Sins & Survivors: A Las Vegas True Crime Podcast - Out Of Nowhere - the Wrongful Conviction of Kirstin Blaise Lobato - Part 2

Episode Date: May 27, 2025

“When I found out I was going to jail, I trusted in the system. I figured everything would be okay as long as I told them the truth. I had no idea how wrong I'd be.”In July of 2001, Blaise was a teenager with no criminal history, no motive, and no evidence linking her to the crime. And yet, she was charged with murder and facing the rest of her life behind bars.No physical evidence tied her to the scene, she didn’t know the victim, Duran Bailey, and she was 170 miles away when he was killed. But none of that mattered.This week, we cover what happened next—and how the system twisted the truth and stole 16 years of Blaise Lobato’s life.https://sinspod.co/79sources (Same as part 1)https://sinspod.co/80blogDomestic Violence Resourceshttp://sinspod.co/resourcesClick here to become a member of our Patreon!https://sinspod.co/patreonVisit and join our Patreon now and access our ad-free episodes and exclusive bonus content & schwag! Get ad-free access for only $1 a month or ad-free and bonus episodes for $3 a monthApple Podcast Subscriptionshttps://sinspod.co/appleWe're now offering premium membership benefits on Apple Podcast Subscriptions! On your mobile deviceLet us know what you think about the episodehttps://www.buzzsprout.com/twilio/text_messages/2248640/open_sms Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/sins-survivors-a-las-vegas-true-crime-podcast--6173686/support.

To listen ad-free, visit Zinspod.co slash subscribe. Starting at $2.99 a month, you'll also get access to our exclusive bonus content episodes when you join through Patreon or Apple subscriptions. Thanks for supporting the show! When I found out I was going to jail, I trusted in the system. I figured everything would be okay as long as I told them the truth. I had no idea how wrong I'd be. In July of 2001, Blaze was a teenager with no criminal history, no motive, and no evidence linking her to the crime,

and yet she was charged with murder and facing the rest of her life behind bars. No physical evidence tied her to the scene. She didn't know the victim, Duran Bailey, and she was 170 miles away when he was killed, but none of that mattered. This week, we cover what happened next and how the system twisted the truth and stole 16 years of Blaise Lobato's life. Hi, and welcome to Sins and Survivors, a Las Vegas true crime podcast where we focus on cases that deal with domestic violence, as well as missing persons and unsolved cases. I'm your host, Sean. And I'm your co-host, John.

Last week, we introduced you to the story of the wrongful conviction of Blaise Lovato for the murder of Duran Bailey. Duran was 44 years old when he was found brutally murdered in July of 2001 with multiple blunt and sharp horse injuries, including the amputation of his penis. Blaze fought off an attempted rape in May of 2001, and she had slashed her attacker in the groin to escape. She had told multiple friends about the attack, and eventually Metro homicide detectives heard the rumor that a young woman had cut off a man's penis in Las Vegas. The day Duran was murdered, Blaze was 170 miles away with her parents and sister in Panaca, Nevada, and she'd been staying there with her family all week. When police questioned her about the death of a man in Las Vegas,

Blaze thought that maybe the man she had fought off in May had died from his injury, and she tried to cooperate. Detectives took her explanation of the May attack as a confession to Duran's murder. She was arrested and charged with first-degree murder. There's so much more to the story, so if you didn't listen to last week's episode, please go listen now and come back here once you do. But back to where we left off. While Blaze was incarcerated at the Clark County Detention Center awaiting trial, she was in with another inmate named Corinda Martin. Corinda became a jailhouse informant and told prosecutors that Blaze had bragged multiple times in the CCDC common room about being locked up for murder.

Corinda said that Blaze had been telling people that she had killed a man named Darren when she was high on drugs. She said that she had picked up Darren off the streets so that she could buy meth from him. She claimed that Blaze told her that Darren wanted to have sex with her, but she declined. Then she stabbed him multiple times, severed his penis, and shoved it down his throat. Corinda claimed she said that Darren deserved it. Corinda said that Blaze said that even though the man never actually tried to force himself on her, she planned to falsely claim that he'd sexually assaulted her.

Also, she was afraid that people would find blood in her car because she had hit Darren in the face. She claimed that Blaze had bragged about the crime numerous times in the CCDC common room, and Corinda had said that she made a log of the times and dates when she'd made those statements. On July 31, 2001, the charges against Blaze were amended to first-degree murder with a deadly weapon and necrophilia. The state reserved the option to seek the death penalty. In early August, the results of the forensic testing that the Metro Police Crime Lab were doing on the evidence collected from the crime scene and Blaze's car were starting to come in. There was no evidence in her car that linked her to the crime scene. No blood evidence was found anywhere in her car, and her car did not match the tire tracks found

at the scene, and so it was returned to her father Larry. The lab found none of Duran's blood on her baseball bat. In fact, there was no blood at all, and her fingerprints didn't match any of those found at the crime scene. There was no blood found on her shoes either, and the shoe prints left at the crime scene didn't match her black platform shoes that she was wearing the night she was attacked, or any pairs of shoes that she even owned. Her feet are two and a half to three sizes smaller than the prints left at the scene. Blaze's trial began on May 2, 2002. The prosecution centered its case around one main idea. Blaze confessed. She told the detectives and Dixie how she had cut a man's penis off in the parking lot in Las Vegas,

and that was a confession to killing Duran Bailey. At the time she was questioned by detectives, Blaze made the comment, I didn't think anybody would miss somebody like that. At least that is what John and I hear her saying in the recording. In news outlets and in court documents, what the detectives and others repeated, she said, is slightly different. Quote, I did not think anyone would miss him. This is how the quote appears in the court records and in the review journal. According to prosecutors and detectives, the whole thing was just too much of a coincidence to be anything other than a confession.

The prosecution's theory was that Blaze, high on meth for several days, drove from Panaca to Las Vegas on July 8th to get meth from Duran in exchange for her performing oral sex on him. However, she changed her mind and he tried to force her. She then fought back against him using her butterfly knife and the baseball bat from her car. To explain the extensive injuries, the prosecution argued that she stabbed him. He then fell to the ground where she continued to beat him. As we discussed last week in detail, Blaze had a very tight alibi for the day of the murder. She was seen by multiple people in Panaca, a nearly three-hour drive away, on July 5th, 6th, and 7th, and on the 8th as early as 2.45 a.m. by

her dad and throughout the day by various people, relatives and non-relatives. The only time not accounted for was from 2 a.m. to 2.45 a.m. The time of Duran's death, therefore, was critical for the prosecution. Dr. Larry Sims, a board-certified forensic pathologist, testified at a preliminary hearing that he estimated Duran was killed about 12 hours prior to the discovery of the body at 10 p.m., so that would be around 10 in the morning. This would have made it impossible for Blaze to have killed Duran, since she was seen in Panaca that morning by her dad and her cousin John at 7 a.m., and several neighbors four-wheeling around 11 a.m. that day.

During the trial, however, on direct examination, Dr. Sims testified that Duran could have died as much as 18 hours earlier than he was found, making the window for Blaze to have left Panaca, traveled to Vegas, and returned home wider, as he may have died as early as 4 a.m. Given the prosecutor's theory of the case, the distance she'd have to drive, the speed she'd need to travel, the fact that she'd have to stop and get gas, of course, for a 340-mile round trip, she'd need at least five and a half hours to travel and commit the crime. The only window of time that would fit the prosecutor's theory and the ME time of death estimation and possibly defeat Blaze's alibi would be that Duran was killed between 3.50 a.m. and 4.30 a.m.

This would mean that after Larry went to bed on July 8th, Blaze got up off the couch, dressed, and left for Vegas around 1 in the morning, speeding all the way. She encountered Duran quickly, meaning she had to know where to find him. They negotiated, fought, and then she killed him, inflicted those extensive injuries to him, and covered him up with the trash. She then drove 15 minutes away to her friend's house on the east side of Vegas, where she got rid of her bloody clothing and cleaned herself up and the car. She then stopped for gas at some point, drove home again, driving close to 100 miles an hour,

and barely getting home by 6.35 a.m. She changed into her pajamas and at 7 a.m. she saw her dad and her cousin. She was described as half-awake, not high on meth at all, according to them. Given this scenario, the prosecution would be implying that her parents and cousin were lying about her whereabouts and her demeanor when all three of them testified and therefore potentially committed perjury. The theory of this case also hinged on the prosecution painting Blaze as being someone who was of low moral character, which they tried to do by talking about her growing up in a rural community, but there was no history of Blaze ever being violent with anyone or ever having any trouble with the law. They also brought up how she had done some exotic dancing a couple times in Las Vegas,

and they also tried to say that she would exchange sex for drugs, although there was no evidence that she ever did, and none that she ever even knew Duran. Blaze took the stand in her defense. More on that later, but here is an excerpt from the prosecution's cross-examination that shows how they leaned into assassinating her character. Blaze. It's been over a year. I was a lot different then than I am now. Prosecutor. Okay, a lot different? Blaze. Yeah. Prosecutor. You're not a meth freak anymore? Blaze. Among other things. Prosecutor. Okay, you're away from your promiscuity? Blaze,

yes. Prosecutor, so you're not out trading sex for dope? Blaze, I never traded sex for dope. They needed to show she had an addiction issue and had been heavily using meth. According to the statement she'd given the detectives, what the prosecution was calling a confession, Blaze had been high for a week prior to Duran's murder. For her confession to match the date of Duran's death, Blaze would have had to leave Panaca several days earlier to obtain drugs in Las Vegas, but there was no evidence to support that theory.

Her doctor's appointments in Panaca from July 5th, 6th, and 7th not only gave her an alibi for those days, but completely disproved that she had taken any drugs on the days before Duran's murder. Also, the prosecution's theory included that Blaze had beaten Duran with her baseball bat, but not only was there no blood or tissue evidence at all on the bat seized from her car, the medical examiner testified that the injuries inflicted on Duran's face and head were not consistent with a baseball bat. The defense's expert testified the most likely weapon used was a fist. Again, note that Blaze did not have any bruising, cuts, or scratches on her to indicate that she had been in a fight

or a struggle with anyone when she was interviewed on July 20th. In addition to relying on Blaze's statement to the detectives, the prosecution called Corinda Martin to testify. Corinda told the jury that Blaze had bragged about killing Darren multiple times in the common areas of the jail and claimed that she had a log that laid out the days and times that she talked about it. However, she never produced that log. It's also worth noting that while Corinda claimed that Blaze had made those loud bragging

announcements in the common areas, not a single other inmate or jailhouse employee had ever come forward to say she had done this, and the prosecution didn't have any other witnesses from CCDC who could back up Corinda's story. No one else at the jail said that ever happened, not even once. It's no surprise that Corinda had some credibility issues. The only facts about the crime that Corinda knew were facts that had been published in the RJ, and she was spreading horrible lies about the crime and seemingly making things up. Blaze's defense team discovered that while she was in jail, Corinda had forged two letters pretending to be one of her acquaintances, a woman named Brenda.

The letters from Brenda were written to Corinda's sentencing judge, asking for Corinda to be given a lenient sentence in exchange for being released to care for Brenda, who uses a wheelchair. The handwriting of these letters was shown to be Corinda's. The prosecution had denied that there had been any deal made with Corinda for her testimony. The defense argued that it should have been able to use the evidence of these letters to show that Corinda lacked credibility, but the judge would not allow it. Blaze's main defense was that she had cut or stabbed that any of her shoes, and no shoes she owned matched the prints left at the scene. She had a very solid alibi for being in Panaca, 170 miles away, and there were no gas station receipts, no convenience store receipts,

no fast food receipts, no surveillance camera footage, no bank ATM receipts, no eyewitnesses, no friends, no one and nothing that placed her in Vegas on July 8th or any time at all between July 2nd and July 9th. Numerous family members, friends and neighbors were called to testify to her alibi and what she had told them about the man who attacked her that she had cut in the groin with a knife. Duran was not a meth dealer or a meth user, so Blaze meeting with him to buy meth doesn't make sense. He was known to use crack cocaine, and when he died, cocaine and alcohol were found in his system. It's not clear why Blaze would need to drive three hours away from her home to obtain meth, when according to friends who testified during the trial, meth was easily obtainable within walking distance of Blaze's parents' home.

Also during the trial, there was no evidence ever introduced that Blaze or Duran knew each other at all. They lived and hung out on opposite sides of town, and they had no mutual acquaintances. As we mentioned earlier, Blaze testified in her own defense. She explained that in May of 2001, an unknown assailant attempted to sexually assault her, and she resisted, cut him with a knife, and fled. She denied stating to anyone that she had cut someone's penis off, despite what Laura Johnson said Dixie had told her. She said that she thought she cut the assailant in the groin area,

but he was still alive and crying when she escaped. She denied knowing Duran or killing him. Blaze said that she expressed remorse during her interview with the detectives because she believed they were telling her that the man she cut that day to escape being raped had subsequently died from the injuries that she had inflicted. On May 19, 2002, Blaze was convicted of first-degree murder with a deadly weapon and sexual penetration of a dead human body. She was sentenced to 40 to 100 years. I know the way we laid this out makes this very confusing, but the jury just did not accept Blaze's explanation for the confession,

and they must not have accepted her alibi witnesses either. Multiple witnesses were willing and available to testify that Blaze had told them about the attack weeks or months prior to Duran's murder. Stephen, who she worked for, her friend Michelle that she drove to the Utah Shakespeare Festival with, and a few others. However, the judge refused to allow these witnesses to testify about that on hearsay grounds. The prosecution consistently objected to any questions by the defense about her prior attack. If the jury had heard that Blaze consistently said the assault happened weeks before the murder, it could have helped show that she was talking about a completely

different event, but the judge ruled all of that was hearsay and kept that part from the jury. I have a very hard time understanding any of that legal logic as Dixie was permitted to testify about what Blaze had said and Laura Johnson was allowed to testify about what Dixie had told her that Blaze had said. Blaze, of course, appealed this guilty verdict and thankfully her conviction was overturned on September 3, 2004, specifically because the judge didn't let the defense use those falsified letters against Corinda or bring up that Corinda may have falsified her testimony in attempt to get out of jail. Since her testimony was such a key part of the prosecution against Blaze, the defense should have been allowed to bring up her credibility during trial.

The court emphasized that jailhouse informant testimony must be treated with extreme caution, especially in what they called a close case like this one, where there was no physical evidence that directly linked Blaze to the killing. Corinda's testimony significantly strengthened the prosecution's argument for malice and premeditation. In December of 2005, Blaze was released on $500,000 bail pending her retrial. I just want to add here that while we don't put much stock in polygraph tests, Blaze took and passed three separate polygraph tests regarding Duran's murder. And, of course, if she had taken that original plea deal to voluntary manslaughter, she would have already served her time and this would all

be over with before her second trial even started. Despite the fact that the DA's office absolutely had access to the full statements of the many, many witnesses Blaze told about the attempted rape days or weeks before Duran was killed, and even though if Blaze had accepted that original plea deal in 2002, the DA's office would have considered justice served in this case, they decided once again to prosecute her for Duran's murder. We understand that it's possible for a jury to make a mistake when they don't have access to all the information, but the DAs and the judge in Blaze's first trial had access to all the information, and they never should have moved forward with that prosecution. On September 11, 2006, Blaze's second murder trial began.

At the time of her second trial, it was reported that she was mature and focused, a vegetarian, and was practicing yoga daily. She was taking college courses as well as correspondence courses to become a paralegal. For the second trial, the prosecution didn't even bother to use Corinda's testimony since she lacked any credibility. The prosecution attempted to uncover other physical evidence that would link Blaze to the crime scene, but just like the first trial, there just wasn't any, of course. Dr. Brent Turvey, who worked with the defense on the retrial, later wrote that DNA criminalist Christina Paulette was rushing to get additional items tested for the prosecution right up until the time of trial. Her forensic testimony evidenced that 22 fingerprints had been found at the scene,

but none of them matched Duran or Blaze. Dr. Paulette testified that cigarette butts recovered from the scene contained an unidentified male profile on one butt and a combination of Duran's DNA and the different males on another butt. The chewing gum found at the scene had a mixture of Duran's DNA and an unidentified person. DNA analysis of pubic hair found on Duran's body revealed the DNA of a fourth unidentified male. DNA testing of swabs from Duran's left and right hands and swabs of his left and right fingernail clippings all excluded Blaze. It goes without saying that the semen was not Blaze's, but it could not be tested because it lacked sperm. Today, with advances in technology, a DNA profile would

potentially be developed from that sample, though. Dr. Turvey also wrote that Dr. Paulette wasn't entirely forthcoming on direct examination, but the defense attorneys questioned her to get at the fact that none of the DNA recovered at the scene was a match for Blaze. In his opinion, there was ample evidence that the police had done a very poor job at collecting evidence of the crime scene. For example, they had bagged items up and placed them in piles, mixing them together, and then sorted them at the police station, and not all the items were preserved or tested. Regardless, none of the items collected or tested matched Blaze. The shoe prints were too large, her car was clean, and the baseball bat was negative for blood. The other testimony and evidence brought forward by the prosecution was the same as the first trial.

Dixie testified and was treated as a hostile witness. Dixie didn't provide any testimony specifically linking Blaze to Duran's murder, and she actually provided testimony supporting that the attack Blaze described had occurred between one and two months prior to their conversation in July. During Laura Johnson's double hearsay testimony, she testified that Dixie said Blaze said that when she was coming out of a strip club where she worked in Las Vegas, a man attacked her while his penis was hanging out of his pants, and she cut it off. Johnson also said, Dixie said, Blaze said, she was hiding out at her parents' house, and her parents were trying to get rid of her car or get it painted to hide it. Evidence showed that Blaze's car was parked in front of her parents' house for the entire week of July 2nd, with her vanity license plate, and there's no evidence anyone was trying to hide it. Also, Blaze never worked at a strip club, and she wasn't in the parking lot of a strip club or near a strip club when she was attacked, nor was there a strip club near where Duran was murdered. We discussed how allowing this double hearsay while excluding testimony from Blaze's

friends and family about her earlier statements about the May attack was inconsistent and certainly hurt Blaze's defense. There were other rulings the judge made that were questionable and prejudicial against Blaze. For one, the baseball bat found in Blaze's car was allowed to be entered as evidence despite having no connection to Duran's murder. Photos and testimony about Blaze's custom license plate were permitted. Although the car wasn't linked to the crime scene, the tire tracks didn't match, and the blood tests were negative. Her license plate was 4NIC8R, or fornicator. So this was another attempt by the prosecution to insult Blaze's character. It's just not relevant to the case and definitely more prejudicial than probative. Although,

if anything, the fact that such a unique car, a 1984 Pontiac Fiero, a red two-seater sports car with the vanity plate fornicator, was parked on the street from July 2nd till July 20th, should have poked some holes in Laura Johnson's story that Blaze and her family were looking to hide her or the car. The judge allowed the prosecution to introduce evidence of the presumptive tests that indicated there were possible blood spots in her car, even though advanced tests later disproved that there was any blood. Defense argued this would mislead the jury, but the judge still allowed that evidence. In addition, approximately 140 crime scene and autopsy photographs were admitted. Defense argued these excessive, graphic, and repetitive images were intended to inflame the jurors, but their objection was rejected.

We discussed the time of death issue earlier, and Dr. Sims testified in this trial with medical certainty that Duran died between 9.50 a.m. and 3.50 p.50pm on July 8th, but there was a small probability that he might have died as early as 3.50am. This was slightly different testimony than what he had provided the other two times he testified. This time of 9.50am to 3.50pm makes it impossible for Blaze to have killed Duran, but the small probability of 3.50 a.m. leaves open the absurdly tight turnaround scenario that the prosecution had proposed. For Blaze's defense, she presented even more alibi witnesses than she did in her first trial. Seven witnesses who were not related to her testified that she was in Panaca from 11 a.m. through the rest of the day. Dr. Turvey

testified regarding the report he prepared for the defense. He concluded that the evidence showed there were multiple assailants that attacked and killed Duran, which makes sense given the multiple male profiles on the cigarette butts, chewing gum, and pubic hair. Dr. Michael Loeffler testified that based on his analysis, the murder weapon was likely not a butterfly knife given the injuries inflicted. Blaze didn't testify during this trial. During closing, the prosecution argued that it's possible Blaze is guilty because it's too coincidental that once she mentioned attempting to cut the penis off a man who tried to rape her, and Duran's murder involved a similar injury.

But just a quick reminder that the burden of proof in a criminal trial is beyond a reasonable doubt, not just that it's possible that the defendant had committed the crime. Again, despite the lack of any evidence connecting Blaze to the crime scene or to Vegas at all on July 8th, on October 6th, 2006, the jury convicted her again, this time of voluntary manslaughter as well as sexual penetration of a dead body. She was sentenced this time to 13 to 45 years in prison. Dr. Turvey wrote, this is a major step down from the results in the overturned conviction. It seems that the jury was forced by attrition to doubt and even disbelieve the prosecution's theory of the case, but for whatever reason, the jurors felt there was something to her involvement that they couldn't get past. The verdict reflects this, but it's

also confusing. The facts of the case seem to support either first-degree murder or nothing. Dr. Turvey called this a compromise verdict, as did many others who have reviewed this case. Blaze attempted to appeal this verdict in 2007 and 2009, but failed as the court found she admitted to the crime, which is just ludicrous. On May 5th, 2010, Blaze filed a 770-page habeas corpus petition presenting multiple grounds to overturn her convictions,

notably focusing on forensic entomology evidence. The petition included 24 grounds based on new evidence, two grounds based on Brady violations, 51 grounds based on ineffective assistance of counsel, and one based on her actual innocence. As we talked about, since Blaze had such a solid alibi, it was always Duran's time of death that was the big question in this case. The ME had provided three different time frames for his death. In her petition, three forensic entomologists provided affidavits all agreeing that Duran's body, exposed all day in July, would have shown

blowfly activity due to Las Vegas's hot climate, contradicting the prosecution's timelines. However, once again, Blaze's appeal failed, as the court found that the expert affidavits were insufficient due to lack of state cross-examination. Blaze also filed for additional DNA testing under Nevada's genetic testing statute with the Innocence Project agreeing to cover testing costs, but that request was also denied. DNA testing is not going to exonerate her because she confessed, said Steve Owens, who was the chief deputy district attorney at the time. There are hundreds of profiles that could be pulled off the body because it was found in a dumpster. People will be chasing

after a lot of red herrings. Yes, DA Owens, but none of them would have been blazes. Not to mention, they should absolutely have tested that semen once the technology was available. Finally, in November 2016, the Nevada Supreme Court reversed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition and ordered an evidentiary hearing on the issue of Duran's time of death. The court was critical of the trial judge's decision to deny a hearing because the issue of Duran's time of death. The court was critical of the trial judge's decision to deny a hearing because the forensic expert affidavits were not subject to cross-examination, noting that there was no cross-examination because the judge had refused to grant them a hearing. Judge Stephanie Miley presided over that hearing with testimony presented by Innocence Project

attorneys, and finally it seemed people were willing to listen to evidence that could determine that it was not possible that Blaze could have committed this murder. Three forensic entomologists testified, Jeffrey Tomberlin, Robert Kimsey, and Gail Anderson, who had all independently reached similar conclusions. These three experts explained that blowflies typically arrive immediately after death, laying observable eggs. The absence of blowfly eggs on Duran's body indicate that his death occurred very close to the time the body was discovered, around 10 p.m. on July 8th.

Therefore, Duran had died at the time when Blaze was without a doubt three hours away in Panaca with her family. This makes a lot of sense to me, because we read that the bloody footprints were still wet when the initial investigators arrived at the scene, so the idea that he had been dead for 12 hours never sounded likely. Also, forensic pathologist Andrew Baker testified that rigor mortis also suggested that Duran had likely died in the early evening hours of July 8th, so another expert's opinion further bolstered her innocence. On December 19th, 2017, Judge Miley vacated Lobato's convictions and ordered a new trial, citing inadequate defense representation,

specifically the failure to challenge the prosecution's time of death estimates with expert testimony. On December 29th, 2017, the prosecution officially dismissed of death estimates with expert testimony. On December 29, 2017, the prosecution officially dismissed the charges against Blaze rather than retry her. She was released on January 3, 2018, at the age of 35, after she had served nearly 16 years for a crime she did not commit. I'm so overwhelmed and so happy and so grateful for all the people that have believed in me and fought for me all these years, she said. I feel so much emotion. Vanessa Potkin, post-conviction litigation director for the Innocence Project, which

is affiliated with the Cordoza School of Law, said, We are very pleased that this long struggle is finally over for Ms. Lobato and that she will finally be reunited with her family and friends. Despite the strong evidence that Ms. Lobato played no role in this crime, including alibi evidence that she was three hours away from Las Vegas on the day the victim was killed, the police focused exclusively and inexplicably on her as a suspect, and as a result, Ms. Lobato has spent all of her young adulthood wrongly incarcerated for a crime she did not commit. When she was first released,

of course, it was an adjustment, getting used to life and technology. In July of 2019, Blaze filed a civil rights lawsuit against the Las Vegas Police Department and the two detectives. In December of 2019, she filed a claim for state compensation. And in December of 2024, a federal jury awarded Blaze $34 million in damages. Also in December of 2024, the Nevada Board of Examiners authorized her to receive $900,000 in state compensation. The civil trial jury found that the Las Vegas Police Department and the two detectives, Towson and LaRochelle, who are now retired, fabricated evidence during their investigation and intentionally inflicted emotional distress upon Blaze. This is taken directly from the complaint Blaze's attorneys

filed against them. When defendants Towson and LaRochelle created their police reports, they purposefully put on their reports that the incident Blaze described was the murder of Duran Bailey, even though they knew it was not true. Prior to the interrogation, there was no probable cause to believe that Blaze had committed the murder of Duran Bailey. After the interrogation, there was no probable cause to believe that Blaze had committed the murder of Duran Bailey. At no time was there probable cause to believe that Blaze had committed the murder of Duran Bailey. Nonetheless, having fabricated a supposed confession statement, the detectives arrested Blaze for Duran's murder after interrogating her on July 20th, 2001, and the detectives discussed and agreed with each other that they would characterize what she said

as a confession when they knew that was not true. The complaint also explains how they fabricated evidence by manipulating Dixie's statement, as well as her boyfriend Doug's. The detectives would take notes and then destroy the notes and turn on and off the reporter in attempt to manipulate the statements. After these rulings, the Review Journal interviewed Blaze and she told them that it's been an uphill battle with many Journal interviewed Blaze and she told them that and they still dig in their feet, zero accountability and zero remorse. In February of 2025, the detectives did ask for a new trial on this matter, so we may have further updates. Duran was buried in Woodland Cemetery in Las Vegas.

He died in an exceptionally cruel manner. He was brutalized beyond all recognition, as one person put it. No matter what his flaws or crimes may have been, Duran did not deserve to be killed in such a brutal and horrific way. Whoever did this wasn't trying to just kill him, they were full of rage. Indeed, one theory raised by the defense in court was that someone seeking revenge for Diane's rape might have been responsible. His murder remains unsolved. Reporters for The Intercept did try to follow up on what was heavily implied in court,

that Diane, fearing for her safety, or her neighbors, enraged by what Duran did, took justice into their own hands. The Intercept was able to locate two of the men who lived in the apartment across from Diane back in 2001. They said they didn't remember Diane or Duran, and that they were never questioned by Metro detectives about the murder. They told the Intercept reporters that there were actually seven men living in that apartment back in 2001. They said three of their former roommates were now working construction in California, and the other two simply disappeared in the summer of 2001, and they must have headed back to Mexico and never returned. Diane unfortunately died in 2005, but her domestic partner Stephen provided an affidavit to Blaze's defense in 2010, and he explained that he and Diane discussed Duran's murder on a number of occasions before she died. He said that Diane had told him it was just not

possible that Blaze had murdered him. During the trial, when Detective Towson was asked why they didn't pursue investigating those neighbors by questioning them or obtaining warrants to search their apartments, he said, It was a long day, and we were getting tired, and at some point you just have to call it a day. Blaze's story is a story of wrongful conviction, but it's also a story of not one, but two victims of sexual assault not having their stories believed and appropriately handled by officers, resulting in decades of trauma. Before we wrap up, we want to acknowledge and thank the attorneys at the Innocence Project for their hard work, as always, and as well as

the work of the reporters at Justice Denied and The Intercept magazines for their incredible in-depth research into Blaze and Duran's story. All of our sources can be found in the show notes. We'll leave you with this last thought from Blaze. I have a message for anyone who's going through a similar situation that what I went through. Be strong, believe in yourself, and never give up. There are going to be days when you're going to feel like you cannot make it another step. Just keep putting one foot in front of the other because eventually your day will come. Thank you as always for listening and remember what happens here happens everywhere. I love you. dot co slash subscribe for exclusive bonus content and to listen ad-free. Remember to like and follow us on Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, and Threads at Sins and Survivors. If you're enjoying the podcast,

please leave us a review on your podcast platform of choice. You can contact us at questions at sinsandsurvivors.com. If you or someone you know is affected by domestic violence or needs support, please reach out to local resources or the National Domestic Violence Hotline. A list of resources is If you have questions, concerns, or corrections, please email us. Links to source material for this episode can be found on our website, sinsandsurvivors.com. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are solely those of the podcast creators, hosts, and their guests. All individuals are innocent until proven guilty. This content does not constitute legal advice. Listeners are encouraged to consult with legal professionals for guidance.