The Deck - Susie Timmons (9 of Diamonds, New York)

Episode Date: October 29, 2025

Our card this week is Susie Timmons, the 9 of Diamonds from New York.In the summer of 1982, Susie Timmons was discovered stabbed and beaten in a vacant lot north of downtown Rochester, NY. Investigators have spent nearly four decades trying to solve her murder.If you have information about the murder of Susie Timmons on July 29th, 1982, in Rochester, NY, please call the Rochester Police Department’s major crimes unit at 585-428-7157 or email them at [e-mail]. You can also call Crime Stoppers at 585-423-9300 or submit a tip online.View source material and photos for this episode at: thedeckpodcast.com/susie-timmonsLet us deal you in… follow The Deck on social media.Instagram: @thedeckpodcast | @audiochuckTwitter: @thedeckpodcast_ | @audiochuckFacebook: /TheDeckPodcast | /audiochuckllcTo support Season of Justice and learn more, please visit seasonofjustice.org.The Deck is hosted by Ashley Flowers. Instagram: @ashleyflowersTikTok: @ashleyflowerscrimejunkieTwitter: @Ash_FlowersFacebook: /AshleyFlowers.AFText Ashley at 317-733-7485 to talk all things true crime, get behind the scenes updates, and more! Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Our card this week is Susie B. Timmons, the nine of diamonds from New York. It was March of 2020 when Major Crimes Investigator Seth Carr was handed the unsolved case of 17-year-old Susie Timmins. The summer of 1982, Susie was discovered stab and beaten in a vacant lot north of downtown Rochester, New York. Multiple investigators had spent years trying to solve her murder without success. Now, it was Investigator Carr's turn. Little did he know, this time would be different. Because thanks to advancements in technology, he had everything he needed to make the first break in the case

in close to 40 years. I'm Ashley Flowers, and this is the deck. When Investigator Carrower When Investigator Carr first picked up Susie Timmons case file, he was coming in not knowing anything that had come before. So he started right where you have to in order to catch you, the beginning. The first report in the file he picked up is about an anonymous call from a man that came into police a little after 11 p.m. on July 29, 1982.

The call taker was able to hear music in the background, and it sounded like he was calling from a restaurant or a bar. The caller told police that they, would find a woman's body with a brick next to her head near an underpass just off Joseph Avenue. When pressed for more information, the man hung up. Now, the old report showed that a police unit had been sent out after the call, but the responding officers ran into a problem once they arrived. They showed up and they did not locate a victim or a complainant for that matter.

Nothing more happened. And that report probably would have been a standalone, forgotten about, and tossed aside, if not for a second call that came in around noon the next day. Now, this one seemed to be from a different caller, but it was incredibly similar. They said they'd found a body of a woman in a vacant lot. They were checking the vacant lot south of the railroad tracks and discovered the body of a young black female face up between, piles of dirt, the person went to the pay phone, called the police, and then led the officers, responding officers to the body. What no one knew in that moment was that this was 17-year-old Susie Timmons.

How she had been missed when law enforcement responded the night before was not exactly clear from the police report's car had to go off of. His best guess was that police might have looked in the wrong place. I mean, this area had a lot that could obstruct a body. And based on the crime scene photos he had in front of him, the vacant lot looked like a demolition site, covered in rubble and debris. Even in the daylight, Susie was hard to spot.

The photos also made it clear that Susie had been violently attacked right there where she was found partially clothed. The autopsy report that accompanied the crime scene photos told Carr that Susie had been beaten, which resulted in massive fractures to both her face and her head. And if that weren't enough, Someone stabbed her more than 60 times. And that gave Investigator Carr his first clue.

When you see that volume of violence, that's like a fit of rage type violence. And typically that would indicate, you know, that maybe the suspect has like an actual relationship with this person. The autopsy report mentioned a sexual assault kit being done. But the results showed that no semen was found. So strike out there. As far as evidence collected at the scene, officers didn't report finding any kind of sharp instrument like the knife that she could have been stabbed with. They also didn't find a brick, like the anonymous caller mentioned.

But they did find a large rock with blood on it and a shoe print. Also some random clothing items that they later determined to be what Susie was wearing. A subsequent report says that police were alerted to another vacant lot less than two miles away. where a man walking his dog had found a bloody tan t-shirt and two bloody towels. One of those towels had the words psychiatric center printed on it. Now there was nothing to definitively link this to Susie at the time, but they collected them just in case. And from what investigator Carr could tell,

those items were still in evidence and something that past investigators had gone back to to look at. The best they had gotten to over the years was blood typing, trying to see if there was a link, but all the testing that had been done came back inconclusive. However, Investigator Carr knew 2020 was a new time in DNA Tech. This evidence would be a good option for new testing.

Maybe it wasn't connected at all. Maybe it was and it was all Susie's blood. Or maybe, just maybe, he could connect that blood to a suspect, which he was learning. there were a few of. Interviews conducted with family members, both by law enforcement and newspapers,

show that Susie's life was complicated. At 17, she was a lot like you or I as a teen. She liked to have fun. She loved dancing and music. Sometimes she even DJed. She was also caring, especially towards her grandmother. But she also had a lot of responsibility, because at 17, Susie was already married to a man

who was 24 years old at the time. And almost two years prior to that, she had given birth to their son. You do the math on that. Susie was not in a good situation. And to make things worse, her husband Roy Timmons, Sr. was in prison on an attempted forgery conviction.

So Susie was left trying to figure out how to support herself and her child as a child herself. She found a boyfriend, she probably hoped would help her out some, and she was considering joining the Navy when she was old enough. But until then, she sometimes earned money through sex work. Records also showed that at least twice, Susie had filed complaints with the police after being assaulted. Susie had filed these complaints within the two months before her murder.

One allegation was against a man who she said had assaulted her with a knife. And the second was against a different man who she told police had sexually assaulted her. Police records don't indicate if these two men were ever questioned about Susie's death. Now, when we asked Investigator Carr about this, he told us that one man was in Florida at the time of the murder, and the other appeared to be a less viable suspect at the time, and even today, although it's unclear exactly why. But for whatever reason, that seemed to rule these two guys out for police. In Investigator Carr's eyes, there were two possible scenarios. One, Susie was killed by someone she didn't know, possibly while doing sex work.

Or two, she was killed by someone she knew, possibly someone she was in a relationship with. I'm kind of looking at it, in this case from the beginning, I'm looking at it from all angles. But, you know, you're keeping in mind those two scenarios. Considering her husband was in prison, it looked like he was ruled out early. Her boyfriend, on the other hand, was one of the first people that police wanted to talk to. Investigator Carr saw that Susie's boyfriend was first brought in for questioning on July 31st. And while he appears in several reports in the file, he has never been named publicly as a suspect in his case. So for that reason, we'll be referring to him as Anthony.

Anthony told police that he had known Susie's since the late 70s, but it wasn't until March 1982 that they had started dating. In the weeks leading up to her murder, they were staying with his parents about a mile from where Susie was eventually found. At first, it doesn't appear that Anthony could give police an alibi as to his whereabouts on the 29th, the night of the murder. He claimed that he was just hanging out in the streets, and even his family couldn't pin down where he was that night. Although investigators were able to confirm from Anthony's family that Susie left the house at around 9 p.m. to walk to her mother's house. Now, she never made it there. And that got me wondering, could he have been the reason? Investigators talked to Anthony a few more times,

and it appears that he later did establish more of an alibi, although it's hard to interpret from what's in the case file. The reference to an alibi actually comes from the notes from a separate interview with an ex-roomate of Susie's. The former roommate said that Anthony was at her house. between 7.30 p.m. to 11.45 p.m. the night of Susie's death. Her family also confirms this, and the notes from that conversation referenced that this lines up with a statement that Anthony himself gave. Though I think it's kind of weird that he didn't mention this in the first conversation. But regardless, it definitely left investigators with more questions. I mean, so much so that later on that year, Investigator Carr could see that investigators gave Anthony a polygraph, which he passed.

Now, another person mentioned a good number of times in the reports was the anonymous caller who first reported Susie's body. You know, the time when even police couldn't find it when they went looking for it. Police did their legwork back in the day, and they were able to locate the guy by honing in on all that background noise from the call. They realized that there happened to be a pool hall about two blocks away from the crime scene. So they go in there, they're interviewing people, and there's somebody in there that, hey, I remember. guy coming in here, saying something about a woman, outside, you know. Not just any guy. They knew the guy's name, but I'm just going to call him Dave.

Long story short, Dave had confirmed to police that he made the call that started this whole saga. But he told investigators that it was another guy, I'll call John, that they really needed to talk to. John told him about witnessing the actual murder. Now, of course, he only knew John's first name, so based on reports, they weren't able to track John down and talk to him until September 12th. Initially, he denies actually seeing anything he heard some female screaming, but he didn't make any other observations. That story changes by the time they're done talking to him, though. The final version of events that he gives is that he had been staying with a friend in a vacant house in the area that, that night and he was alone in the attic getting ready to go to sleep when he heard a woman's scream.

That prompted him to go look out the attic window at around 10 p.m. And that through the window, he made observations and what he saw was that he saw a male assaulting this woman. Specifically, he told police that he saw this man stabbing a woman and then hitting her with some rocks. He described the man as black, mid-20s, thin-billed, average. average height wearing tan work boots jeans with a blue shirt over a white t-shirt. John said that he saw the man run away after killing the woman, and he admitted to going to the scene and locating Susie's body. Now it took a lot of back and forth to get all of that out of John, so his reluctance to talk was suspicious to Carr. And it was unclear to him if his

final version of events are actually possible. If anyone ever went to the location of the vacant house that he was in and checked to see if he could hear or see what he said he did, all of that info has been lost to time. All he knows is that they took this guy back to the YMCA where he was staying and searched his clothes, which didn't turn up any evidence. The reports after this are kind of few and far between. The thinning out of the case file is a physical representation of leads drying up. But Detective Carr could at least see what was tried, like when they sent some rocks from the crime scene to the FBI to test for fingerprints.

But no prints came back. Six months later, a local crime stoppers episode aired featuring Susie's case, but nothing substantial comes from this or any major breaks in 1983. In 1984, there is one tip that made its way into Susie's file. An anonymous call came into the district attorney's office accusing Anthony and an associate of Susie's murder. Now, it doesn't seem like police took this super seriously because there's no follow-up. But Carr was very interested to see that associate's name pop up again in Susie's case file in 1986 when he put himself right in the middle of her murder investigation.

In March of 1986, police are contacted by an inmate at Collins Correctional Facility, who told them that he had information about the death of Susie Timmons. Now, why this man chose to reach out to police is a mystery in and of itself. Because this man, who will be referring to as Cody, was in prison for burglary at the time. But if he was hoping to get something for sharing his story with police, that didn't make it into the report. Maybe he was just tired of holding on to this secret, if the secret is legit.

When police sat down with Cody, he told them that on the night of the murder, he was with Susie and Anthony at the house where the couple had been staying. Cody saw Anthony and Susie get into an argument, which ended when Susie left the house at around 10 p.m. Anthony was making threats about Susie, and while Cody tried calming him down, he couldn't. He said Anthony went into the kitchen and from the living room, Cody could hear him getting a knife. Anthony then left to go after Susie. So he's claiming that he followed Anthony over to this location

without Anthony understanding that he was behind him. Cody had followed in his own car. He told police that he saw Anthony find Susie outside a bar where Anthony and another woman forced Susie into a man's car. Cody told police that he followed them and then watched while Anthony and his accomplices took Susie out of the car. Cody says he briefly got out but then he went back to his car and rolled down the window.

He didn't see anything but he said he could hear screaming for 20 minutes. He said he left and he got home before Anthony and he watched him clean the bloody knife and burn his clothing. Now, on one hand, it is very interesting to investigate her car that Cody's name had been brought up before. But there were some glaring inconsistencies

with what he's read in previous statements. I mean, statements from Anthony and his family don't match this. Cody even got the day wrong. He said all of this was a Friday, but Susie was killed on a third. Sure, it was years later and little things like that would be easy to get wrong. But it turns out Cody was interviewed back in 82 when they were looking into Anthony and he said none of this back then. So is he lying now?

Was he lying then? Was it something in the middle? In his 86 interview, police Preston. As that interview progresses, the investigator is changing gears and looking at, at Cody under that scope that he perhaps he's talking to the killer right now, not a witness. When investigators began to put pressure on Cody, they asked him if he was the one who stabbed Susie. And his response was, quote, I did it. Now what? Now problem is, Cody never appeared to clarify why he said this. I mean, was this a confession or was this something else?

It might have been clear from his tone at the time, but Investigator Carr only had the written report to go on. I'm reading that like it was done sarcastically, but, I mean, maybe it wasn't. However, they felt about Cody leaving that interview in 1986, they couldn't do anything with those feelings. He has never been arrested or charged with any crimes relating to Susie's death. They only call him a person of interest. So police were kind of running into the same roadblocks over and over, Anthony, John, Cody.

They looked suspicious, but there was nothing tying any of them to the crime scene. So there aren't many reports in the files from the rest of the 80s, 90s, even the early 2000s. But Detective Carr could see that Rochester PD had ordered some new testing in 2013, specifically DNA testing on items of evidence from the second. vacant lot, those towels and tan t-shirt. The tan t-shirt was tested and returned a partial DNA profile from a woman. The towels were tested, too, and had a mixture of two separate contributors. One was a male profile, and the second was inconclusive.

But that's where things in 2013 stopped, because none of the DNA samples found on these items were suitable for CODIS. And they couldn't even rule out Susie as the contributor of the female DNA. profile because blood collected from Susie in 1982 had degraded over time and couldn't be compared to any of these profiles. That's where the file ended. That's all Investigator Carr had to work with. But it was enough to get more answers.

He decided to focus first on any additional DNA testing that he could have done with new technology, starting with getting a new standard sample for Susie. Now, he couldn't actually get it from her, so. he reached out to her now adult son. He was extremely cooperative and just really, I think, pleased that we were actually looking into the case. Then Investigator Carr had a lot of new testing done. From both the crime scene where Susie was found,

as well as the second location that had bloody towels and the t-shirt. And this new testing revealed that the textiles from the second scene didn't have any DNA connection to Susie's case. It wasn't her blood. Now, whose blood was soaking two towels in a t-shirt? Couldn't tell you. Once it was ruled out from being connected to Susie, the testing just stopped. They had other things to focus on.

Other items that were actually at the first scene where Susie was found. Now, investigators are holding back what items produced this new sample that they got. But they confirmed for us that it was from a man. And it wasn't a match for the male DNA at the other scene on the towels in the shirt. And that gave them the final confirmation that those items really weren't connected. But guess what? This new DNA profile, it was good enough to add to CODIS. This is why we revisit cases like this, because we have technology today that we didn't have back in 1982.

And we have technology today that is more advanced than it was in 2013. Once you have that kind of development in a case, I mean, you can start to narrow your focus and you start to eliminate people. A little bad news to follow the good news, though. There have been no matches in CODIS yet, not even to Anthony, whose DNA is in the system from prior arrests. Knowing this has allowed investigator car

to be more focused in his lines of investigation, identifying persons of interest whose DNA aren't in CODIS and trying to make contact with them to quickly rule them in or out. People like Cody. In February of 2021, Investigator Carr and his colleague interviewed Cody again, who was no longer in jail at this point. And just like in his last conversation with police, Cody continued to suggest that Anthony killed Susie.

I don't know what his motivation is to try and implicate a person that didn't commit the crime. I mean, or like, why would you try and present yourself as a witness? But sadly, he's not the only person I've ever dealt with that's done that. During this interview, Cody was offered a cigarette, which he took and smoked. Once the interview concluded, that cigarette was bagged up and sent off for testing. I mean, if you think about it, a case would have been really good if it was his DNA. I mean, he described the crime.

He's changed his story multiple. times. And if his DNA was at the crime scene, that would have been pretty damaging. It would have been. But, close to two months later, Investigator Carr got those lab results back and learned that Cody's DNA was not a match. And that just leaves John. He's the guy who claimed to have witnessed the murder from a window, but police were oh so suspicious of his story. Years after Susie's murder, John went on to be charged with a different crime, a sexual assault from the early 90s, which he was sentenced to seven and a half years for. But New York State's DNA databank wasn't operational until 1996,

and it wasn't even until 2012 that all felons were required to submit DNA. So John wasn't in CODIS, and it doesn't appear that his DNA was ever directly compared to Susie's case either. And unfortunately, comparison now would be difficult because John passed away in 2023. That said, Detective Carr is looking into whether there is evidence from John's sexual assault case in the 90s that could be used for comparison. So TBD on that. It is very well a possibility that John's DNA won't be a match either. And maybe Susie was killed by someone who was never on police's radar. And actually, there was a tip early on.

One of the very first tips that Detective Carr found in the case file that was from a man who said that at 9.30, on the night of the murder, he and his girlfriend were driving down Joseph Avenue. And as they approached an underpass, he saw a man and a woman in what appeared to be some kind of confrontation. The report goes on to read. The male had the female by the arms and was forcing her into the driveway alongside the railroad tracks in Joseph Avenue.

The witness couldn't describe the woman. The man was blocking his view. But good news there, that meant he was able to describe the man. He stated he was approximately 20 to 30-year-old male black, six-foot-tall average build, wearing khaki pants, a shirt that was also khaki color, it was darker brown, and he had a hat that resembled a fishing hat. A couple of things stand out to me about this. One, none of the guys that I've talked about,

are six feet tall. John, Anthony, Cody, all of them are between 5'6 and 5'8. What if one of the very first hips was the most accurate? Who could that man be? Now, it's worth mentioning that Investigator Carr did tell us that investigators aren't focusing on the difference of a few inches. So maybe that's not important. But the second thing that stands out to me is what that guy was wearing, khaki pants, khaki-colored shirt, the bloody t-shirt found at the second vacant lot was tan in color. If this tip isn't connected to Susie, what if it's connected to some other crime that happened that night? I do believe that one day we will know. When asked by our reporter where this case stands today, Detective Carr said that it is active. He said that

Susie's case file hasn't left his desk since the day he first picked it up back in 2020. It's just going to take some more legwork because, unfortunately, the DNA sample from Susie's murder scene to date is not sufficient for something like familial DNA testing. Although, Investigator Carr points out that advancements in technology and changes in minimum thresholds could make that a possibility one day. But for now, that just means Investigator Carr. will need to find and compare people one by one. And he's up for the task,

though it would sure be helpful if someone out there had a name for him. Now is the time. In fact, in a case like this, we can take the information that you provide and we can move forward on the case without your cooperation. We just need the information. We need the information because we can,

prove it through science if you point us in the right direction. If somebody has information out there and they just don't want to get involved, but they want to provide the information anonymously, if they provide information anonymously on a suspect, and then we can run with that, and we can include them or exclude them through testing. What's so heartbreaking about Susie's case, besides just how young she was,

is that there's never just one victim. I mean, her family and friends have had to live with the pain of her murder for decades, including her son, not even two years old at the time. He was robbed of what should have been a lifetime of memories with his mother, and he deserves to know why this happened. And more importantly, he deserves to know who did it. So if you have any information about the murder of Susie Timmons on July 29, 1982, in Rochester, New York.

Please call the Rochester Police Department's Major Crimes Unit at 585-4287-7-1-57, or you can email them at major crimes at cityof-rochester.gov. And you can also call crime stoppers if you want to remain anonymous at 585-423-9300. You can also submit a tip to them online.

The deck is an audio chuck production with theme music by Ryan Lewis. To learn more about the deck and our advocacy work, visit the deckpodcast.com. I think Chuck would approve.