrial match to James Vincent Gunnels, known as Vince. The issue is that Gunnels was only 15 when the children were murdered in 1976 and 1977. It turns out that Gunnels himself was a sex abuse victim as a child at the hands of a man named Christopher Bush, who will talk about more in a bit, Gunnels went on to become perhaps an unwilling accomplice and would help lure potential victims to his abuser, Chris Bush. Is it possible that Gunnels helped lure some of the young victims to their deaths? Serial killer Dean Coral had two teenage accomplices helping him lure young male victims to their deaths in Texas. So this isn't unheard of. Vince Gunnells reportedly refused to sit for a polygraph examination.

regarding Christine's death. In June of 2013, Gunnall's then living in Kalamazoo, was arrested for obstructing by disguise. For his part, Gunnals has maintained that he never murdered anyone, and he was not the only victim that would help Chris Bush. Kenny Bowman was also a victim of Christopher Bush and another man named Gregory Green.

Just like with Gunnals, Bush and Green would make Kenny Bowman get close to other young boys. Bowman believes he was. he met Tim King at a cottage on S. Lake and was forced by Bush to perform sexual acts with him. There were reports to local authorities that Bush was seen with young boys the weekend that Tim King disappeared. Both Gregory Green and Christopher Bush were arrested in January of 1977 for sexually assaulting, or at least trying to assault, young boys in the area. Green had a long criminal history. He lived in Huntington Beach, California in early 70s. he was charged with 45 counts of criminal sexual conduct

for molesting the young boys on the basketball team he coached there. He was also charged with kidnapping and attempted murder. Green entered a guilty plea and admitted to molesting 15 different victims between the ages of 6 and 14 years old. The attempted murder charge stems from one victim, who he choked until he was unconscious, while attempting to sodomize him. When he thought that he had killed the boy, he burned him with a cigarette.

The boy didn't wake up, so he drove to an area near a hospital and dumped his body out of the car. This fits with what we know of the Oakland County child killer, sodomizing male victims and dumping them out of a car in plain view. Green was labeled a mentally disturbed sex offender. And since the time at Patton State Mental Hospital in San Bernardino, while there he was a model patient or a prisoner and was released on January 15, 1976, exactly one month before Mark Stebbins was abducted. He went back to Michigan, where he at some point somehow met Chris Bush.

Christopher Bush was arrested for criminal sexual conduct with a minor in January 1977. The incident occurred at the restaurant Bush ran. Thanks to the money his father put up to open it for him. At the time, he was living in an Alma, Michigan. After his arrest, he moved into his parents' home in Bloomfield Village. Bush allowed a search of his home, trying to act nonchalant. But investigators found a suitcase full of roles of film, pictures, and magazines, including

images and movies of children. He denied any involvement in the murder of Mark Stebbins, but he didn't deny molesting Kenny Bowman. At the time, Christopher Bush had no criminal record. There are some who suspect that his father, Harold Bush, a wealthy and influential bigwig in Detroit's auto industry for General Motors, got him out of any potential trouble that he got into. But now, Green had flipped on Bush to save his own skin, and Bush was in the crosshairs of investigators. Bush gave investigators the locations

of where he had hunted for his own victims, and when he did so, he described the areas that Mark Stebbins, Jill Robinson, and Christine Mihalik were last seen in. He also did so in the order that they disappeared in. He said he picked up a young boy at the intersection of nine-mile road and Woodward in Furndale, dropped him off from Royal Oak near Woodward and 13-mile road, and also mentioned Hartfield's bowling alley and the 7-Eleven across the street. Was this guilty knowledge on Chris Bush's part? Or were these locations he mentioned, just natural targets of pedophiles like him for some reason? But some people push back and say that if Bush was involved than the murders, why would he admit that he trolled areas where the victims were abducted,

but at least one of Vasgator believes that Bush was trying to muddy the waters in case there were any eyewitness descriptions of him in any of these areas. That way, he could claim if he was seen there, he was looking for other victims, not the ones who were killed. Thanks to a plea deal, for his part in these child molestations, Christopher Bush received only two years of probation for sexually assaulting gunwales, no jail time. But his partner Gregory Green, without a powerful father and money, was stuck behind bars, despite facing the same charges. Green's bail was set at $75,000. So he was stuck in jail, while Bush made his bail of just $1,000.

It appears that Green was still in jail when Tim King was abducted and killed, which could mean that if he was involved in any of the murders, he wasn't involved in Tim Kings. Green received a life sentence. He died in prison in 1995 after suffering a heart attack. One of his former cellmates claimed that Green had bragged about getting away with killing four kids. The cellmate took a polygraph about his claims and passed for whatever that's worked. And more if I have to go back and talk about Gregory Green. He ultimately got life in prison, which I am absolutely fine with.

The problem I have is what happened to him in California in the early 70s. I mean, we mentioned it. 45 counts of criminal sexual conduct and kidnapping and attempted murder. And this guy, after being placed in a state mental hospital, ultimately did just a few years. and was released. Yeah, I'm never shocked by the light sentences and the lack of jail time when we talk about the 70s cases and these predators that, you know, they rape someone or they kill someone, and then you look at their record and find out they've been in prison and mental hospitals for related crimes for multiple times for years. And this guy is just another example of that.

You know, this guy should have never been on the street. So these two birds of a feather, Bush and Green were drawn to each other and committed despicable crimes against kids at the very least. Could they have also murdered the kids? We know that Bush had access to a cottage on S. Lake. This could be where the children were held before their deaths. According to Bush, he and Green shared a fantasy where they would each take a shift staying with an imprisoned child, even going as far as to plan for one of them to work the night shift. Gregory Green claimed that Christopher Bush was the person who killed Mark Stebbins. If he was telling the truth, then Bush, being out of jail when Tim King was killed,

lines up perfectly with Bush being the Oakland County child killer. Bush, who was living in Bloomfield Hills at the time, has ties to Brother Paul's children's mission, the pedophile ring operating on North Fox Island. His parents often traveled for business, so it wasn't unusual for the home to be empty, other than for Chris Bush himself. He would have had yet another place to hold the children. In January 1977, Christopher Bush passed a lie detector test regarding the murder of Mark Stebbins. A few days later, Green was also given a polygraph test regarding Mark's murder, and he passed too.

This is pretty much the main way that people were cleared at the time. It's very frustrated and look back on this now because we know how unreliable polygraph tests are, and they're not admissible in court. Yeah, that is frustrating to me as well. I mean, you know, in the 70s, they did put a lot more weight on polygraphs. There's no doubt about it. I think they thought they were just more scientific than what they really turned out to be. So the fact that, you know, people were convicted based on those, that's horrible.

But also just as horrible, people were excluded as suspects. in many cases solely based on these polygraph examination results. Yeah, I mean, if I can see rolling guys out if their fingerprints didn't match evidence or their blood type was the wrong blood type and didn't match the evidence, things like that. But we know that in the 70s, a lot of stuff like polygraphs was used. And we know now that that's not reliable. In November 1978, 27-year-old Christopher Bush was found dead in his Bloomfield Hills home. He took his own life with a 22-caliber rifle, which was lying on the bed beside him.

His brother found him after he was called by the maid, who showed up just like she did every Monday at 8 a.m., but couldn't get inside. There are people who feel that the details of Bush's suicide just don't quite add up. there were reportedly multiple shell casings on the floor, but only one bullet wound in Bush's body. There was no gunpowder on his hands. He was lying on his side with his right arm under the covers and his left arm on top of his body, not near the rifle. There's a lack of any blood spatter near his body. The bullet wound that killed him is said to have been directly between his eyes, which is an unusual, if not impossible, position for a suicide, depending on what expert you ask.

Bloomfield Police Department Corporal Richard McNamey, the first officer on the scene of Bush's suicide, ended up being arrested in the 1980s. For criminal sexual conduct with a minor, he drove a 1973 Pontiac Ventura, which looks very similar to a Pontiac Lamont, which we'll talk about in a bit. And more, if this kind of really stuck with me, as we were researching this case, I just don't know how many people who make the decision to end their life with a firearm would do so between the eyes. That just seems like a very strange place.

Yeah, that is odd. And, you know, sometimes strange things happen that don't necessarily mean there's something else going on. But in this case, you know, it's, it's kind of strange and it makes you wonder if there's something else going on that more than meets the eye. Well, let's face it, with this guy's past, I mean, there might not be a shortage of people who might want to have seen him dead. Yeah, out of maybe revenge or, you know, maybe a person that was involved in some of his crimes that didn't want him rolling over on them and did it to silence him. Christopher Bush's brother didn't feel that he had shown any signs of depression,

especially anything so severe that he would take his own life. He had been excited about starting a new job. As we know, though, suicides can often take family members by surprise. But if Bush didn't really take his own life, then who killed him? Who would have wanted his death to look like a suicide? Was Christopher Bush a patsy to lay these murders on? A lot of people believe that's possible. In Bush's room, investigators found a pencil sketch of what looked to be a young boy screaming.

Many believe this boy bears a striking resemblance to Mark Stebbins. There was a shotgun shell sitting on a desk in the room, which many people connect to Jill Robinson, even though this has never been determined. Ropes were found on the closet floor. They had discolourations on them, which many people believed to be blood, making them think of the rope burns on Mark and Tim. The ropes, however, were not tested. and ended up disappearing from the logged evidence. Investigators at the time disputed the notion that the ropes were bloody,

stating that if they had been, they would have been tested immediately. For years, Christopher Bush stayed at or near the top of the suspect list, but in 2012, according to Click on Detroit, Oakland County prosecutor Jessica Cooper said that whatever evidence that may or may not exist does not come back to Bush. And Paul Walton, Chief Assistant Oakland County prosecutor, said,

there isn't a piece of evidence that we can point to. And say Mr. Bush killed Timothy King, Joel Robinson, Christine Mihalik, or Mark Stevens. It seems by this point, investigators didn't feel like Bush

was tied to any evidence. One interesting tidbit is that Christopher Bush drove a blue 1975 Chevy Vega. with a white stripe down the side, which did look similar to an AMC gremlin, which was the car investigators spent a lot of time looking for. So, you know, many people have wondered whether this could have been a case of mistaken identity with the vehicle type. And police should have been looking not just for AMC gremlins,

but for similar looking cars. It's not an indisputable fact that a gremlin was a vehicle involved. in this case. While Tim King may have been seen standing near one before he disappeared, we don't have any statements that the man seemed talking to him had been the driver of that Gremlin, and the Gremlin was still parked in the Hunter Maple Pharmacy parking lot after Tim went missing. His 16-year-old brother, Christopher, remembered seeing it that evening when everyone was out desperately searching the area for Tim. The son had already gone down. If that car was involved in his disappearance, it was likely not used as the getaway car that evening.

We should point out that after our first part of this two-parter, a listener who studied this case extensively, reached out to us to say that the Grumlin was a red herring and that there's no proof it had anything to do with the case. But a lot of resources in time were put into trying to track it down. But one question people have asked, why did the owner not come forward? So the Grimlin may have been a red herring, but there's another vehicle that may be tied to the case. a witness believed they saw a dark-colored 70s model Pontiac Lamonts on the shoulder of the highway in Troy a few hours before Jill Robinson's body was discovered. There was some damage on the driver's side and the left tail light was broken.

There was a snowbank near Christine's body and there was an impression in it that showed that a car had made a two or three-point turn near her body. Investigators believe the killer backed their car up into the snow leaving the mark. Investigators were able to match this imprint to a Pontiac Lamonts with a damaged trailer hitch, which seems very specific. After all, how many Pontiac Lamans with the trailer hitch were there in that area of Michigan? Another witness, Doug Wilson, claimed to have seen Tim King head to the store on a skateboard. He took note of this because he was driving a brand new car and didn't want it to get hit by a wayward skateboard. Wilson also noticed that while Tim was talking to a man between 25 and 35 years old, an older man between 55 and 65 back to 1973 Pontiac Lamont's into the space

across from him. After Wilson had finished his shopping, maybe 20 minutes later, all three of them were gone. We mentioned earlier Bloomfield Police Department, Corporal Richard who responded to Chris Bush's home after his death and later faced charges for sex crimes drove a similar car, a Pontiac Venture. Of course, this could have been a coincidence. For a long time in this case, the talk of suspicious vehicles and shady pedophiles dominated the discussion. But then something from the past would present something new to talk about. It turns out that when investigators looked at the results of Gregory Green and Christopher Bush's polygraph examinations, both men didn't actually pass.

At best, Bush's test was inconclusive, but there were potential signs of deception. Green had flat out failed his test. Investigators had cleared them in error all those years ago. This was unknown during the initial investigation, but in April of 1977, Christopher Bush took a different polygraph relating to his charges for assaulting Kenny Bowman, and during that session, he admitted to killing Tim King. The polygraph examiner Larry Wasser would never forget this session. Unfortunately, he was ethically bound not to disclose this information.

Wasser would finally recall this confession in 2006, giving fellow polygraph examiner Patrick Coffey, a vague recounting. Coffee knew exactly what Wasser was talking about, because he had lived in the same neighbor. as Tim King when he was growing up. The case is part of what made him become a polygraph examiner. But later, Wasser denied making any such statement. Was this because he never really said it or because he realized he had breached his ethics and didn't want to get into trouble?

Either way, as we all know, polygraph tests are not admissible in court. They're not an exact science. But if that's primarily what investigators used to rule out, and Green, it's very troubling. The investigation into the Oakland child murders included multiple different law enforcement agencies, all trying to figure things out, compare notes, and work together to compile the facts, and they all concluded that the four murdered children were all taken from and left in different cities, which involved multiple jurisdictions.

The FBI and the Michigan State Police were also involved. When the task force was created, the investigation became the largest in the history of of the United States. Despite that massive effort of time, manpower, and resources, the case remains on salt. Many of the people who may have had answers or been involved died a long time ago. This is still an open investigation, and there are still family members waiting for answers. If you have any information about the murders of Mark Stebbins, Joe Robinson, Christine Mahalek, or Timothy King, you can give a tip to the Michigan State Police by calling 855-640. to 4847.

You're also encouraged to call if you have any information about any of the murders or suspects discussed in this case, like who else Arch Sloan may have associated with, the Michigan State Police can help get what you know into the right

hands. So more of it, I think in the final analysis, and for me, this is one of those unsolved cases that, you know, is near the top of the list for many people as far as wanting to know who the Oakland County child killer was. I mean, there's no doubt. It's a very infamous unsolved case or set of cases.

And unfortunately, it involves a number of children. So that makes it tougher. But I was struck as we were going through this one. Obviously, we're talking about the known victims, but then you have all these other victims of abuse, child sexual assault material and a litany of people kind of scattered, you know, around the Detroit area, the, the Michigan area who were involved in one ring, different rings. I mean, it's a scary proposition. Yeah, it's a very seedy aspect of the case, the, the underbelly of this area, the people that were hiding in the shadows. And what's interesting to me is if you look on a map and I encourage all the listeners

to go check up maps on this case, you'll see that the area where all four victims were taken from was a very small, stretch of, of an area. And it's just frightening to know in that small stretch of an area how many predators there were. All these different people we talked about were right in that cluster. So all the kids, not the ones that were murdered, but every kid living there probably risked danger at that time because there were so many of these predators and creeps right there. Yeah, I mentioned it in episode one, but, you know, I live. lived close to a lot of the areas that we talked about in these two episodes. And yeah, I think geographically, a lot of these areas are pretty close together.

But as you mentioned in the first episode, right, a pretty densely populated county when it comes to Oakland. I just think when you have so many people kind of hitting police radar who are known to have been involved in criminal activity involving children. I mean, how can they not be persons of interest or even suspects in this case? And we just mentioned Arch Sloan, but, you know, such an interesting connection there because there's actual DNA. Yeah, it's a very interesting part of the case to know that in some manner or some way that

Arch Sloan may hold the key to solving this case because, you know, his car, evidence there, taken from that car links to these crimes. So he's either involved in some capacity, even if he doesn't know it. But to this point, he hasn't owned up to any responsibility and has never divulged any names that we know of to bring this case to a resolution. So we're going to wrap this episode up a little differently than we normally do. Morph and I got to thinking just how fascinating it would be to try and understand or get into the mind of someone who could commit these kinds of horrible murders of children.

And we thought, who better to help us try and do this than an FBI profiling? Yeah, I was fortunate enough to sit down with former FBI profiler, or Julie. Kelly Callie, who also hosts the awesome podcast, The Console, Real FBI Profilers. We talked about what her years of experience profiling killers like this tells her about this case and the killer. It's a lengthy but fascinating interview that we're going to play in its entirety here at the end. We think listeners will really be intrigued by what Julie has to say.

So look for that in just a moment. But that's it for our two-parter on the Oakland County Child Killers case. As always, if you love the show, but having to be a lot of the show, but having to be a two-parter. done so yet. Take a minute. Go out, leave us a review or rating. Also, keep telling your friends, word of mouth goes a long way. If you want to find us on social media, we're on every major platform. Just search for Criminology Podcast on your favorite. And for news, old episodes, and more, head over to our website, Criminology Podcast.com. And if you want to join a discussion about the podcast and the cases we discuss, go over to Facebook and search for Criminology Podcast

discussion in fans. Don't forget. Right after this is Morph's interview with former FBI profiler Julia Callie. That's it for another episode of criminology. So for Mike and Morph, we'll talk to you next week. Take care, everyone. Hi, Julian. Welcome to the show. Thank you for coming on and sharing your insights with our listeners.

Thank you for inviting me. I felt like I was cramming for a college final. Yeah. It was sort of last minute, but I knew it would be invalid. We're going to dive into the profiling and get your thoughts on Oakland County Child Killer case. Before we do, can you tell listeners a little bit about your background and your resume? Sure. My name is Julia Cowley. I am a retired FBI agent. I spent 22 years in the FBI. I was also a member of the FBI's behavioral analysis unit. I was assigned to the Crimes Against Adults Unit. And prior to becoming an FBI agent, I was a forensic scientist with the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation. And part of my responsibilities were not only analyzing evidence in the laboratory, but also going out to homicide scenes and processing those scenes. And from that experience working homicide scenes, I also was a member when I joined the FBI, I was a member of the FBI's evidence response team.

throughout my career, I was also an instructor at the FBI laboratory for FBI agents who were new members of the evidence response team. And I was the lead instructor for that two-week course for the new agents joining the ERT, as it's known as. So that's my background in a nutshell. I retired almost five years ago. I can't believe it. It's been that long. Well, you've done some great work. you obviously have an impressive resume.

I'm always happy to get experts on like you that are the real deal and have experience, you know, doing this kind of stuff. And this kind of case especially, it's just very interesting to get the insights of somebody like you. And for listeners that really want to check out a great podcast, check out the console, Julia's show, really good show. I was lucky to be a guest on there covering the Liz Braza case. And we talked about that on that episode and we covered that before on criminology. So definitely go check that episode out.

And, you know, a little bit of a shout out back to us. You told me a long time ago that your first experience in a true crime podcast was listening to our coverage of the Zodiac Killer. So, you know, it seems like we've come full circle now. I can't believe I'm sitting here with you now. Yeah. The first podcast I ever listened to was criminology's coverage of the Zodiac. I was on a flight and I just decided, you know, let me check out this podcast here. And of course, I was always interested in the Zodiac case.

It was not a case I ever worked on when I was with the FBI. So it always captured my interest and I saw your show. I'm like, this is the one I want to listen to. So that was it. And I was hooked. And here we are, all these years later, you've got your own show. And you're a guest on this show. I know.

I'm honored. Thank you. So let's get into what we're here for today. And that is the Oakland County Child Killer case. And I have a series of questions that I want to ask. But before I do that, I'd like to have you, if you can, lay out your presentation on what you came up with based on what you were able to read up on this case. Sure. So I do want to give a caveat that I don't have access to all the records, all the police files, as I normally would when conducting a profile. And also I don't do profiles on my own. Typically, usually we work as a group and there's usually three or four of us looking at a case. So I just want to throw out those caveats. This is just my opinion based on the information that I did have access to. You sent me a lot on the, on the case, but like I said, I haven't seen photographs or all the lab reports or various reports that were done at the time. So this will be limited. But I think what struck me right off the bat, and I don't think any of this is going to be earth-shattering for your listeners. It's probably going to be fairly obvious, but you have the four victims that you sent me. And I know there's,

possibly other victims suspected. But the ones I was looking at were Mark, Jill, Christine, and Timothy, those main four where I think law enforcement has confirmed they do believe that they're linked. So I was looking at those. And just looking at their ages, it looked to me as if we're probably dealing with a pedophile, somebody whose preference is pre-adolescent, children. and with a preference toward male victims, but obviously not exclusive to male victims, because there are two female. But I believe just based on the interaction the offender had with the victims, he likely preferred to have a male victim. Now, when we're looking at the victim selection process, every offender goes through the same kind of process. Desirability, availability, availability, and vulnerability. So every offender has an ideal victim. And that's usually the criteria that's the first to go out the door because it's very difficult to find that ideal victim. So then they're looking okay, who's available to me? They look around and then from those who are available, they look for

the most vulnerable. So in this case where you have, it's an offender whose preference is a male victim. If he cannot find a male victim, in this case, he would choose a female victim and who's ever available and vulnerable to him. So that's the first thing that stood out. This is a pedophile. And in my opinion, likely offended prior to these murders and possibly after. But I don't think the kidnapping sexual assault and murder of Mark Stebbins was his first offense. So those are, that's what jumped out at me right away. So along those lines, I'm going to jump ahead through some of the questions that I have. Do you have an estimate, like if you had to ballpark what age range this guy might be? What would you say? Age is very difficult because a lot of

times we're looking at not necessarily chronological age. We're looking at emotional age. So what we're looking at, too, is that several victims were held for an extended period of time. And what that requires is privacy. And so did the offender, were they at a place in their life where they could have their own place? They weren't living with their mom and dad or another family member or guardian. they have their own place at this point. So that maybe puts them a little bit older. So anyone who can live on their own and have privacy or have access to a place with privacy. So, you know, I would say it's a wide range anywhere from early to mid-20s to, you know, 40s, 50s, I mean, it could be, it's a wide range. There does seem to be some confidence.

in the offending that I see. And like I said, I don't think this is the first time. I don't think Mark was his first victim, whether he's murdered prior to Mark, I can't say, but I am sure that he's offended prior to Mark. So that age range is a wide age, and that's always really difficult for us. And one thing else I will say, because I know a lot of people, people will ask this because of the extended period of time that the kids were held, you know, is he acting alone or is there some sort of accomplice with him? So when we do profiling,

it's based on probabilities. What's most likely? What do the statistics tell us? What does the research tell us? And in looking through the materials that I had access to, I didn't see anything that would indicate there was an additional offender. And usually, when we're doing a profile, we have to have some pretty good evidence. There's a second offender, like two different DNA hits or something like that. Or somebody absolutely knows that they saw the victim with two different people or two people, something on video. If we don't have solid information that there's a second offender, overwhelmingly, it's usually just one offender. So we stick with one offender. So I just want to say, too, I think it's a, likely a white male because of the area,

because of the victimology, acting loan. So a white male acting loan, somewhere between, you know, early 20s to 50s. And that's... So that narrows it down. Yeah, I mean, it does. I mean, it takes away part of the population. And, I mean, that's a good place to start. And I think you hit the nail right ahead. There's a lot of discussion. in this case about possibly more than one killer being involved. And I'm just curious in your experience, how often do crimes like this with two people happen? Not that often, but it's not like it never happened.

So I wouldn't rule it out, but I just don't see anything in these materials that would indicate to me that this offender had, there had to be a second person involved. even when you have multiple victims, like you have two, three victims at one scene. Overwhelmingly, it's still one offender. So, you know, I just stick with the statistics and the probabilities. And, you know, like I said, there are some well-known cases where you have, you know, a main offender and then you have someone that may assist them or they may commit the crimes together. But that is not. the, you know, the statistical precedence. And I think a lot of people point to the, to the possibility, at least, of two people in this case because of the murders are very cold and, you know, murdering a child, I think, is like a whole other level of brutal, brutality. But then you see these instances where they're posed almost and they're, they look like they're,

you know, put, you know, in one case, I think he had his hands on his chest. And they're, they're sort of laid in positions like they wanted to, I don't know, what the right term would be, just respect them somehow, show them some kind of respect. It seems to sort of clash with someone that would just cold-bloodedly murder a child. Then you see this other side where they're showing some kind of care. And along those lines, you know, we know that they were fed, they were given water, they were cleaned. So it does seem like some kind of care went into being provided for them despite the fact they were murdered. So it's a strange clash, and I was wondering how often you see something like that, this like a contradiction between what they actually do to these victims, but then the signs.

but then the signs that they cared for them in some way. Well, I first want to address the word care. And, you know, we have to think about why is this offender caring for them? He's, you know, maybe trying to keep them alive, keep them energetic because he wants a specific type of victim. He doesn't want them to, let's say, get sick or pass out because they haven't eaten or become dehydrated because he needs them for whatever his fantasy is and he wants a specific type of victim. He doesn't want them passed out. I think we have to think about is he keeping them

nourished so that he can do what he wants to do and that his fantasy plays out the way he wants it to play out. I think you have to think about it like that because this offender is not a caring individual. He is someone who is willing to take a choice. He is someone who is willing to take a child, tie them up, sexually abuse them, murder them, and just leave them out in the elements to be found. And so I don't think our definition of caring should be he was caring because he wanted to make sure they were okay. He was caring for them so that his own needs could be fulfilled. That's my opinion about what we're looking at. I mean, is there a possibility at some point, you know, the victims were redressed, whether they dressed themselves or he dressed them after

they were killed. I don't know, but I think that's an element of control. I think this offender has a fantasy of control and prolonged control of a child victim to be able to do what he wants to do, whatever that fantasy may be. And I think this. As far as the posing, potential posing of the victim, it's hard for me to weigh in too much on that because they haven't seen the photographs. And so I couldn't say, is this posed or is this purposely done and what's the purpose? Now, there is a term called undoing. And it's kind of rare, but you do see it in certain cases. A lot of times you see it in cases where the offender knows the victim and they're kind of

trying to psychologically undo what they've done, such as covering the victim's face with a blanket. So it's kind of like, okay, if I cover the victim, I didn't really do what I did. I don't have to see what I did. So perhaps addressing the victim and placing them where their bodies are found and somehow posing them is this idea of psychological undoing. That is just speculation on my part without having seen. I've read descriptions that it did look like they were just placed. So that's a possibility, just sort of undoing. But it's usually seen when you have some kind of, you do see it in pedophiles, I should say. There's some research that suggests pedophiles will engage in undoing as well. But you often see that when there's a known connection between the offender and the victim, some sort of emotional connection, such as a familial relationship of some sort. what I will say as well is that since you were talking about the dump sites where the bodies were found didn't seem to be that the offender made any attempt to hide them. And so that would indicate to me that the offender did not feel he had a clue or that other people knew of the relationship that he had with the victims. it, meaning that he didn't feel if the victims were found quickly, and some were, if they were found quickly, that he would be an automatic suspect. So what that tells me is that he likely did not have a prior relationship with these kids. So, or at least he didn't believe that there was a known relationship that he had with the kids. So I think this was likely stranger, abduction, sexual assault.

assault, murder, and then dumping the victims. Along those lines, would this be, in your opinion, would this be the kind of person that would snatch a kid just physically drag them into a car, or would they be more likely to lure them in with some something? Well, based on the fact that keeping them for a prolonged period of time, it's possible that, and we also, in reading the files and what I read, it didn't appear that. anybody saw anything or heard any screaming or anything like that. So I do think that this particular offender perhaps relied on his personality traits to be able to approach these kids. Perhaps he didn't

appear intimidating or threatening to children or even other people around. He didn't look suspicious. He fit in. So possibly able to approach the kids, quickly build some trust. And maybe come up with a ruse of some sort to get them in his vehicle, or he just was able to get close enough to the kids in order to grab them very quickly and throw them in the car. I mean, sometimes abductions happen so quickly. So in either way, I do think that this is an offender who fits in and is very comfortable in these areas, these kind of public areas where the kids were last seen. This is an area where he's very familiar with.

And so, yes, I do think it's possible he was able to somehow get close enough and appear non-threatening enough to get within at least a close distance to grab the kids, maybe disarm them some way by saying something to them and they're talking. And then he grabs them, throws them in his vehicle. And I do think he had a vehicle as well. think it was necessary for his crimes. As opposed to maybe just like walking down the street with the kids right in alongside them. Yeah, I think that, you know, when looking at where the kids and I don't have the map up right now, but it's the map you sent me where they were taken from and then where they were

all found, I think there's a great enough distance. I think a car was necessary. A vehicle would have been necessary to do all the transportation. Again, I don't think that's earth-shattering, but, you know, it's always, you have to think about it. How did he transport the kids? Is he so close by that he didn't have to have a car? I mean, we've seen offenders who get kids right in their neighborhood and take them right into their house or apartment, and they're never seen again. So you have to consider what's the mood of transportation if there is one.

I think he had a car. So. Yeah. And especially, I guess, you know, it's a lot of. you're dumping a body, you don't want to be seen walking down the road carrying a child's body that's going to stand out. So it seems to make sense, reasonably that there'd be a vehicle. One other thing I wanted to ask you sort of before we move on about the treatment of the bodies, there's been a lot of discussion or evidence that maybe the bodies and where the clothes were washed.

You think that was maybe done in some kind of attempt to get rid of evidence? or do you think there might be some kind of meaning to that? The most practical explanation is forensic countermeasures. He's trying to hide the evidence, which would lead me to believe he is evidence conscious and somewhat criminally sophisticated if he's doing those types of things. And again, tells me he may have been convicted before based on possible evidence. Of course, this is the days before. DNA, but we had hairs, fibers, biological fluids could still be detected, things that could

link an offender to a victim, many other forensic things prior to DNA. So that's a practical explanation. Now, why go to the trouble of redressing the children? That's an extra step. It's an extra unnecessary step. Let's say you're just, you're washing the victims. I read one of the victims had very clean fingernails and toenails as if they had been cleaned. And I don't know if that was confirmed, but that's what I read in the files. So that's all necessary if you're trying to hide forensic evidence. Taking the clean clothes, let's say, let's say the clothes were washed. I mean, I don't know how you know for sure they were washed other than maybe he just,

took the clothes off and set them aside while he offended and then redress them with clothes that just weren't that dirty to begin with. But let's say he did wash them as well. Or let's say he didn't. I don't think it really matters. Why take the time to redress them? Why not throw them out the way he did unclothed? Because it's extra time. It's extra effort. So to me, that's prioritized behavior. Why do that? And that indicates to me more of a control fantasy of some sort possible undoing. You know, I didn't do this. I'm redressing them just as I found them, almost psychologically erasing that he did this. It's possible, as you brought up about maybe showing respect at least at the end. And I use it. I use it.

air quotes when I say respect. I don't think the offender really truly has any respect, but I do think that it's possible the redressing and leaving them out to be found clothed is possible ritualistic behavior based on some sort of fantasy, caretaking fantasy of some sort. But the bottom line, when you have this like sort of pseudo caretaking type fantasy that you're seeing in these crimes, Those are usually based on the need to possess, the need to control, the need to dominate, not necessarily to truly care for that victim, the way we know caring to be. Now, we, I don't want to go too far off course, but I don't know how familiar are with the April Marie Tinsley case. I am familiar with the, yes, I am familiar with that case, but not.

not in details. Yeah, in her case, a couple things you just mentioned made me think of this case because in her case, her killer, John D. Miller, did dress her again

and discarded her body, and he was admittedly patrolling, looking for other potential victims following. So I think that proves that he didn't necessarily regret what he did.

He admitted. that he was looking for more victims. So I sort of, his name popped into my head when you're talking about that because, you know, here's somebody that thankfully, as far as we know, he didn't have any other victims. But, you know, he had dressed her and admitted that he tried to get more victims. So I wonder, you know, that's made me think of that case. And when you see a case like hers that's solved, you can maybe look at that person and wonder if there's any kind of parallels to that person in a case like this.

What I see similarities is that just because you may be engaged in potential, and I'm just saying potential undoing, doesn't mean you regret or that you're going to stop what you're doing. And I mean, I think particularly with in Timothy's case, I think that was very successful for the offender. It's a lot of elements about in the details where I think that that particularly, crime went well for him, whereas maybe the kidnapping of the girl victims, the female victims, was not as successful for him. So I don't think he likely had any regrets in terms of, oh, I feel so bad, I'm going to stop. That is just not, I mean, pedophilia is very difficult. to treat and to prevent. And I don't think that, you know, this offender would necessarily just stop on his own unless there was some kind of really compelling reason. And I also want to point out, too, that, you know, the female victims in this case, there was no evidence of sexual assault against them, but just because we don't have the evidence of sexual assault doesn't mean that these

aren't sexually motivated crimes because you still have elements of power and control and domination over the two female victims. And that can still be very gratifying for an offender, even if they are not the ideal type of victims that he's looking for. But, I mean, you have one victim who's kept for over two weeks. And is that because he enjoyed keeping a victim hostage? That way, I think so. I think that that was also very successful in its own way, in that he was living out his fantasy of, you know, controlling these victims. And it's, you bring up an interesting point there of living out a fantasy.

And I wonder, does this type of criminal that goes on to do these things, do they have, in your experience, like, a background of maybe fantasizing about this stuff for a long time before they actually do it? Very much so. These crimes are based on fantasy. And oftentimes they fantasize about them for a great deal of time prior to actually offending. So absolutely. And I'm trying to get a sense of what kind of person does is it's hard to get into that head of that, the kind of person that do something like this, but I'm just trying to understand them and what's driving them. Yeah, and, you know, I'm sure you've been doing this long and probably still don't know,

because I don't think there is any way to know. But just looking in their background, are they usually going to be victims themselves at some point of violence or sexual abuse? Oftentimes, yes. And you mentioned that there's, they may or may or may or may. not have a record for for abusing children, but they've likely done it before. Might they have some other crimes that might go along with it that police might be looking for too in their background? They might with pedophilia, and I don't know what the statistics are, but a lot of times

that's their only crime they're committing. But you may have associated crimes such as loitering or, you know, suspicious behavior reported around children or fondling or something that that person made me feel uncomfortable. Those are the types of things. Child pornography you may see in their history of, you know, some kind of visual materials that they seek out prior to offending that reinforces their fantasies. And they're going to be seeking out the kinds of materials based on what they're fantasizing about.

So those are the types of things you might see in the. their background, you might, you know, I'm not saying you wouldn't see like a history of, you know, burglary or theft or anything like that. You might, but typically with, you know, sex offenders like this, you typically see other sex offenses in their history. And like I said, I do believe prior to Mark this offender, offended against children prior to this, whether he murdered them or not, I can't say, but I do think he's offended before. Yeah, and in this case, especially, there's so much that comes up in the way of pedophiles that and sex offenders, if you start going down that avenue, you're going to come onto a bunch of

different suspects, which probably made the investigation tough because there's, you know, pops up left and right in this case. and so you think, you know, especially as I'm going to get into a little bit further here and a couple of questions, there's a pretty good description of a suspect. And, you know, it's kind of, on one hand, it seems, okay, there's an endless pool of suspects here. But on the other hand, it almost feels like it's strange that somebody didn't, you know, 10 different people didn't call in the same person because of things that, that, that, meet what we know about this person and what we think we know about this person. And I'm trying to

get a sense, too, if you have an opinion. Is this a type person that would probably be in, you know, that middle class neighborhood living there in generally fits in with everybody in that community? Yes. I think the offender is very comfortable in this area. I think they are comfortable in the suburbs. This is where they're offending. There's a you know, even though there are miles that separate some of the victims where they're taken and where they're found, you know, you have this cluster area and it kind of follows, you know, it gives immediate access to certain roads. I think this is a path the offenders very comfortable with. I think the he is from this area. I think he's got, as the geo profiler would say, anchor points. close by, whether it's he lives there, he works there, he's driving through, he's driving these roads often, he's frequenting these places often, and he fits in. I think we're always looking for that person who doesn't fit in, the creepy guy, but this is somebody who's not

necessarily going to get a second look because he is so comfortable and confident operating in this area. But I do think this is someplace he's very comfortable with, probably even living and working in the area, or passing through this area routinely. But, you know, he, he offends, he grabs the kids in these kind of public areas. And then when he is ready to dispose of the bodies, he kind of goes out on the periphery. So he doesn't want necessarily to discard the victim too close to where he actually took them from. So there's a plan here. But he doesn't go out that far either.

So again, it goes back to familiarity because you're not necessarily going to, or it's unlikely that somebody would take a body to someplace that they're not comfortable with, particularly some of these victims were left possibly during the day. And I think one of them in the morning. and that's really high risk if you're not comfortable in an area. And I think this just shows how comfortable he was. Yeah, I want to touch you on the victimology. You went over a little bit of the fact that there were two female victims, two male victims.

You seem to think that his choice if he had one would be more of a male victim. And maybe the female victims were maybe more opportunistic. But I am curious, you mentioned that there's no. no evidence that the female victims were sexually assaulted. That doesn't mean they weren't. But the boys were, but they believe they were assaulted with foreign objects. And I wonder if that could mean anything to you, or does that say anything to you? I think it could potentially mean a lot of things.

It could go to fantasy. It could suggest a possible dysfunction of some sort, not necessarily. I don't want to jump to that conclusion, but I certainly think it's based on a fantasy that this person has. So if you are looking at their visual materials or looking for visual materials, I would look for materials that depict foreign object insertion. And but like you said, you know, the female victims, just because there was no evidence of it doesn't mean they weren't sexually assaulted. And even if they were not physically sexually assaulted, and even if they were not physically sexually assaulted, under the definition of what it is, it doesn't mean it's not sexually motivated. It doesn't mean that this wasn't gratifying to him to hold and control a victim for a specific length of time. I think sometimes we think if there's no sexual assault, this was not sexually motivated. But I don't believe that. I think this is a sexually motivated child killer. So, but yeah, I don't think I'd say much more beyond it's just his fantasy. possible sign of some sort of dysfunction of some sort as well, but most likely fantasy-based. Okay. And I wanted to move towards the differences, you know, one victim, 12-year-old, Joel Robinson reportedly had nightmares frequently about being shot to death, and she was the only victim who turned out to be shot. Another victim, 11-year-old Timothy King, he was found of

eaten fried chicken before he died. And while he was missing, his mom had gone on TV about him mentioning that his favorite food was fried chicken. I wonder if these couple things here are coincidences? Where do you think that the killer acted on intel that they received either from the victim themselves or the victim's family that might have led to these things here that seem at least coincidental at the least? Well, he had a lot of time with them.

So it is very possible that the victims did share information with him. I mean, you know, I don't know how much interaction he was having, but he certainly held them. He certainly provided them nourishment to keep them alive and to keep them healthy enough so he could offend against them. So it's possible, you know, as he's engaging with them and trying to keep them, potentially trying to come across as I'm trying, I'm going to help you, what would you like to eat? And, you know, the victim shares, well, I love fried chicken.

And that's what I'm hungry for. That's what he gets. It's very possible they shared information. Like in the case of one of the victims who was terrified of being shot and she winds up being shot, I mean, might he do that for some kind of cruel pleasure? Possibly. I don't think that we can't say just because he cared for them that he wouldn't get gratification from terrorizing them as well. I mean, I think that's part of it, the terror, the holding them, you're not going to see your families again and they're scared.

They probably feel they're going to die. That was all probably very gratifying for him. So certainly. And the best lead in this case came in when a witness came forward in the final case. you know, Timothy King's case to say that they saw a man parked next to a Grumlin talking to him and multiple sketches were created, distributed of this person along with images of this car with a hockey stick like striped down the side of it. And to me, this seems very specific. You know, you've got a look of what this guy may look like and what

his car may look like. And then after that description went out, the murder stopped. So, you think it's possible that this guy was out of self-preservation, was afraid and fled the area? And if he did, might his crimes continued someplace else and might he alter them in some way to not, you know, raise red flags that it's the same person? Or could he have stopped cold turkey and just stop doing this kind of stuff altogether? So there's a lot of speculation there. What I will say is that I'm always reluctant to trust eyewitness identification or eyewitness memories.

It's some of the weakest evidence that we have, even under ideal conditions. It's really difficult to recall details. However, let's say that this eyewitness was accurate. And the offender, who I believe has offended before may have even been convicted prior. and who's very evidence conscious realizes this is accurate, this is too close to home for me. And yes, that might prompt them to stop. Because despite the fact that we think, oh, there's a compulsion they can never stop. They can stop and they can stop for reasons such as self-preservation.

They can stop because life gets too busy. They can stop. A lot of people think, well, they either died or went to prison. A lot of times that's not even the case. they just stopped for number of reasons. But self-preservation is a big one. So yes. And if he felt like police were getting too close,

very well could have moved. You might see post-defense behavior like that. Changed his look, you know, maybe changed his hairstyle or facial hair. If he had it or, you know, grew a beard. If he didn't, you know, those could all be potential. Sold his car if he had, if he did infestrian. fact, that was him and the gremlin, and maybe he got rid of it or didn't drive it for a number of months or years even. And, you know, certainly relocating is another option that we would see. You, you know, there's all sorts of potential post-defense behavior, particularly if the offender feels like I'm about to be exposed. And would they reoffend? Certainly if, if, if, if, you know, If this person moved away and felt comfortable in their new location, I don't see any reason why they wouldn't offend again.

It's very reasonable to assume that. I can't say with 100% certainty that they would, but it's very likely. I mean, particularly, I already think the offender probably offended in the past. He's doing it again. he leaves this area, goes to another area, he's very likely to start up again. One of the things I don't think I would expect to see,

I would expect to see elements. And it's, again, it's really hard because I haven't seen the entire autopsy reports. I haven't seen the photographs. But the fantasies that he's having about kidnapping and controlling victims for a period of time, for an object insertion, those types of things, these base fantasies that he's engaging in and needs to have satisfied,

those aren't going to change. M.O. might change, but the ritualistic behavior doesn't change. The reasons he's committing these crimes, the gratification that he gets. And we don't know all the gratification he might be getting. We don't know because we don't know exactly what happened. But those underlying core ritualistic behaviors. I would expect to see those if he continued to offend after Timothy King. I think he touched on it earlier. I said, I think you said you don't think this killer really had any kind of empathy or, you know, sympathy or regrets. But might someone like this person later on in life, you know, regret what they did? Might we see, you know, suicide down the line, something like that.

Regret would not be the regret we would think, you're not feeling, or feeling bad for what he did. Regret could be turned inward for what's happening to him. It's all about him. So, no, I don't think that a person who does this to children has much empathy.

They care a lot about themselves and their own needs and their own needs come before the needs of anybody else, for any victims, any of the victims family members, they don't care. So if this person is struggling with regret, it's not regret for what he did. It's regret for what's being done to him. It's all going to be turned inward. Like, how is it affecting him? That's how I see a kind of person like this with regret. You know, we do something bad and we feel bad. We feel bad because maybe we hurt somebody's feelings

or we feel guilty because we know we did something wrong. But there are certain types of people that, no, I feel bad because I can't do what I want to do anymore because of these particular reasons. It's all about their own needs and how it's impacting them, not because they truly feel bad for what they did. And so there's all sorts of potential, you know, in addition to pedophilia, this person may have suffered. from other complications, let's say, such as depression, that could also, you know, you don't just have pedophilia and nothing else. There could be other things. So somebody with pedophilia who also becomes depressed could certainly take their own life. But I don't believe it would be about feeling bad for what they did. It would be other factors. That's an interesting, interesting outlook

there. If you were trying to help solve this case, obviously, if you could go back in a time, machine back to the 70s and with the knowledge that you've had, what do you think you might tell them about this person? I mean, you gave us an estimate as to what you thought of their age and that they fit in that area. Anything as far as employment, education, anything else that you might add that you think might have been included who this person was? I'm not sure I could add a lot. I would say definitely for them to look back and not necessarily just in this area because, you know, there might be somebody could have relocated to this area, but you're certainly looking for the suspects that have prior histories of some sort, whether it's, you know, indecency with a child, whether it's a conviction of sexually assaulting a child, whether it's a conviction or possession of child pornography. Certainly that would be the first thing I'd be looking at. I'd be looking for a white male, somebody living alone or with access to a private area.

Somebody, you know, I would look at their work schedules as well as, and of course, this comes, once you identify potential suspects and trying to prioritize them, looking at their work schedules, looking at their mode of transportation and how they travel to and from work and home and their other routine. activities that they engage in that would give them regular access to all these areas. You have main roads that are on that map that this person is likely traveling just in their regular everyday life. So I would examine those. I would not necessarily be looking for that creepy guy, but somebody who blends in who has the ability to potentially talk. their way out of things or appear normal. But then when you dig below the surface, it's, you know, they're hiding very deep fantasies. As far as employment, I don't believe this person likely had a job that required much of them because I do think that this fantasy was probably

took up a great portion of their life and certainly holding, a victim hostage the way that he did, there's a lot of time and efforts spent on this fantasy life versus becoming successful in a career. So I wouldn't be looking for somebody who, you know, has, you know, a high paying career where they're responsible to be at work, you know, 40 hours a week. And that kind of, I think you'd be looking for something that's a little more manual labor, maybe some kind of job that allows them to travel through these areas as well, to become familiar with these areas. So that's what I would be based on what I have now. With more details of the case, we could probably give them a little bit more, but that's just

what I would have so far. So it may help prioritize suspects, but it's also like take it and need a lot of a haystack. It's not easy. And there probably were many sex offenders in the area already, like everywhere, you know, I won't say a lot. And, you know, one thing I did want to ask you, I meant to ask you this early on, but I know there's cases where it's happened, and I don't know how often it happens. Maybe you have a better grasp on that, but might this person enlist one of their victims to help lure other victims to, into their car or something like that? I mean, we've certainly seen that before,

but I don't think I could speculate or offer an opinion as that, could that happen, it could, but I don't know that I see that in this case, but it certainly could happen. I mean, it's not unheard of that sex offenders employ other people to help them get more victims.

They groom one victim and they use that victim them to get other victims. That's always possible. And then the last question I want to ask you, you know, these pedophile rings, obviously they share some awful, terrible stuff between them. But would this person, if he murdered these children on his own, would he share something like that with another group of pedophiles? I don't know. I would say likely not. But as you said, there are groups of these like-minded pedophiles that get together. They share horrific details. And, you know, but, you know, I would say a lot of them don't kill.

So you'd have to find that right person that he would be able to share that with. And that person would have to be able to keep that secret. But like I said, a lot of pedophiles are, they're offending against children. children that they already know that they've groomed and it's a it's a process and so that's often that you see and so they will share that kind of information with each other but going on to become a child murderer becomes a little bit more and I don't think that would be somebody somebody would readily share with a whole group of people I think that would be something that you'd have to just find that right person to share.

My opinion, he likely didn't share this, what he had done. Yeah, and then even if he did, if you're in this group, it's not like you can go to the police and say, hey, at my pedophile group meeting or whatever that it would be called, somebody told me that they killed a kid. So it's like, even if someone had that information, how do you, I mean, short of an anonymous tip or something if they. Yeah, other than that. But like you said, you know, if somebody were to report.

that they have some explaining to do for themselves and maybe their own criminal activity and that would just expose them and very unlikely they'd be willing to take that risk and for something that necessary you know they might not believe or could even prove and it's probably like they probably rationalize thinking that's not true yeah or they just don't want to even get involved with the police don't want to get involved in the police don't want to get themselves clean yeah yeah That is very common. People do not like to be involved. You look the other way.

So there's a lot of information. I really appreciate your insights. Where can people find you, find out more about you, your work, social media, the show, everything. Let people know where they can tune in and find you. Well, our show is called The Consult, Real FBI Profilers. And I am the host, but I do the show with three other retired FBI profilers that I worked with in the FBI's BAU, a behavioral analysis unit. And we cover both solved and unsolved cases. We've covered cases we've worked on. We've covered other cases that we hadn't worked on or haven't

worked on. And in between casework, I also talk with people that can inform criminal profiling in the work that we do a little better. So I like to take a break in between the cases and do interviews of people as well. And on social media, we're on Twitter and Instagram and Facebook at the consult pod is our handle. And we also have a Facebook fan page called Unsubs that was created by fans for fans of the consult where listeners can discuss our episodes and other true crime topics. That's awesome. Again, I encourage all our listeners to go check out at Julia's work and her show. It's fantastic. And again, thank you so much for coming on and sharing your insights on this case with us.

Thank you for inviting me, Mike.