True Crime All The Time - Clifford Olson Jr.

Episode Date: January 9, 2023

Clifford Olson Jr. was a man who called himself “The Beast of British Columbia.” Olson was a Canadian serial killer who murdered 11 children in 1980 and 1981. Join Mike and Gibby as they discuss the life and crimes of Clifford Olson Jr. Olson entered a highly controversial “cash for bodies” deal with the police, where his wife and child were paid in exchange for him leading the police to his victims’ remains.You can help support the show at patreon.com/truecrimeallthetimeVisit the show's website at truecrimeallthetime.com for contact, merchandise, and donation informationAn Emash Digital productionSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hello everyone and welcome to episode 315 of the True Crime All the Time podcast. I'm Mike Ferguson and with me as always is my partner in true crime. Mike Gibson. Gibby, how are you? Hey, I'm doing good, man. About you. I am doing much better today. Good.

On a road to recover. Yeah. Today's the best I felt. Just to kind of let everybody know, we couldn't do it ahead of time, obviously. But after I got back from vacation, last week, I found out I had COVID. And so that's why we. ended up taking an extra week off. No episodes last week, but we really couldn't warn everyone because it wasn't planned.

Well, that happens. We remember that when it happened to me, so I get it. So we had two weeks off instead of our scheduled one week off, but we're back. And we're in 2003. Hope everybody had, you know, a great holiday season. And we're already into the new year. Yeah, excited, man. I am too.

I am too. We've got a lot of good stuff lined up for the year. Let's go ahead and give our Patreon shoutouts. We had Wyatt Salisbury. Hey, Salisbury. Like the steak. Like the steak. Amanda Parker.

What's going on, Amanda? Kate Kern. Hey, K.K. Cheryl Kuhn. What's up? Cheryl. Jennifer. John Ritchie.

Hey, Richie. Taylor Powell. What's going on, Taylor? John O'Neill. Appreciate that, John. Whitney B. Hey, Whitney. Samantha.

Good old Samantha. Casey Jones. What's up, Casey? Keros Huerta. I appreciate that, Keras. Sasha Gutierrez. Oh, Gutierrez. Tiffany Donovan.

Hey, there's Tiffany. Nancy Gregg. Appreciate that, Nancy. Kendall Lawson. That's awesome, Kendall. Hazel Tofia. Tafia. Sky Vroomin.

What's going on, Vroomin? And last but not least, Richard Clark jumped out at our highest level. Thank you so much, Richard. Yeah, thanks to everyone. And then if we go back into the vault, this week we selected Lucy Burton. Hey, Lucy. So big shout out to all the people who, you know, start to support us, continue to support us. It's all amazing.

On PayPal, we had great donations from Kimberly Herrick. Hey, Kimberly. Shelle's tax service. Oh, you've got to have a tax service. And Elizabeth Mitchell. Hey, Elizabeth. So thanks to all of you as well. Gibbs right now.

We have an episode out on Unsolved. It's a case that a lot of people have been wanting us to do for some time now. it's on the murder of Betty Gore, the whole Candy Montgomery thing. Pretty big case. It's a big case. And so it's been requested and we decided to do it. Yeah.

So if you haven't already, make sure you go over and check that one out. It's definitely a different type of unsolved. Yeah. Kind of like, more like unresolved. Unresolved. I mean,

most people, you know, kind of think they know what happened. And it's just, kind of how it played out. Exactly. That makes it unresolved. All right, buddy, are you ready to get into this episode of true crime all the time?

I'm ready. We are talking about Clifford Olson Jr., a man who called himself the beast of British Columbia. Olson was a Canadian serial killer who murdered 11 children in 1980 and 1981. He also entered a highly controversial cash for bodies deal with the police where essentially his wife and child were paid in exchange for him leading the police to his victims remain. I can see why that would be controversial. Yeah. I mean, I guess if you can get away with it as a killer, okay, you're providing for your family. Now, are there a lot of people who are going to have an issue with that? Yeah, probably so. But there's also going to be a lot of families

out there who are going to be saying we're okay with it. We need answers. Yeah, I think the only people that have really a right to say anything is the victim's family. Yeah. I mean, I see what you're saying there. I understand it's taxpayer money, so that's probably a level of concern there. But again, if you're the victim's family, you want to know where your loved ones are.

Yeah, no, absolutely. Clifford Robert Olson Jr. was born on January 1st, 1940 in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. His parents were Clifford Olson Sr. and Leona Olson. He grew up in Richmond, a city near Vancouver. Clifford's father was a member of the Canadian Army. After World War II, the family moved to a subdivision for servicemen. Olson was the first of four children.

Clifford, Sr. worked as a milk delivery man, and his mother worked as a housekeeper. according to the Vancouver son. Good old milk delivery. Yeah. You know, you and I have talked about milk delivery a lot over the years. And I still get email from people who say, I get my milk delivered. Yeah.

And I, for one, have not seen a milk delivery in a very, very long time. I'm going to deliver some milk to you. Yeah, I will not be drinking that. So as a boy, Clifford Jr. was a bully. He was a thief. he was also a guy who tormented and abused cats and dogs. And we know from our many, many episodes on different people,

that's a bad sign. Yeah, it's kind of foreshadowing. It can be for sure. Now, there are people, and I've actually conversed with people who have said, you know,

I did some of this stuff as a kid. I'm not proud of it, but I didn't go on to be a serial killer. And I think that's the thing you have to take. Right. Not everything means absolutely this will happen. Exactly. But it can be an indicator.

He also stole berries and flowers from people's yards. And then I guess he tried to sell them back to those same people. See, that's the flaw right there, right? You should sell them to someone else. Right. I mean, that's like you come up into my yard picking all my petunias and then you come up with a big handful and say, would you like to buy these? Exactly.

I know what they are. I might have planted them. Well, I didn't. My wife did. You're never planting anything called petunias. No, I just picked that. Clifford, Sr. said in an interview to the Globe and Mail, he was always getting into fights at school and getting beaten up. One day he said to me, Dad, I'm going to learn to be a boxer.

As soon as he did, he started making the rounds of all these boys who had been, you know, beating him up. and he started evening, you know, out to scores. Well, you know, when you learn how to fight, sometimes that can change the outcome. You know, his dad said maybe that's the trouble, that chip on his shoulder. Olson's former boxing coach, Tommy Yule, said that Olson was a good boy, who won runner up in the 1954 boxing tournament. And in a different tournament, he was named the most sportsman-like boxer. So, you know, for me, as we go through the backgrounds,

of these people, these killers, there are interesting facets, whether it's foreshadowing of really bad things to come, or it's little nuggets where somebody is viewed by people as a good kid, even though maybe at home or away from those people's eyes, they're doing some not-so-good things. Yeah.

I just remember boxing is a good sport, to teach you discipline. You do need to have a lot of discipline. Yeah. Where you're going to get hit a lot. Exactly. And I remember when I was in the aluminum glove competition, you know. Where you wore aluminum gloves.

Yeah, because we weren't ready for the golden gloves. Oh, okay. So it was called aluminum. Yeah. Yeah. I did okay. I felt like that would be dangerous. Actually, to be honest with you.

So then we get to like 1950. You know, Clifford began skipping class. In 195, he was held back for the first time. In 56, he left school to work at a racetrack. And then later on, he began working as a self-employed contractor. I was doing whatever he can to make some money. Yeah, by the age of 16, he's out of school. So, you know, obviously he didn't finish.

Now, he lived with his parents until he was 17 when he was sentenced to nine months in jail for burglary. But he escaped. even though he was recaptured. And he would escape prison at least seven times in the next two decades. That's a lot of prison escapes. It really is. Now, I get it in some of the episodes we've talked about that's go back a number of years.

Okay, was it a little easier in some of these, I don't want to say rinky dink, but we're not talking about Alcatraz or what's that? Supermax. Supermax Florence thing. Yeah. that you couldn't get out of unless you're Sylvester Stallone and who else was in that one? And the skate plan?

The skate plan. Yeah. The ones that always get to me are the ones where there was like a metal grate. And all somebody had to do was figure out how to get the bolts out. Right. And they were able to get out. I'm like, okay, can we do a little pre-planning risk assessment on some of these things? You think that would be like in the checklist of design?

So from 1957 to 1981, Clifford Olson was arrested 94 times for crimes such as fraud, armed robbery, sexual assault, firearms offenses, and burglary. So by the time this guy was 41 years old, he had only spent four years of his adult life out of prison. Now, this is a little different. You know, normally what you and I are railing against are serious crimes where somebody gets a very light sentence. Yeah. And they get out early to then go do something else bad. Now, there might have been some of that here. I think obviously what this is telling us is that this guy was such a repeat offender.

essentially the minute he got out, whether he was getting out early or not, he was going to do something bad. Just turn around and walk back in. The other thing I would say is he probably wasn't too good at what he was trying to do because he kept getting caught. That's true. 94 arrests, that's quite a rap sheet. Also means you probably don't care if you go back.

And that could be it, right? There are some people who don't go through all the machinations of, trying not to get caught because they don't really care all that much. I'm not saying they want to get caught. What if they do? They're like, okay, I'll go back. Yeah, I've done it. It's okay.

In 1959, Olson was eligible for parole, but his parole was revoked. It was revoked again in 1972. So he did occasionally get early release for good behavior. Other times, you know, his sentences got extended because he kept trying to escape. We talked about that. In 1974, Clifford repeatedly sexually assaulted a 17-year-old inmate. According to the Vancouver son in 77, Olson was awarded $3,500 by the government for what was termed an unusual degree of moral and physical courage.

So apparently he was stabbed seven times in prison, but it was the result of him snitching on other inmates who had this plan to smuggle drugs inside the prison. These guys attacked him. They called him a rat and they stabbed him. I just don't feel like 3,500's enough to justify that. I mean, good for him, but 3,500, man, to be stabbed seven times. But you know prison is a very rough place. Oh, yeah, yeah.

I mean, 3,500 goes a long way in prison. But are most prisons in the habit of awarding compensation? for people who get stabbed? I don't know that they are. I don't think so, but I don't know that 100%. I haven't heard that a lot in the research and things that we've done. According to researchers from Radford University in 1978, during a brief stint out of prison, Olson assaulted a seven-year-old girl. While he was back in prison in 1978, he was moved to a Supermax unit, and he met another killer named Gary Francis Marceau. Olson would testify against Gary, who was convicted of raping, murdering, and mutilating a nine-year-old girl in 1976. It was reported that Olson was in protective custody with this guy, and he actually helped him write letters describing the assault and the mutilation, which were then later used at trial.

It's like, this guy's a monster himself, but yet he's trying to do some good against these. other guys? Well, but in this one, is he trying to do good or is he getting some type of thrill from going through this guy's crimes with him kind of line by line? I could see that as a possibility. And that makes sense. On September 7th, 1980, Clifford was released from jail for the last time before he started killing boys and girls. The Globe and Mail wrote, The bodies of the three boys and eight girls, aged between 9 and 18, had been found in secluded areas within a 90-kilometer radius of Vancouver. Some of the victims had been raped and sodomized.

Some were bludgeoned. Others were stabbed and one was strangled. All had been drugged and killed in a murderous spree lasting only nine months. From November 1980 through July 1981. And this was a time when Olson was out of prison on mandatory supervision. So he's being supervised. Not very well. And is able to murder 11 youngsters in the span of about nine months.

They were keeping a close eye on them, weren't they? Now, I'm not sure what the monitoring techniques were in 1980. I know you didn't start to experience some of your monitoring until, uh, you know, well into the 90s. Absolutely. So you can't speak to 1980. No. But, you know, the research really went into the fact that, so at this time when he's committing

these murders, he's going to church. And he's speaking to people about, you know, how he had found religion. He posted an advertisement for window washing jobs for teens on the church bulletin. He also met his future wife, Joan Hale, in February. of 1980, they had a child together who was born during this murder spree. And, you know, I don't want to make a huge deal out of it, but I got to keep saying it's a nine month or so period of time. That he's doing all this. Because remember, he's not out of prison very much. On November 17, 1980, Clifford Olson murdered 12-year-old Christine Ann Weller near Richmond. She was reported

missing on November 25th, 1980. Her body was found beside River Road in Richmond on December 25th. She had signs of stab wounds and strangulation. Christine's cause of death was ultimately ruled as multiple stab wounds. On April 16th of 81, Olson abducted 13-year-old Colleen Dagnow, a girl from Surrey. Her body was found five months later, and her cause of death was determined. to be skull fractures. 16-year-old Darren Todd Johns Rood was killed near DeRoch on April 21st, 1981. He had only been in Vancouver for two days. His body was found on May 2nd of that year.

His cause of death was also skull fractures. Olson hit him in the head with a hammer and then dumped his body in a ditch. It's brutal, the hammer to the head. It's absolutely brutal. I mean, already, you know, we have talked about a 12-year-old girl, a 13-year-old girl, and now a 16-year-old boy. And these are, you know, really nasty, horrific murders. On May 19, 1981, Clifford picked up 16-year-old Sandra Lynn Wolfsteiner, who was hitchhiking

from her boyfriend's house. Sandra's boyfriend's mother saw her get into a car with a man. Olson killed Sandra in the woods nearby, and he did so by. you know, beating her over the head. I think this is kind of his thing, you know, trauma to the head, either with a hammer or however he's doing it, looks like that's his method of choice. Yeah, I mean, there are some strangulations. There are some other things.

But all of these things that we're talking about, we have mentioned before, right? These are up close and personal acts. You know, a hammer is not that long. It's essentially an extension of your arm. If you think about it like that, that's a very up close and personal way to kill someone. You're not shooting them from, you know, 30 yards away. And one of the things that I always kind of try to figure out is, you know, what makes some people choose their method of murder?

You know, go back to Tommy Linsells and the strangulation. and I'll use the word joy that he derived from kind of seeing the light go out of people's eyes. Made him happy. Then you have people, you know, who are snipers. They're not up close and personal. You have people who are poisoners. Yeah. Who may not even be there to see it.

There are different methods of murder. And it's always kind of, I hate to use the word fascinating, but to think about why people choose the reasons that they do on top of the fact that they've made the choice to commit murder. Exactly. And sometimes after the murders complete it, the way that they feel they need to position the body. Or do bad things to the body. Body post-mortem. In May 1981, Olson was arrested for impaired driving and for contributing to the juvenile delinquency of a 16-year-old girl. I don't have a ton of detail kind of around this, but, But you can kind of make the inference that, all right, should he have been stopped here?

He's in the middle of a murder spree. Yeah. Should this have been enough to put him back in prison or in custody for something? Sounds like it should have been. A little bit nice if it would have. Well, it would have saved some lives for sure. 13-year-old Ada Anita court was killed near Agassiz on June 21st, 19, 18, Ada went missing on her way to see a friend.

She was babysitting at her brother and sister-in-law's apartment in Coquitlam. The Olsons lived at this same apartment complex. Ada got on a bus to meet her boyfriend and then she went missing. A witness, 52-year-old Jim Parranto believed that he saw Clifford Olson disposing of Ada's body. Her body was found two months later and the cause of death was determined. to be strangulation. He's really racking up the numbers. I mean, again, 11 in nine months, that is a very rapid pace.

On July 2nd, 1981, 9-year-old Simon Partington from Surrey went missing while riding his bike to a friend's house. By this point, the case was being called the case of the missing lower mainland children. And it was really Simon's case that kind of marked a turning point. unlike the other children who were several years older than Simon, he was so young that he really could not be considered a runaway. So the police naturally had to assume that he was abducted.

Which was good because we know how they treated that back in the 80s. Yes, right. I mean, 13, 14, there was still a lot of thought that, well, they just ran away. Now, you're talking about a nine-year-old. and it gets harder and harder the younger the person is to believe that they just ran away on their own and they're subsisting, right? They're living by themselves. Kind of hard reasoned that one.

Simon's cause of death was later determined to be strangulation. Then on July 7th, 1981, Clifford Olson was charged with the sexual assault of a teenage girl, but he wasn't linked to any of the recent disappearance. appearances and deaths. So here's again a second time that this guy has gotten in trouble with what seems to be an underage girl. But what happens to him? Nothing.

Well, whatever it was, it wasn't enough to get him off the street. Exactly. Because two days later, Clifford abducted and killed 14-year-old Judy Elizabeth Cosma. After getting her to drink a bunch of alcohol and essentially drugging her, Judy was last seen at a bus stop near her home in New Westminster on July 9th. Her body was later found in Lake Weaver on July 25th. Her cause of death was listed as multiple stab wounds. Yeah, I'm just thinking of Judy's parents and how upset they were just for what happened, but let alone when they find out that Clifford was charged two days prior. Yeah, and back out.

back out to kill their daughter you know as a parent you would be just livid but olson did something different this time he also took judy's address book and he began calling her friends and telling them you're next okay you want to get freaked out you find out that your friend is missing now you start getting these anonymous calls saying you're next. Be alarming. Be very alarming. On July 10th, Olson and his family left for a two-week vacation. They traveled to Knottesbury Farm near Los Angeles and returned on the 21st.

Because everybody needs a vacation. The day after you murder a 14-year-old girl. Yeah. Hey, family, let's go and have some fun at the park. I need some time away from my second job. I hate to say it like that. Yeah. But it's almost mystifying to think that these individuals can be out doing these things.

And then all of a sudden, they are Chevy Chase from vacation. They're jumping in the car or whatever and going cross country to visit an amusement park. On July 15, 1981, Clifford Olson's name was first mentioned at a law enforcement conference. According to Malcolm Gray's 1982 article in McLean's, a secret RCMP brief of the chronology of the murders showed that Olson was singled out

as a suspect at this meeting on July 15th. So the police decided to put him under surveillance. But Gibbs, he would kill four more victims before he was arrested. And it wasn't like he was laying low. It came out that, you know, on these days where he was under surveillance, he was out driving.

He was attempting to pick up girls. He also spoke with the police. He went on vacation with his family. He appeared in court on a charge of indecent assault. So this guy is on the radar in a major way. He's under surveillance, but he's fallen through the cracks somehow. So he gets back from this vacation.

And on July, 23rd, Olson lured 15-year-old Raymond Lawrence King, away from a local youth employment center by promising him a job. He then beat Raymond and dumped his body in a remote campground. Raymond King was found on August 5th, about 1,500 meters from where Judy Cosmo was found. His cause of death was ruled as skull fractures. 18-year-old Sigrin Charlotte Arndt was killed near Richmond. on July 25th, 1981, her cause of death was skull fractures as well. She was a German student visiting Canada.

She was seen in a pub in Coquitlam with Clifford Olson. Some passengers saw her crouched in a passing train with a middle-aged man, who later turned out to be Clifford Olson. But she wouldn't be a confirmed victim until later on when Olson actually confessed to killing her. So I think we're kind of seeing a trend here, a pattern. There are people who are seeing this guy. He is on police radar.

So the question becomes, how was he able to get away with it? Yeah, why didn't they pursue him sooner? I understand in the beginning. Police are trying to figure out, you know, who this serial killer is. But once you have a task force and you have a name and you have surveillance, then it becomes a little bit harder to figure out, doesn't it? I think so. But I think the parents of the four victims after they decided to do surveillance probably think the same thing. Well, and I think the public would as well. Do you lose some faith when all the facts come out? I think for a lot of people, it would be hard not to. 15-year-old Terry Lynn Carson was killed near Agassas on July 27, 1981. Olson dumped her body in a wooded area near the Fraser River. Her cause of death was killed nearer,

death was ruled as strangulation. So, I mean, again, I know we're running through these very quickly because there are so many murders that we have to talk about. But I just kind of want to go back and look at this timeline. Look at July, July 9th. He goes on vacation, comes back, and then it's, you know, July 23rd, July 25th. I mean, these are two days apart. Yeah.

In some instances. Now, there was some conflicting information about when the police surveillance began. Some reports had it beginning while he was on vacation. Like they actually went to his residence and figured out that, you know, he was gone. Right. With his family. There was another report that said it began on the 27th, which would be obviously a little bit later in the month. And if it was the 27th, then that means by that point, Olson had already killed

Terry Lynn Carson and dumped her body near Raymond King. In the early morning hours of July 29th, the police arrested Olson and two other men who picked up two teen girls and gave them some alcohol. Olson was released at 3 a.m., but he wasn't even followed when he left the jail. Investigators later argued that they thought it was pointless to follow him because he would know it. He'd be looking for them. Why do surveillance?

That's a good question. I don't know. Or maybe you need to find better people to do the surveillance. Well, so surveillance can do two things, right? If the person doesn't know they're being surveilled, well, then you're looking to catch them doing something or hopefully stop it or whatever. But could it also not have a deterrence factor?

Maybe there's a point to that as well. Right. The guy knows we're following him. He's less likely to do something if we think he's, he's this monster serial killer. On July 30th, this is the day literally after being arrested. Olson picked up 17-year-old Louise Chartrand,

drove to an area near the Whistler ski resort, murdered her, and buried her in a shallow grave in the same area. Louise's cause of death was ruled as skull fractures. And this very same day, Olson met with the police. Then later in the evening, he left to meet with the police.

his lawyer, Robert Chance, and it was on the way to see his lawyer that he spotted Louise. So, you know, go back to the conversation about not really fearing the consequences. I really don't think he did. I think he was really confident and just had zero cares. One of the other or both, confident they're not going to catch me or even if they do, I don't give a, you know what. Exactly. Like you said, he actually saw the police that day.

and then the next day he's going to appear in court. Yeah. And it does appear as though he knew they were following him or surveilling him. So you mentioned it. He went to court the next day. He then left the lower mainland for a week to go to Calgary, Alberta. He returned from Calgary on August 6th. And RCMP surveillance team was waiting for him.

They surveilled him for the next six days, hoping that he would do something that would link him to the murders. Now, they did see him break into a house near Victoria, but one officer said that they were after him for murder, not breaking and entering. And I understand that. You don't want to blow cover, I guess, but you're just going to let this guy break into somebody's house. Yeah.

Without doing anything? And I'm still thinking when he went off to Calgary, did they not follow him there? Did they not, you know, reach out to Calgary or Alberta, whoever needed to be aware to, put some eyes on him knowing what he's done they could have there was nothing in the research that said that but it could have happened so he was arrested again on august 12 the surveillance team decided to arrest him when they saw him picking up two girls who were hitchhiking because they felt

that these girls were in danger he was arrested and charged with impaired driving on the day of the arrest the police found an address book inside olson's van and the The book contained the name of one of the victims, Judy Cosma. So after he was arrested, he was taken to Chilliwack for questioning. And I always get a lot of voicemails about the way I see Chilliwai. I see, I seen that in the research. I thought, oh, we're going to get some calls. I'm going to say it wrong, but I do my best.

On August 20th, 1981, Olson was charged with the first degree murder of Judy Cosma. after new evidence emerged from the searches of three houses. The police found clothing and writings in a personalized phone book. The police found a phone book in his van when he was arrested. His defense attorney, Shant, said the book was not Judy's. But Judy had an address book with her friend's phone numbers when she went missing. And we mentioned it, right? At least three girls received threatening phone calls from a man

after Judy went missing. On August 21st, 1981, Olson was ordered to be sent to the Forensic Psychiatric Institute in Coquitlam for a 30-day assessment. Judge Tom Meager ordered the referral after Olson's lawyer and prosecutor John Hall made a request. A physician examined Olson in the holding cell and told the court that there was reason to believe Olson was mentally ill and suggested he be assessed. by a psychiatrist. Malcolm Gray wrote in a McLean's article that Olson's lawyer, Robert Shantz, had him analyzed by psychiatrist as for Olson's mental condition.

Chance had five psychiatrists looking at him, and they diagnosed him as a psychopath. Even though he is mentally disturbed, Olson never received psychiatric care while he was in prison and was not legally insane under Section 16 of the Criminal Code. He knew what he was doing when he killed. Dr. Tony Marcus, head of forensic psychiatry at the University of British Columbia, was one of the psychiatrists. According to the other press, he said that Olson did not suffer from illusions, delusions, or hallucinations, and added that Olson was the quintessence of the incorrigible, amoral, antisocial psychopath who does indeed know that he's done wrong and does appreciate the nature and quality of the act, though he cannot respond to these acts with the feelings that a normal individual would show.

Dr. Marcus said that Olson's attempts at showing remorse are without death. And he said, the perpetration of such horror, of such dimension in such a macabre and horrendous way is so alien that even people who have met individuals who are called psychopathic, or antisocial cannot bring themselves to believe that there may be individuals of this gross nature. It's too impossible to accept. And I know that was a lot. Yeah, but. But I thought it was very fitting because it's something that we talk about a lot, right? This determination of someone being psychopathic, the no empathy doesn't feel things the way that maybe the rest of us do. And here's a guy saying he knows what he's doing is wrong.

He does appreciate the fact that it's wrong. He just doesn't feel the same way about it that the rest of us would if we were to do something bad like that. 100% certified monster. And then the other thing is he's saying, You know, people just can't understand how individuals like this can be this way and can do the things they do. And I think it all makes a lot of sense. On August 25, 1981, Olson was supposed to come to court for two breaking and entering charges.

But Crown Counsel R.J. Lemiski said he entered a stay of proceedings at the request of special Crown prosecutor John Hall. Well, yeah, for sure. they have more important charges coming. Yeah. Yeah, it was just six days later on the 31st that Clifford Olson was charged with eight murders. So let's take a break on this breaking and entering. Yeah. And focus on the big daddy murder charges.

In September of 81, several charges against Olson were stayed at the request of prosecutor John Hall. Then on October 28th, a direct indictment. man was filed against Olson charging him with 10 counts of first degree murder. Well, they're definitely upping their game. Yeah, my assumption is they're putting in the work, right? They're doing the research. They're linking him.

And you oftentimes see charges added as time goes on. So Olson pled not guilty to 10 counts of first degree murder on the opening day of his trial on January 11th, 1982. His trial was expected to last for weeks, but it ended after just three days. On January 13th, Detective Dennis Tar testified that back in June 1981, Olson approached the police, offering to be an informant about stolen property. So essentially, he offered to assist in kind of like a sting operation, but he was never able to come through with information that the police needed.

But when this detective, Tar, visited Olson at his home on July 23rd, apparently Olson started talking about nine-year-old Simon Partington, who was still missing. Olson asked what Tar thought about the reliability of a witness's description of a man allegedly last seen with Partington. And he also offered his own theories about the reason that, you know, this young kid went missing. Right. I think if you're a detective, your spidey senses are, you know, going off. For sure. Number one, why is he talking about this individual? Why is he so curious about the reliability of a witness description? And why does he have his own theories about why this, this kid's gone missing?

But doesn't that go back to the old adage that a lot of these individuals like to insert themselves? That's true. They do. They like to talk to the cops. They want to know what the cops know. And a lot of times by doing that, you know, it seems as though they're kind of tipping their hand. They're giving something away. Why are you so curious? Why are you asking so many questions? Could it be that you want to find out how accurate they think this description is because the description is you? I think so. Sometimes I think they want to be as close as they can so they can try to cause a diversion. Or take a different path. Yeah, take a different path. If they need to, if they need to go in a different direction. On January 14th, Clifford Olson changed his plea and he pleaded guilty to 11 counts of first-degree murder. Sandra Wolfsteiner had been added to his list of charges from 10 to 11. He was ultimately sentenced to 11 concurrent life sentences and the judge recommended that he never be released.

Well, the one way that you guarantee that would be to give him consecutive life sentences instead of concurrent. Yeah, maybe they didn't have that option. I don't know at the time. But I absolutely understand the judge recommending that this guy never be released. You know, when you look at individuals like this, so callous, taking the lives of, you know, young children, young teenagers, how can you make the argument? that they should ever see the light of day.

I think it's very tough. Now, if you want to take them out of their cell and put them in one of those little cages where they do the rec time, and they can look up and see the sun, okay, I'm okay with that. Yeah. But to see the light as a free person,

no, I can't see that. But that very same day that he changed his plea, the media began reporting on what I referenced earlier, this controversial cash for bodies deal, where Olson received money in exchange for helping authorities find the bodies of his victims. According to McLean's, after six days in jail, Olson offered a deal. He wanted a guarantee that if he was convicted, he would serve his sentence in a mental facility instead of prison.

His lawyer told him that the police had no control over. sentencing. So Olson offered a deal for money, which would be called the cash for bodies deal. The RCMP report reads, the prime consideration in recommending the $100,000 plan was to locate bodies, which would be solid evidence necessary to prove that Olson was indeed responsible. I get. It's a good way to ensure that you can lock up this monster. Yeah, it definitely does that. Now, I'm surprised they also didn't say that they wanted to, you know, help the family by finding the bodies of their loved ones. So I get it. It's a police report. It's a little cold in the way that it's written. So four victims were found before Olson was arrested. He gave the police information about four murders and gave the location of six victims. The police agreed to pay him $30,000 for evidence about these first four. And an additional $10,000 for each body he helped them find or murder site he helped them find.

Olson agreed to give the police what he called a freebie. However, he insisted that the money be paid to his wife, Joe. Freebie. I'll give you one for free. Well, what a nice guy. Yeah. Now, I said earlier that, you know, he was doing this to provide money for his wife and child. Could people still have a problem with that?

Yeah, I see where they could. Now, would people really have a problem if they were paying him directly, $100,000? And I would say absolutely yes. For sure. I think people would be up in arms over that. I mean, people get upset when killers. make money selling paintings, let alone being given straight cash for providing information. You talk about profiting off of murder. That is essentially the worst form I can think of.

On August 24th, British Columbia's Attorney General Alan Williams authorized the deal after ensuring the payment was legal in that it wouldn't jeopardize the case. Williams asked the publishers of the Vancouver province and son not to print the details about the arrangement. According to McLean's, when Williams was approached after the conviction, he denied approving the deal and said he agreed only to the concept of payment being made. So, you know, that sounds to me like, you know, he's trying to walk it back because he didn't want to take the rap of the public saying, what the hell are you doing? There was also some internal conflict over which level of government would pay Olson.

It was decided that Ottawa would contribute over 75,000 under federal provincial cost-sharing agreements. And at one point, the police tried to trick Olson into giving information without payment, but he insisted that the money be put in a trust account and released $10,000 at a time as soon as he led the police to a victim's location. So he's not dumb. He's not dumb when it came to that. Now, there are a lot of people who believe that without this deal, the other murders never would have really been solved. Robert Kaplan believed that there was enough against Clifford based on the four victims

already found. But apparently, Olson's lawyer didn't like it. According to McLean's, the lawyer called the deal improper and politically insane. That's his attorney saying that. That's his attorney. Yeah. Wow. Well, because what does it do? Well, it confirms guilt. For his client. Yeah.

Yeah. On January 20th, 1982, a lawyer representing the Olson family said that Olson's son would receive an annual income from the $90,000 paid out to Joan Hale. The lawyer said the money had been invested in a trust fund for the care and maintenance of the child. On January 26th of 82, a warrant was issued for the arrest of 18-year-old Randy Ludlow, a known associate of Clifford Olson. Ludlow also went by the name Randy Cook. So apparently this guy was supposed to go to trial for possession of a dangerous weapon.

He never showed up to court. So a warrant was issued for his arrest. But Ludlow was with Olson on July 9, 1981, when Olson picked up Judy Cosma. But the police did not believe that he was an accessory. And they said Randy's weapons charge was not related to any of Olson's crime. According to the Vancouver son, Randy told people that he and Clifford Olson were friends. And he often stayed at Olson's apartment in the summer of 81. The RCMP believed that Ludlow was in the car with Olson when he picked up Judy.

Ludlow was supposed to be a witness at Olson's murder trial. but he never testified. He was questioned by the RCMP while they were building their case against Olson and they determined he was not a suspect or an accomplice. So he's free of all this, right, as being someone involved. Well, and to me, the only way that that could happen is that he was in the car but was let out before Clifford Olson murdered Judy Cosman. I mean, that's the only way that that's the only way that that.

that that could happen. Ludlow also believed he was with two of Olson's victims before they were killed. One was Judy. He said he left before Judy was killed. And he told a relative that he had what he called a hazy memory of watching Olson kill Raymond King Jr. So one he's saying I wasn't there at all. Yeah. Another one he's saying, I might have been there. I think I might have actually seen it. I just don't have great recall. My memory is. The Vancouver son first learned about Ludlow when Olson called a reporter after he was arrested. They learned that Ludlow claimed he met Olson in April of 1981 while he was out hitchhiking. So Olson gave him a rut.

Randy left his job at a bakery to work for Olson's construction company. Clifford Olson said he grew up with Randy's father in Richmond. And one of Randy's relatives confirmed that Randy lived with Olson on and off during the summer of 1981. So, you know, this guy is kind of interesting in the grand scheme of things. He's put himself in the car during or from his statements before one of the murders. And maybe he witnessed one of the murders. But he's living with this guy. Yeah. Throughout this summer where most of the murders, you know, are taking place. Clearly, he had no concerns. Or he really didn't know.

According to this relative, Randy said he was in the car. When Olson picked Judy up, Olson ordered him to get out. Judy was scared to be alone with Olson, but she agreed to stay after Ludlow told her that Olson would just drive her home. Boy, was he wrong about that? Absolutely. According to the world encyclopedia of serial killers by Susan Hall, Olson was driving towards downtown New Westminster.

He had Randy with him. Olson saw a girl coming out of a phone booth. And he waved at her. This girl was Judy Cosmo. She was on her way to a Wendy's in Richmond for an interview. And Olson offered to drive her. They got there early. And Olson offered Randy and Judy a beer.

He bought more beer after they drank that. Judy missed her job interview. After they went back to New Westminster, they drank more. And Olson gave Judy some green pills. Olson then dropped Randy Ludlow off at the mall. and Judy was never seen again. When Ludlow next saw Olson, he said that he dropped Judy off in Richmond.

According to the Vancouver Sun, Ludlow also said that he remembered lying in a drug-induced fog by a lake and watching Olson kill Ray King on a boat on the water. He said he heard a gunshot, saw Ray fall into the water, and then watched Olson stab him multiple times. That's pretty intense.

That is. It's a little bit more than a hazy memory. I get it. It's drug-induced, but it's pretty descriptive, pretty vivid. The RCMP drove Ludlow to a lake, and he saw a swing in a tree that he remembered. But investigators learned that the swing was in a different location from where Ray was killed. After Randy was interviewed by the RCMP, a psychologist determined that he was a man who harbored strong urges for violence. Back in 1980, Randy was put under a 72-hour committal warrant, and a psychologist wrote a letter that said Randy suffered from hallucinations. The hallucinations were brief psychotic episodes that had increased in frequency and intensity in recent months.

The psychotic episodes caused Randy pain and led to urges for violence. The Vancouver Sun wrote that Randy was quoted to saying, I feel like I could very easily kill someone when I'm like that. So, you know, here's a guy, like I said, that's very interesting. Yeah. He's not admitting to any murders. He's kind of been placing himself in the vicinity of, you know, where a couple of these crimes happen. But then you have all of this other stuff where he's saying he could kill.

So I don't know what to make of this guy. I mean, you can look at him and say, you know, he was friends with the wrong person. He was in the wrong car at the wrong time. And he had no knowledge whatsoever of the murders. Or you could say he's not telling the entire truth. Yeah, you could say maybe he was partners. Or had some hand played some role.

We don't know. In February 1982, Joan Olson told a BC TV reporter that she still loved her husband and didn't plan on returning the $90,000 she received from the RCMP. She said she never suspected Clifford until he told her in August 1981 that he was a killer. She said that her husband loved their son and that he was a very kind, thoughtful man. And you talk about stand by your man. That's really standing by him. You're going way above and beyond.

I get it. you have a love for an individual. Can you just turn that off? Now, what happens when that person discloses to you that they killed 10 or 11 young people, some kids? Repulsive. Does the love remain? And how could you say that he was a very kind, thoughtful man? Maybe he was to you and to his son.

But clearly not to others. Right. And as we know, there are a lot of these killers like this, right? They're one way at home. Their family knows them to be a certain way. And then away from them in the dark hours of the night, there's something that gets unleashed. Joan said that the two met at a bar. She knew he had a criminal record, but she didn't know that he had spent most of his life

in jail until January, 1982, when she said, I wasn't really very interested. And I didn't know how to take that. In him or his? No, obviously she was interested in him. They got married and all that. I took it to mean she wasn't all that interested in really asking questions about what he had been in jail for, how much time he had been in jail. Wouldn't you want to know that if you're going to be around him and maybe potentially have a child?

Build a life. Yeah. You would think so. She just, I think she was being honest. I wasn't really interested. interested. The families of seven victims each received $10,000 in civil court awards in 1982 from February to June 1986. The victim's families went to court to try to get the money. Olson earned from the deal, but they were unsuccessful. Joan was called as a witness in a lawsuit

filed by seven of the victims' families. In October, 1984, the family sued in the Supreme Court of British Columbia to have the 100,000. trust fund, declared fraudulent, and the remaining money given to them as compensation. At this lawsuit, Joan Hale testified that Clifford was an alcoholic. He beat her and threatened to slash her throat. The Globe and Mail reported that he also confessed what he did to her after trial, saying, what can I say, honey? I did it. It was the booze and the pills. So she loved him, even after she knew he was a killer, but she divorced him in 1985. In March 1986, the British Columbia Court of Appeals ruled against the families and argued that the payment was

not made as compensation for the deaths of the children, and it was authorized to obtain evidence to convict Olson of the murders. The Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear the case. The Globe and Mail wrote that in the years after his conviction, Clifford Olson played the criminal criminal justice system like a personal video game. Pretty good line. It really is. When I read it, I thought it was good writing because, you know, I think we've seen this time and time again.

Some of these individuals have nothing but time to try to figure out how to play the system. And I also think they learn from others who they're in prison with. Yeah, no doubt. They're sitting there trading. secrets and all that strategies. So basically what he did was he promised the police and journalists, details about unsolved crimes in exchange for certain privileges and media coverage. He submitted poems and stories to literary contests.

He also appealed for a new trial, an early parole, under what was called the Faint Hope Clause, and petitioned for parole after he served 25 years in prison. And I think it's that first part, you know, I will tell you X if you give me what I want. Sure. Yeah. You know, we sometimes refer to it as the Henry Lee Lucas effect. Yeah.

Now, he may not have wanted strawberry milkshakes. He might have wanted something else. But what do these guys have to lose? That's what I always think. What's going to happen to them if they don't deliver? Nothing. So they can string people along. They can try to get as much stuff out of them.

as they can. And if they don't deliver, what's the downside? They're still in prison. Absolutely. They're never getting out. Olson's case led to some changes in the criminal justice system in Canada, such as an amendment to the criminal code that barred multiple murderers from applying

for early parole under this faint hope clause. Clifford's collections of pension and old age income supplements led to the passage of a bill which denied payments to prisoners while incarcerated. That's a good thing. Are you telling me they're getting like social security and all kinds of different payments? Whatever it is up in Canada, they must have been getting it.

In 1992, Clifford Olson complained about back pain. He was sent for x-rays at a hospital where technicians found a handcuff key inside his rectum. The things people put up their prison wallet. Yes. I knew that was covered. Now, we've heard of some strange things being put up there.

I guess if you were going to put anything up there, a handcuff key might be the handiest thing if you can retrieve it. I still don't understand the complete retrieval process. Yeah, yeah. Well, I mean, I have an idea of it, but I, you know, I don't like to think about it a whole lot. I'm thinking that process is a little bit rougher than the first process. I don't want to, I don't want any part of any of the process.

You don't a keyster anything. First, middle, or last, I'm out of it all. Olson was transferred to a special handling unit in a maximum security federal penitentiary in Prince Albert. On July 18th, 2006, Olson appeared before the National Parole Bowl. After serving 25 years in prison, they rejected his application in about half an hour, which seems about 25 minutes longer than it probably should have taken. I mean, I'd just have the stamp ready when he walks in. At the beginning of the hearing, Olson told the panel that he had documents showing he should be transferred to the U.S. because he had information on 9-11,

but the board didn't allow him to continue talking, and they switched over to admitting four victim impact statements. And maybe that's why it took half an hour. Yeah. Just because of the victim impact statements. The information on 9-11 was what really, through me. Yeah.

So this is 2006, five years after it happened. And Clifford Olson, a serial killer in Canada, who's been incarcerated for, what, 25 years or so, has the answers to unlock the conspiracies behind 9-11. Yeah. Thinks he's got them. Again, just going back to throwing shit at the wall to see what you can get in exchange for whatever you can come up with. The parole board determined that Olson was still a high risk and that he would kill again

if he were released. Olson left before the ruling because he said he didn't want to hear the decision. That means you already know what it's going to be and it's not going in your favor. So I talked about, you know, how his case led to some changes. There was one report that said on March 21st, 2010, the public was outraged. when news reported that Olson was collecting over $1,100 a month in old age security and guaranteed income supplement payments after a 65th birthday in 2005. Yeah, that's a bunch of crap, man.

$1,100 for killing people. And then obviously after that is when they changed the law. He applied for parole again in 2010 but was denied. And it was reported by various outlets that Olson told the board, this is the final time. Never again, I'm out. So you won't be seeing my face anymore because I'm not applying for parole. Okay. Great. Yeah. We don't want to see you anyway. It makes it sound like, you know, like a, you'll be missing out. Yeah. You won't see me no more. You know, you did horrific things. We don't really want you out. So go back to your little cell and think about it.

I just can't imagine that really anybody on that board was really thinking, yeah, this would be a good idea to let this guy out. I'm not saying everybody should be kept in prison for the rest of their lives. I'm not saying that. I'm not saying that just every parole should be automatically denied. But when you look at this guy, when you look at what he did, when you look at what was written about him from various psychiatrists and things like that, it was clear to pretty much everyone. This was a guy without remorse. And if you let him out, he's going to kill again.

Yeah, I mean, 11 people. So let's not do that. And they didn't. But not even 11 people, 11 kids. Right. In September 2011, Olson was moved to a hospital in Quebec. Victims, family members were informed that he wasn't expected to live out the month of September. They were entitled by law to know about his movement.

and condition, which I think is a very good thing, but I also think, you know, every time you get a notification about this guy, it has to stir up so many emotions and more heartbreak and all of that. I get it. It's a good thing. You want to know where this guy is. You do. Where he's going. But it just has to be so tough on the family.

To relive all that again. Yeah. Clifford Olson died of cancer on September 30th, 2011. He was 71 years old. Many of the victims, family members expressed feelings of relief when Olson died. You know, his attempts at getting media attention, his parole applications, kind of like what we just talked about. Those had caused them a lot of suffering because every time they happened, they brought up all of these painful memories of what happened to the their loved one. And I know we talk about it. I don't know if we talk about it enough. I don't know. I obviously don't have firsthand experience. So I can't speak to it from, you know, that angle.

I can only try to think about how tough it must be. Because that's on top of the everyday thoughts you have of what happened to your loved one. And the fact that Christmas is rolling around, they're not here. Their birthday is rolling around. They're not here. And now you got this guy who's, you know, maybe trying to do a sideshow circus thing, trying to stir up media and get interviews. And I would think it would just cause you to almost lose it. The fact that anybody's even giving this guy an interview. So not surprised the family members were relieved. Yeah. Yeah. Does that make them bad people? No. I don't think so. Not at all. I don't think so. But, that's it for our episode on Clifford Olson Jr.

No doubt. I mean, he, he was a very bad guy. The one thing that I struggled with as far as it related to him was really his motives behind the murders. I didn't see where he really talked about it. To me, it was almost as if these were killings for the sake of killing people.

Yeah. I mean, there were no other ancillary crimes. It seemed like associated with the murders. He would just take people out and beat them on the head or strangle them. It was just a violent guy. Yeah. Yeah. So obviously he got something, which we never can quite understand, from taking the lives of these individuals.

And that makes you a very, very bad person. Dangerous person. We got some voicemails. You want to check those out? Get us here. Hi, Mike and Debbie. This is Anna Sefer from Omaha, Nebraska. Long-time listar, but first-time caller.

Just wanted to call and say that I love listening to you guys. I bounced around to several different true crime podcasts, but just kept coming back to you guys. Now you're my exclusive true crime podcast I listen to. I just love how you guys bounce between each other and how you present the information. So keep up the great work. I did want to suggest a case out of my hometown of Omaha, Nebraska. It would be the Kenyatta Bush murder that happened in 1992. So lots of interesting twists and turns, even long after convictions happen.

So I know how you guys like those. So I hope you guys have a great holiday season and your own time ticking. All right. Deanna's a great listener. That might be her first voicemail, but I know she emails and, and things like that. So we appreciate it. Hey, Mike and Gibby. My name is Jessica. I am absolutely obsessed with TCAT.

I've got no, you know, things to say other than I absolutely love your podcast and I listen to it on Stitcher and I'm glad you keep it free. There's ads, but it's totally worth it. So thank you so much. If there is some kind of way to pay like $5, $10 month, whatever it is to get some more, you know episodes or something, I will absolutely do it. Thank you for everything you do. You guys are amazing. Oh, appreciate the kudos. And there is a way that we have Patreon. We do. Where every month we put out a Patreon-only episode. We also do weekly kind of minisodes where we talk and stuff. But,

you know, you can sign up for Patreon for as little as $2 a month. Yeah. Sometimes we'll show up at your front door. Sometimes Gibby does. It's caused quite a stir many times. times and a few restraining orders. It didn't go as well as I thought. No, it shouldn't. It absolutely shouldn't. Hey, Mike and Gibby. This is Jamie from Virginia.

Just wanted to say, I love the podcast so much. I listen to you every day. I am going to ring in the new year by listening to True Crime all the time. I think I'm on episode 52 now. Shouldn't be long before I'll be caught up. And then I'll be super sad. So, I mean, maybe we can start doing this twice week now. But I just wanted to say thanks for all that you do and for all the hard work you guys put in.

It's just great to see what a success of podcast has become. You guys have a great new year and I hope it's a prosperous one. Thanks. Bye. Yeah, awesome. I have big hopes for 2023, but I don't want to jinx it. Yeah. Just keep them to yourself.

Because I've jinxed years before. Yeah, you're the one that started the whole COVID thing. 2020 is partly my fault. We had mailbag. Elena sent us a big Christmas package of sweets from Canada, a bunch of stuff. Oh, yeah. And then Andrea, Papa George, big time fan of the show, also sent us a box of goodies. She included stuff for you, for me, but also for our families, which was very cool.

Really cool. Yeah, Christmas stuff. So thank you to everyone. All right, buddy, that is it for our episode on Clifford Olson Jr., but also another episode of true crime all the time, the first of 2003. Yeah. Many more to follow.

Absolutely. So for Mike and Gibby. Stay safe and keep your own time ticking.