Dark Downeast - The Murder of Bernard Egounis (New Hampshire)

Episode Date: November 20, 2025

One ordinary day during August of 1983, in a quiet patch of parkland just off the road in Penacook, New Hampshire, a teenager found something that didn’t belong. What followed rippled through the small community for years.Interviews, rumors, and timelines never quite fit together. Voices clashed over what was seen, what was said, and what couldn’t be proved at all. This is a story about how quickly attention can settle on one person, and how hard it can be to find the truth once it does.View source material and photos for this episode at: darkdowneast.com/bernardegounis Dark Downeast is an Audiochuck and Kylie Media production hosted by Kylie Low.Follow @darkdowneast on Instagram, Facebook, and TikTokTo suggest a case visit darkdowneast.com/submit-case Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

One ordinary day during August of 1983 in a quiet patch of parkland just off the road in Pentecook, New Hampshire, a teenager found something that did not belong. What followed rippled through the small community for years. Interviews, rumors, and timelines never quite fit together. Voices clashed over what was seen, what was said, and what couldn't be proved at all. This is a story about how quickly attention can settle on one person and how hard it can be to find the truth once it does. I'm Kylie Lowe and this is the case of Bernard Egonus on Dark Down East.

When a young man named Melvin was taking a casual stroll through a park in Pentecook, New Hampshire, overlooking the Contacook River. The low hum of the nearby hydroelectric site blended with the steady rush of water over the dam. It was a familiar soundtrack in this small mill town, but beneath a park bench, just 20 feet from the road, Melvin noticed something unfamiliar that didn't belong in the park at all. a man lay face down on the ground wearing nothing but his underwear there was blood pooled beneath his body melvin froze whatever he'd found he wanted no part of it instead of calling police himself melvin waved down his friend paul and asked him to handle it when paul returned with conquered police to the scene they found the man lying near the corner of east and bridge streets very close to the boscoen town line the spot was quite a quiet and shaded, tucked into a small grove of trees, a place locals might pass every day without a second glance. That's when Paul realized he knew the guy. He babysat for Paul when he was a kid and painted their family's fence once. The victim was 53-year-old Bernard Agonis. What began as an ordinary Saturday morning was suddenly the start of a case that would

haunt the community for years to come. Bernard was a familiar face around Pentecook and the neighboring town of Boscoen where he was born and raised. His parents had immigrated from Lithuania decades earlier and built their lives in the Greater Concord area. They ran a small grocery store in town

and Bernard later followed in their footsteps. With his former wife, Beverly, he opened Bernie and Bev's Market in West Concord. They had a few kids together, but the partnership didn't last. The two separated in 1960, and their relatives later told the Concord Monitor that Bernard's alcohol use played a role in the split. He lost his driver's license after multiple OUI convictions and eventually gave up driving altogether, so most people in town knew Bernard from seeing him out on foot, walking Main Street and stopping to chat with locals,

with his signature corncob pipe in his hand. Bernard was an outdoorsman at heart. He loved to hunt and fish, and his son Stevens said his father was a good woodsman, someone who could handle himself in the forest, and had even done some lumber jacking. Those who knew him, described Bernard as old-fashioned when it came to manners and relationships. He never used foul language around women, and when walking arm in arm with a date, he always took the outside of the sidewalk. At the time of his death, Bernard worked at the Colby Lumber Company in Boscoen,

though people said he had fallen on harder times recently. He wasn't a troublemaker, but he drank a little more than the other regulars at the bar in town. Still, when fights broke out, Bernard wasn't part of them. His son said that if a tussle started, Bernard would simply turn the other cheek and walk away. Violence wasn't in his nature, and he didn't have any enemies. In fact, Bernard often befriended younger people in town. Many of those friends called him Bernie. Though he didn't have much, when payday came, Bernard was generous, buying rounds for friends

even when his check wouldn't stretch that far. As reported by David Allinger and Sharon Vous, Bernard's son remembered how his dad's paycheck would be gone by Saturday morning, and sometimes he'd have to borrow a few dollars from those young friends to make it through the rest of the week. Investigators learned that Bernard had cashed a paycheck or even multiple checks the day before his death. That Friday night, he spent the evening drinking beer at a pizza place in the village. It was possible he still had some of that cash on him when he left the pizza place. So could this have been a robbery that turned into something worse?

Some locals told reporters that Bernard had been robbed several times in the weeks before he was killed. The kids who supposedly robbed him were known to hang out at the same park near Bridge and East Streets where his body was found. If this was true, though, Police records didn't back it up. Bernard didn't report any robberies before his death. Whatever happened that night, it seemed to start and end in the same quiet patch of grass where Bernard was later discovered.

And for investigators, the question now shifted from who Bernard was to who could have done this. The medical examiner determined that Bernard had been stabbed seven times in the chest. His time of death was estimated between midnight and 6 a.m., with 2 a.m. being the most probable. The coroner noted that the wounds could have been caused by almost any kind of knife. There was nothing distinct enough about them to narrow it down. Reporter Bill Sanderson of the Concord Monitor wrote that investigators collected everything they could find at the scene.

Trash, bottles, bits of debris, anything that might offer a clue. Some of it was sent to both the state crime lab and the FBI for analysis. A pair of pants believed to belong to Bernard was found draped over the park bench near his body. Those two would be tested for trace evidence. Now, one of the earliest leads in the case didn't come from debris in the park. Surveillance footage from a nearby bank

captured Bernard sometime the day before his murder, easily recognizable with his trademark corncob pipe in his hand. When police found his body, though, that pipe was missing. Later in the investigation, they learned that someone else in town had been seen carrying it around. For a moment, it seemed investigators could have a break in the case. If Bernard's pipe had been stolen, maybe the person who had it also possessed critical information about Bernard's murder. But as quickly as that lead appeared, it faded. Police questioned the witness who had seen a guy named John with the pipe.

but nothing solid came of it, and attention had already started to shift elsewhere. According to reporting by David Ollinger and Sharon Vouse for the Concord Monitor, a woman told police she'd seen Bernard arguing with a man named David Gray, around 9.30 p.m. on the night of the murder. A shop owner in Bosco Inn recalled seeing Bernard and the same guy, David, together late that night, near the leather tannery, just across the street from where Bernard's body would later be found.

The witness said Bernard looked drunk, standing unsteadily in the middle of the road. David seemed to be waiting for him to cross. A conquered police officer also reported, seeing the two men together walking down Main Street that night. Then there was a witness, who saw David the morning Bernard's body was found. She remembered him crouching beside her car all jittery and uneasy. When she glanced down, she noticed a reddish stain on his shirt, what she assumed at the time was blood from a nosebleed.

Once David Gray's name entered the conversation, it never seemed to leave it. Before long, he was no longer just a person of interest. He was the suspect. If Bernard was last seen with David and hours later found dead just across the street, it seemed to them more than a coincidence. So naturally, investigators tracked him down for questioning the very same day Bernard's body was discovered. Concord Detective John Riley found David at his father's apartment above the Buggy Barn Tavern. During that threshold conversation, the detective asked David repeatedly if he had seen Bernard recently, even if they didn't talk.

David was insistent that he hadn't seen Bernard since the previous weekend, and definitely not in the days immediately before he. he died. At that point, the detective asked David to come to the police station to give a full account of his whereabouts on August 13th, and David agreed. Once in the interview room, David explained that he'd been at a friend's place that day, and then went to the buggy barn, and then he went to a party in Boscoen. He told the detective he also went to his sister's house and then got some pizza at the Penicook House of Pizza. The detective paused the interview for a moment and stepped out of the room to find the conquered officer who reported seeing David and Bernard together. The detective wanted to make sure of the other officer wasn't confusing

David with his brother, but the officer was sure he could tell them apart, and he definitely saw David. When the detective returned to David, he read him his Miranda rights and then continued his line of questioning. He asked David if he was sure, absolutely positive he didn't see Bernard. Again, David said he hadn't. And then the detective told David that another officer had seen him with Bernard. At that, David paused. He sat quiet for a few seconds before responding. He thought Bernard had a bag of beer with him, he said. David continued saying that he was leaving his father's apartment above the Buggy Barn Tavern and heading to the Pentecook House of Pizza when he encountered Bernard. Bernard offered him a beer, but David said,

said no thanks, and he went into the pizza shop. The detective emphasized to David that the other officer saw him and Bernard together walking down South Main Street, past the House of Pizza. David thought about it briefly and then told the detective he was probably right. He thought maybe he did walk down the street with Bernard, and they continued on to East Street at Center Street, which was only a few blocks away from the park where Bernard's body would be recovered the next morning. David told the detective that Bernard planned to hitchhike home

and he suggested that Bernard go wait down near East Street he'd probably have better luck finding a ride down there he said David explained that he then turned around and started thumbing for a ride himself hoping to get back to a friend's place and conquered but ultimately went back to his dad's place for the night David agreed to hand over the clothing he was wearing when he saw Bernard for testing and he removed his shirt right then in the there so police could check for any wounds, possibly inflicted during a struggle with Bernard. But he wasn't under arrest, and the detective sent him on his way. They'd speak again a few

days later, but once again, David was free to go. Almost two months passed, and police had yet to make any arrests. They needed more information, new information, so Concord PD offered a $2,500 reward supported by donations from the community. Behind the scenes, results. had come back from the state and FBI labs, there was no physical evidence linking David to the scene, no fingerprints, no trace of blood that could definitively connect the suspect to the victim, not a single fiber or strand of hair

that backed up what witnesses and even David himself had said about them being together within hours of the fatal stabbing. Still, investigators pressed ahead, building their case largely on overlapping statements and circumstantial details. It took a few months, but the case eventually came together with the help of a new witness, claiming the lead suspect had confessed to the crime. After seven months of investigation on March 15, 1984,

Concord Police arrested 23-year-old David W. Gray on a second-degree murder charge. David was taken into custody without incident and arraigned in Concord District Court. He entered a not-guilty plea, and bail was later set at $100,000, but unable to post it, David was held in Merrimack County Jail. The shock of David's arrest was widespread. For starters, he didn't have a significant record. Bill Sanderson reports for the Concord Monitor that in 1982, David was convicted of resisting arrest when an officer tried to remove him from a restaurant in town.

His fine was about $100, but he was permitted to work off the charge with community service. That's about it. Beyond his mild history with the law, people who knew him couldn't reconcile this quiet guy getting pushed to the point of such a brutal personal violence. At the time of his arrest for the murder charge, David worked on the maintenance staff at the State Highway Garage. His supervisor said he was a good worker and got along well with other employees there. He was also in a program called Project Second Start,

which offered reading and math classes for adults. But David's decent reputation in town didn't matter when police had a new witness to connect all the dots of the highly circumstantial case. The witness, who all called by his first name, Ron, spoke with police on March 8, 1984, about a week before the the arrest was made. Ron alleged that David confessed to killing Bernard in self-defense during a fight. In May of 1984, David's attorneys filed a pleading in Merrimack County Superior Court indicating that David might plead self-defense. The pleading cited a state statute called

physical force in defense of person. According to the statute as of the mid-1980s, there were three circumstances where deadly force may be justified. To defend, offend yourself against someone who is trying to kill you, or someone committing an armed burglary against you, or trying to kidnap or forcibly sexually assault you. The filing claimed that the statement by Ron regarding David's alleged confession was also the basis for the self-defense claim. However, the filing did not disclose which of the circumstances of the statute they'd argue at trial. However, in a letter to the editor written by one of David's most dedicated supporters, local chaplain, Reverend Paul Lyons, he suggested that

the attorneys wanted David to say he was defending himself against alleged sexual assault. There'd been a suggestion by a witness that the crime was either sexually motivated or staged to look like it was because Bernard was found in his underwear, but that theory hadn't been backed up at all by investigators. Interestingly, after that pleading was filed, David fired his attorneys. According to reporting by Aaron Zittner, who covered this case extensively for the Concord Monitor, David felt that they weren't appropriately representing him, so he got two new lawyers through the State Public Defender Program. With the change in lawyers, David's trial that was originally scheduled for mid-July of 1984 was rescheduled for April of 1985, more than

nine months later. It was the first of many delays in his trial. The next few, had to do with David's mental state. In March 1985, just before the scheduled trial date, a judge ordered a psychiatric evaluation after observing David's erratic behavior in court. To be considered competent, a defendant must understand the proceedings and be able to communicate rationally with their attorney.

The judge doubted David met that second requirement. The state hospital's forensic director later found that David suffered from a, quote, moderately severe psychosis, describing him as unable to follow a train of thought and prone to disjointed ideas about conspiracies against him. On May 22, 1985, the judge ruled David incompetent to stand trial and ordered treatment at the forensic unit of the state hospital. By September, two psychiatrists re-evaluated him, but they disagreed. One believed David was competent, the other said he was not. The judge called for a third opinion, extending the delays

even further, all while David insisted he wasn't mentally ill, and he continued to claim his innocence. The psychiatric back and forth continued until February 1986 when a third psychiatrist concluded that David had a, quote, paranoid personality disorder, but was competent to stand trial. With two of the three experts in agreement, the court ruled that David, understood the proceedings and could move forward, even if his mistrust of the system made cooperation difficult. No further challenges to his competency arose before David finally went to trial on the second-degree murder charge in September of 1986, 29 months after his arrest. During opening statements, Assistant Attorney General Brian Tucker told jurors,

the state would show that David and Bernard argued over money after a night of drinking. that Bernard made an alleged sexual advance, and that David stabbed him before disposing of the knife in a sewer drain. The assistant AG admitted there were no eyewitnesses, but promised two witnesses who would testify that David confessed to the killing. The defense countered that the state's case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, no fingerprints, no blood, no weapon, and that their witnesses would testify Bernard was alive. Hours after prosecutor's claimed he was dead. In the face of a case built on circumstantial evidence, the jury was in for a battle of fact and fiction, which version of the case was the truth, and which side's witnesses

could really be trusted. One of the state's key witnesses was David's friend, Ron. Pieces of Ron's statement to police had leaked prior to trial, but now on the stand he detailed the moment he claims his pal came clean about the murder. The conversation happened at Ron's girlfriend's house and conquered. Ron said David told him it was around midnight that he and Bernard were walking through the park, sharing some beer and casual conversation when David raised the issue of the money Bernard owed him. Ron testified that David said Bernard refused to pay and instead responded with a crude sexual insult, beginning to undo his pants seemingly to emphasize his point. Ron said David told him that as Bernard's pants fell down, he took a swing and knocked

David to the ground surprising him. From Ron's testimony directly, quote, I don't know if it was the hit or the sexual advance, but the next thing David knew he was pulling out his knife. End quote. On cross-examination, the defense elicited testimony from Ron that he used pot almost every day back in 1983 and occasionally used LSD and cocaine. They also asked him about other alleged criminal activities and felonies, including the assault of a child, suggesting that Ron only gave police his story about David because he was trying to garner some goodwill with police. As the defense pointed out, at the time of his testimony, he hadn't been prosecuted for any of the alleged crimes for which he was under investigation. Ron denied that his testimony and

story about David's confession was any form of quid pro quo. Now, some pieces of Ron's story were a little iffy. Ron said David told him he ran up the street, ditched the knife in a sewer drain, and tossed his sneakers behind a house on Fisherville Road. According to Ron, David later had a friend go get the knife out of the sewer drain before police found it, and the knife was never found. Now, when police tried to find David's sneakers that Ron said he disposed of behind a house, they weren't where Ron said they'd be.

Also, this confession supposedly came just days after the murder, yet Ron didn't go to the police back then, and he didn't share the information with investigators at all until they found him months after the murder. But there was a critical piece of Ron's testimony of David's alleged confession that did beef up his credibility a bit. David supposedly told him that Bernard's pants were off before he stabbed him, and that lined up with the evidence. There was blood on Bernard's legs, but not his pants. Ron wasn't the only witness to a witness to a apparently hear a confession from David. A second witness named Bruce testified that in October of 1983, David also confessed to him that he killed Bernard. Yet when police first came to Bruce

asking questions about David, Bruce denied knowing anything because he didn't want to get involved. Afterwards, he had a crisis of conscience. As a Boy Scout leader, he taught the kids to be honest, but he was doing the opposite, so he decided to call the police and share what he knew. It reserves mention that the two witnesses on the other end of David's alleged confession didn't know each other. Among the other witnesses for the prosecution was a friend of David's, who testified that David asked him how to get blood out of his clothes once. The same witness said David told him he had a few beers with Bernard in the park on the night of the murder. The witness also said that David was wearing his buck knife as usual the day before Bernard's murder, but he was

notably not wearing it after the murder. However, the defense pointed out through cross-examination of multiple witnesses that many people carried buck knives in Pentecook. It's not like David was unique in that. The prosecution's case relied on words, what David supposedly said, what others claimed to have heard, but as the defense began their case, they have focused on what wasn't there, the evidence missing from every corner of the investigation. The state may have had some secondhand confessions and witnesses placing Bernard and David together in the hours leading up to the murder, but they didn't have much else to support those witnesses. The defense zeroed in on the lack of physical evidence that could tie David to the

crime. Beer bottles collected at the scene that were sent off for testing at the FBI lab didn't return any fingerprints or other links to David. An FBI agent testified about the blood found on both Bernard and David's clothing. There was obviously a lot of blood on Bernard, but there was only a quarter-inch spot on a shirt David wore on the night of the murder, and the lab couldn't determine whose blood it was, not even a blood type, because it was too small of a sample. All the testing revealed was that it was, in fact, human blood and not animal. But just because there was no trace evidence or conclusive findings from the blood samples tested,

doesn't mean David wasn't there in the park. A conquered police officer testified that the outdoor surfaces in the park, like the cement and wood bench, wouldn't hold a fingerprint. On top of the lack of physical and biological evidence, a primary argument coming from the defense side of the courtroom had everything to do with the case timeline established by the investigation. The prosecution had called the physician who performed Bernard's autopsy who testified that according to his findings, Bernard died between midnight and 6 a.m., with 2 a.m. being

the most likely time. The defense aimed to heavily challenge that testimony with the help of a.m. witness. Enter Steve. Steve told the jury he saw Bernard at the intersections of Route 3 and 4, about three miles away from where his body was later discovered, sometime after 7.15 a.m. on August 13, 1983. Steve said Bernard was hitchhiking, but he couldn't pick him up. He hollered out his truck window. Sorry, Bernard, I can't big you up. I ain't going that far. And then Steve said he leaned over to his passenger and told him, that's Bernie. A few other witnesses took the stand to further unravel the timeline of the crime,

like David's own father who said David came to his apartment around 3 a.m. on the 13th. A guy named Kevin testified that he picked David up hitchhiking around 2.30 in the morning on the night of the murder, and he was acting normal, not nervous or anything. Another witness testified that he saw Bernard with someone around 1 or 1.30 in the morning, and that guy was wearing a white shirt and off-white pants. David was believed to be wearing a flannel shirt over a black t-shirt that night. And then it was time for the next defense witness, David Gray himself. His attorney asked if David had anything to say to the jury, and David responded, quote,

Yeah, there is. I got arrested March 15, 1984. I've been in jail ever since my arrest awaiting to the jury. trial. I've been battling with courts, attorneys, the Attorney General's office, and everybody else. And I even told the judge right to his face that I did not kill the guy, and I don't know who killed the guy. And I told my attorneys the same thing. Now I'm going to tell the state. I didn't kill Mr. Agonis, and I don't know who did. End quote. Scott French reports for the Concord Monitor that over five hours of testimony, David detailed his every movement on

on the day before the murder. He acknowledged that he saw Bernard, and Bernard offered him a beer, where earlier testimony claimed David didn't accept the beer. On the stand, David said he did. He said he also helped Bernard stand up and get his bearings. He put his arm around Bernard, who was seemingly drunk, and helped him walk down towards the bridge where they were less likely to have a run-in with cops waving citations for public intoxication. David testified that Bernard talked about ripping some guys off, but he wasn't really sure what Bernard was talking about, and after just one beer,

David decided to get on with his evening. He told Bernard to try thumbing for a ride on East Street, and that's where he left him. David testified, Bernard mentioned something about going to meet some kids, but again, David couldn't be sure what he was talking about. They spent 30 minutes together tops before parting ways. David explained to the jury

that he found out about the body in the park the next morning, but it wasn't until that afternoon when he learned the body was Bernard. He was shaken up by the news because he was with Bernard the night before, and he, quote, didn't want to get pinned for this, end quote. When police came knocking sometime around 7 p.m. that same night, he left everything about his encounter with Bernard out of his original statement. It wasn't until the fourth time telling his story when police recorded the interview that he decided to tell the full truth about that night.

He said that when the detective presented him with a white sheet of paper with Miranda rights on it, he signed it and said he agreed, but he didn't understand any of it. David testified that he read at a third or fourth grade level and had a learning disability. David denied ever confessing to the murder to anyone. His friend Ron tried to incite him to confess, but he never actually did. That's for the other witness who claimed David confessed. David said he'd only repeated a rumor he'd heard, that people thought he did it. It must have been misinterpreted or something.

When David stepped down from the stand, his words hung heavy in the courtroom. If David Gray wasn't responsible as he claimed on the stand, then who was? Over the following days, jurors heard testimony about others who might have had motive or opportunity, names that had surfaced early in the investigation but were never fully pursued. What unfolded next, painted a far more complicated picture of that August night in Pentecook. One alternate suspect suggested by the defense was John, the guy who allegedly had Bernard's pipe in the days after his death. A witness testified that in addition to the pipe, John also had a large stack of cash, which was unusual for him. Remember, Bernard had cashed his paycheck, or possibly several checks the day before he was killed,

and possibly had the money with him when he was killed. A bartender from the former Buggy Barn Tavern testified that he picked up John while hitchhiking in Pentecook days later, and when he asked John how he was doing, John replied without prompting that he had murdered Bernard. The bartender said he immediately told John he didn't want to hear any more about it. According to the bartender, police interviewed him once during the original investigation, but didn't take notes and didn't follow up. Police later denied interviewing the witness at all. At the time of David's trial, John was in state prison awaiting trial on a robbery charge out of Carroll County.

Another theory was that Bernard was killed by someone who died while David was in jail awaiting trial, a man named Mickey. Mickey had a criminal record, and according to earlier reporting, he was the town's unofficial suspect. Locals thought he did it. A man serving a sentence in state prison testified that on the night before Bernard's murder, he was with Mickey in Blossom Hill Cemetery when Mickey said he wanted to prove he wasn't a punk by stabbing someone.

The man said Mickey was carrying a buck knife that night. The witness reported this information to police two years after the murder on August 16, 1985, after hearing about the case on the radio. But other witnesses disputed these claims, saying Mickey wasn't near the cemetery the night he supposedly made the threats. But another witness testified that Mickey had actually tried to rob Bernard a few weeks before the murder, though a friend intervened in the incident was never reported to police.

Whatever the truth was, Mickey died in 1985, so anything he might have to say about the murder or his involvement in it couldn't be. part of the trial. The alternate suspect that raised the most eyebrows with doubt and confusion was a woman named Stacy. She'd confessed to the murder. Twice. While she was living in California, Stacey called her parents back in New Hampshire and confessed to stabbing Bernard that night in August of 1983 when she was still in the area. She told them she and a group of four friends chased Bernard from a bar, caught him near the leather tannery, and stabbed him. Stacey said David was there, but did not kill Bernard. Later, when she returned to Pentecook

from California, Stacey repeated the confession to her parents in person. But when she was questioned by police, Stacey's story didn't align with other witness accounts of where Bernard had been that night or where he was found. Stacey also claimed she stabbed him in the side, though the coroner determined Bernard had multiple stab wounds to his chest. She also couldn't explain where she got the knife or agree on a motive. At one point, she said it was because Bernard made unwanted advances towards David, and another she said it was because Bernard knew about a drug deal. Stacey said she couldn't remember much because she'd taken a large amount of LSD that night. She reportedly struggled with substance use disorder and mental health issues.

Now, Stacey did not appear at David's trial, but both her parents did, and they really believed she might have been involved. Stacey's mother testified that sometime in the early morning hours of August 13th, Stacey entered the house, covered in blood, from her knees to her feet. She frantically changed clothes, packed a bag and a butcher knife, and left again, abandoning the bloody pants on a railing inside. Stacey's mother said she bagged the pants up a few days later and kept them for months, wanting police to collect them, but they never did. Stacey's father told a similar story and testified that he remembered the date clearly because it followed the death of his aunt. On cross-examination, the prosecutor presented the aunt's death certificate, dated October 8, 1983,

almost two months after Bernard's murder. But the defense reminded him of another way he marked time. Each month on the 12th, he reflected on the death of another daughter. It was after one of those conversations on August 12th that Stacey came through the door covered in blood. Stacey's father also recalled Stacey saying as she left, You heard nothing, you saw nothing, you know nothing. By the time the defense rested, one thing was clear, there was no shortage of possible suspects in Bernard's murder,

and the evidence against David Gray was circumstantial at best, built on inconsistent witness statements and rumors that unraveled under scrutiny. Reasonable doubt wasn't just possible in this case? It was everywhere. The evidence was fragile, no fingerprints, no weapons, no firsthand confession. There was a little bit of blood on David Gray's shirt, but nothing to say who it came from or how it got there.

What the jury had instead were fragments, bits of testimony, rumor, and contradiction, all pointing in different directions. It was a case built on inference, not proof, and after long days of testimony, the question hung heavy over the courtroom. Would that be enough to convict? On October 16th, 1986, the jury returned following a four-hour deliberation with a verdict. David Gray, not guilty. After two and a half years, David was free.

Outside the courthouse in the parking lot, David told reporters, quote, I feel like I want to run forever. I want to go to the ocean tomorrow. I want some air. End quote. Though he later said that he'd rather not revisit the time he spent in custody, custody before trial, David also shared how he learned how to read and write while in jail. A convicted killer named Robert Brunow taught him how. Before his arrest, David said he could only

write his name. As for the state's case and the witness testimony that threatened to put him in prison for life, David had some ideas as to why certain people said what they said. He believed his friend Ron made up the story about a confession to try to get the reward money. As far as I can hell, the reward money was never paid out to anyone. Bernard's murder investigation was effectively closed without justice. The state tried their guy, but the jury didn't agree. Prosecutor Tucker said that the AG's office would consider any new evidence in the case, but everything they had against David would present reasonable doubt against any new suspect.

The jury's decision didn't bring clarity. If anything, it deepened the mystery. With the acquittal of David Gray, a killer is still walking free somewhere. During trial, the defense raised the possibility that investigators had overlooked stronger suspects early on, names that were mentioned but never fully pursued. Each came with their own troubling connection to the case. There was John, the man who reportedly had Bernard's pipe and a suspicious amount of cash, after the murder, and Mickey, the local troublemaker rumored to have threatened to stab someone

just to prove he could, and then Stacy, a woman who confessed twice to killing Bernard herself and whose own parents said she came home with bloody pants the night of the murder. But there's something else that I didn't really see debated at length during trial. Is it possible that Bernard's death was a random act of violence by troublemaking teenagers? At the time of the time of his murder, the small towns surrounding Concord where Bernard spent much of his time were struggling. According to reporting by Lorraine Adams for the Concord Monitor, ongoing bridge construction had cut off the usual traffic routes into Pentecook. The independent shops that line the street, the mom and pop stores, they were barely hanging on. For business owners

already facing hard times, an unsolved murder in their community only deepened the sense of unease. But Adams' reporting mentioned something else, causing strife in the town, something that feels relevant to this case. In her article, she wrote about a group of, quote, teenagers who tease older residents. These kids hung around in front of stores and along sidewalks, targeting elderly residents who walked into town from a nearby senior housing complex. The teens would block the sidewalks and stepped deliberately in front of the older pedestrians, forcing them to weave around only to do it again, taunting and laughing as they went. Business owner said the teens were more than just a nuisance. They scared off customers, disrupted the quiet flow of Main Street, and gave

the small-town business district an uneasy edge. Teasing and taunting is a far cry from murder, but this reflection of the atmosphere in Pentecook at the time still makes me wonder. could Bernie, a familiar older man who often walked through town alone, have crossed paths with those teenagers on the night he was killed? David testified that Bernie mumbled something about meeting up with some kids that night before they parted ways. Earlier witness statement suggested that Bernard had been robbed by teens in the weeks before his death, though the police were never involved in those alleged crimes. To me, there should have been reason for investigators to explore the possibility that Bernard's death was the result of a confrontation with the same

kids who taunted elderly residents in broad daylight. Some cases never find the kind of justice we expect. The evidence fades, the witnesses move on, and the truth, whatever it is, gets buried beneath years of doubt and what-ifs. The system gets one chance to make it right, and when that chance passes, the questions don't stop. They just linger. Thank you for listening to Dark Down East. You can find all source material for this case at Darkdowneast.com. Be sure to follow the show on Instagram at Darkdowneast. This platform is for the families and friends who have lost their loved ones and for those who are still searching for answers. I'm not about to let those names or their stories get lost with time.

I'm Kylie Lowe, and this is Dark Down East. Dark Down East is a production of Kylie Media and Audio Check. I think Chuck would approve.