True Crime All The Time - Stephanie Lazarus

Episode Date: January 18, 2021

In 1986, Stephanie Lazarus was an LAPD officer who murdered her ex-boyfriend's wife, Sherri Rasmussen. Lazarus was still infatuated with her ex, John Ruetten, and decided to execute the woman she thought was her romantic rival. She used her police training to make the murder look like a robbery. Join Mike and Gibby as they discuss the murder of Sherri Rasmussen committed by Stephanie Lazarus. From the start, police were stuck on the theory that Sherri was killed by one or multiple burglars. Many people have said this caused them to not interview key witnesses or even take a hard look at John's ex-girlfriend. It took cold case investigators, over 20 years later, to put the pieces of the puzzle together. And when they did all signs pointed to Stephanie Lazarus. But, they had to tread carefully to take down one of their own.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.

Your math skills have global potential. As an actuary, you'll solve some of the world's most pressing problems while helping people to live better lives. Become an actuary through the society of actuaries and work anywhere in the world. Hello everyone and welcome to episode 216 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. How are you? Hey, man.

I'm doing good about you. I'm doing great. Yeah. I am ready to get into this episode. which is very tightly packed. Very tightly packed. So we can't waste any time getting there. So let's go ahead and give our shout out.

Let's do it. We had Kimberly Mueller. Hey, Kimberly. Suzanne Higden. Hey, Higden. Beth Ann Logan. What's going on, Beth? Melissa Teresee jumped out at our highest level.

Hey, Torrice. Emily E. What's going on, Emily? Emily Waddell jumped out of our highest level. Man, it's like two Emmleys in a row. Deanna Maydie. What's going on, Mayday? Carly Topham.

Hey, Topham. Chris Matthias jumped out at our highest level. What's up, Matthias? Barissa Bannon. Hey, appreciate that, Barissa. Kate Harris. Hey, thank you, Kate. Allison McLaughlin.

Hey, Allison. Chris Ormey. Well, appreciate that, Army. Mike Dupree. What's up, Dupree? Courtney Marnoka. Monoka. Raj Patel.

What's happening, Raj? Sean Perry. Hey, Sean. Holly Stevenson. What's going on, Holly? Anita Dunn. Thank you, Anita. Jennifer O'Brien.

Well, O'Brien. Uh-huh. Yeah. Cassie Patton. Hey, Cassie. Lutz Lang. Hey, what's happening at L.L.?

And last but not least, Julia Nash. Well, appreciate that, Julia. So it's a lot of great new Patreon support. We really appreciate it. And then if we go back into the vault,

this week we selected Eva Nordland. Well, thank you, Eva. So we really want to thank all of those folks that have supported us over the years and continue

to support us on Patreon. It makes a world of difference. We had some great PayPal donations as well from Christy Titsy. What's what going on? Titsy. Jennifer Wormwood. Hey, Jennifer. Nobody's business.

There's nobody's. And the Leah Firkens. What's happening? Furkins. I felt like Alex Trebek there. I'm like laying out the categories for this round of Jeopardy. You do a good job. Gibbs, right now we have an episode out on True Crime All the Time Unsolved.

We're talking about the disappearance of Amy Scher. Yeah. So we're headed to Massachusetts. We are. 2002. Yeah. To talk about a wife and mother who disappeared. Right. And, you know, her family's been searching for her.

We'll get into all the details of that. But make sure you check it out. It's a good one. All right, Ghiby. Are you ready to get into this episode of true crime all the time? I'm already. We are talking about Stephanie Lazarus, a woman who killed her ex-boyfriend's wife. because she was jealous of this woman who she considered her rival.

And Stephanie just happened to be a police officer. So that adds a number of elements to the case. Police officers, they're supposed to protect and serve the community. Now, they also receive some pretty specialized training. Very specialized, right? To be able to do their job correctly.

Some of this training includes knowing what to look for at a crime scene. analyzing the clues, all of that. So you have to ask the question, what happens when a police officer uses that training to try to commit the perfect murder? Well, in theory, it should make it very difficult to figure out, solve. Well, you'd have to agree.

They have an advantage over most people who aren't trained in those type of things. Absolutely. I mean, I immediately go to the show, Dexter. Yeah. Why was Dexter able to get away with everything? Because he knew all the tricks and he knew what they were going to look for. He knew how to get rid of evidence.

If you know all that, you can make things better for yourself. This is a case that garnered national attention, not only for the heinous crime that was committed, but, you know, for the realization of who was behind it. One of the big questions that most people ask when it comes to this case is how, How was the murderer able to elude police for 23 years when really she should have been the prime suspect right from the very beginning? And so that's something that we'll definitely dive into. Definitely a very valid question. On the morning of Monday, February 24th, 1986, John Rutten left the condo that he shared with his newlywed bride Sherry.

He left about 7.20 a.m. to make the 20-minute drive to his workplace. The couple had just married about three months earlier. That morning, Sherry told John that she wasn't feeling well. So she was thinking about skipping work that day and staying home. John later told investigators that he had tried to call Sherry that day several times. He tried to call her at their house. He even tried to call at her work. place just in case she did happen to go in, but he wasn't able to get a hold of her.

So he's covering her all basis. He is. And I think a lot of people can relate to that, right? Your spouse is sick. Well, you're going to call and check on them. Hey, how you doing? Now, I think for me, Gibbs, what happens if you don't get a hold of them? Is it, ooh, something's wrong?

Probably not. I know for me, my first thought is my wife's, turned off her phone. She's sick. She's in the bed. She doesn't want to be disturbed. That would probably be my first thought. But one thing that John noted is odd was the fact that when he tried to call home, the answering machine didn't pick up. So again, you could think that was pretty odd. You could also maybe think, all right, turned it off, disconnected it, took the phone line out of the wall, you know, if you didn't want to hear it ring, if you were really trying to get some rest. I think I'd be concerned though.

Yeah, I do too. When you add both of them together. But I think John told police that he didn't make a lot out of it, either one of those, because Cherry was often very busy, hard to get in touch with anyway. What John couldn't possibly know at the time was that he would walk into an unimaginable scene that night when he got home. John returned to his condo. around 6 p.m. And the first thing he noticed was that the garage door to their unit was open and that the 1985 BMW that he had bought Sherry as an engagement gift was gone. That's a hell

of an engagement gift. That really is. I mean, get the ring is one thing, right? You can engage. It's got to buy the ring. Well, you're going to get that. Sure. Yeah. I didn't know you got buy a car on top of it. Hey, that's how that's how players do it. That's how they roll. That's how they're roll. That is not how you and I roll. No. No. Because, you know, this is early 1986. So, it's not like he bought her a 20 year old BMW. This is at the time a

state of the art BMW. Yeah. It's like, here, will you marry me? Here's your ring. And by the way, you get a car too. You get a car. You get a car. Yeah. Okay. Garage door open. Mm. Car gone. That's strange. But then he noticed that there was shattered glass all over the driveway.

John said that his first thought was that Sherry must have hit something with the BMW that shattered one of its windows. I don't know what to make of that first thought. Maybe she was prone to hitting things. I don't know. Or maybe just he was stumped with trying to come up with an explanation for this broken glass. Just trying to find some logic around it. As he went up the stairs in the garage, he knows.

noticed that the door leading into their living room was ajar. When he got into the house, John discovered his wife's lifeless body in front of the fireplace and gives, you know, in all these different episodes, this is something we can talk about. You know, we can say John was in shock. He couldn't believe what he saw. But I don't know that that really conveys it unless you've been in that situation and I don't think a lot of us have. where you've seen a or discovered a loved one murdered, in this case, your spouse,

I don't even know how you would process what you're even seeing. I don't know if you could process it. Because this was brutal. Yeah. Sherry's face was swollen and bruised. She was covered in dry blood. He touched her skin and it was cold. He checked Sherry for a pulse, but couldn't find one.

So right away, he called the police. When the police arrived, they found Sherry lying on her back and her arms and legs were already so stiff that they were slightly raised off the ground. It's a little planking going on right there. Not good. No. And just, you know, another description to factor in of what this husband is seen. Scary.

Very scary. Sherry was wearing a red bathrobe and a camisole, which took, who police made it look as though she had not gotten dressed that morning. As they looked over her face, they could see that her right eye was closed and swollen. It looked to them as though she had been hit with either a punch or an object. You know, when you get really upset and you punch me in my eye.

Right. Which you are prone to do. Several times. Through fits of rage. That's what happens. You know, my eye swells up and it closes. or rage of fits. Either one.

Yeah. The police discovered three bullet wounds in Sherry's chest in what was described as a pretty tight group. And I think most people will understand what that means. But if you don't, you know, grouping, you know, shooters talk about that is how far the, the shots are from each other. Right. So if you shoot three shots in a row on a target, the grouping is how far they all are. away from each other.

On a target, I mean, clearly grouping is the best when you're in the center and you're on top of each other, right? Yes. Yeah. Yeah.

Kind of think of it like throwing darts. Yeah. If you were good enough to throw three darts right on top of each other, that's a hell of a grouping. Now, this is different because, you know,

when we're going to find out, obviously they're inside of a house. These shots are probably going to be pretty close quarters. Right. Not as hard. to get maybe a good grouping. But I think if you're the police, you have to be at least somewhat thinking,

okay, is this someone that has some experience with firearms? Sure. And that's why the grouping is so tight. Or did they just get lucky? You have to factor that in. I agree with you. Only two bullets were recovered from Sherry's body. The third completely exited

her back. Homicide detective Lylem mayor was on scene and he began to go through the crime scene looking for clues. Detective Mayor noticed that a tall speaker had been knocked over and was lying next to Sherry. This is back in the day when if you had a good sound system in your home. Oh yeah. The speakers had to be big. They did. I always think of that poster, I think Magnavox or no, I can't remember the name of the brand of the speakers, but they'd have the speakers out in front and the guy be sitting in the chair and his hair be blown back. Oh, yeah, yeah. The chair was like trying to fall backwards.

Memorex, maybe. Yeah, it did start with an M. I think it was Memorex. Yeah. Bigger the better. Well, in the 80s, that was true for a lot of things. Yeah. You know, now, and for quite a while now, smaller's better.

Yeah. Right? I mean, you can buy a bookshelf speaker that takes up. hardly any room that probably will blow away some of those great big speakers from the 80s. Finally, they're talking your theme, man. I know. Yeah. But this speaker, the wires had been pulled out of it.

It appeared as if someone had attempted to unplug some of the other stereo equipment in the room, a VCR and a CD player were stacked on the stairs. So put this scene together as an investigator. and what conclusion would you draw? It appears to be some type of robbery. Right. Or the beginnings of one. Exactly.

And either they got scared off. They didn't get away with their prized possessions. Right. That the owner came home or came down the steps or up this, whatever happened. On top of the CD player, investigators found a small amount of blood. There was a shattered vase on the floor. that some investigators thought was most likely the object that had caused the damage to Sherry's eye, which would do it.

Somebody hit you in your eye with a vase. It's going to be like a punch or it hurts. It's going to be, I'm sure you've had, everything I've talked about, you've had happened to you. It hurts. So you can speak to some of this from experience. A drawer had been pulled open from a coffee table. Upstairs, there was a glass.

glass sliding door that was found shattered. And it would turn out Gibbs. This was the glass that John had seen when he got home. He thought it had come from the BMW. It hadn't. It had come from this sliding glass door. Detective Mayer found a blanket in the living room that had a bullet hole in it. And he could see powder burns around the hole. So as an investigator that tells you something. Sure it does. Use it to muffle the sound. When they examined the bullet wounds to Sherry's chest, it was determined that, you know, two or three, maybe all of them were contact wounds. So again, much like the blanket, they thought the killer actually placed the muzzle of the gun against Sherry's chest before pulling the trigger. Well, that's how you get a really tight grouping.

Not hard to do it when you do it that way. No, not at all. And I think, you know, as you said, police did theorize that the blanket had been used by the killer to quiet the sound of the gunshots. Another important clue was found on Sherry's body in the form of a bite mark on the inner portion of her left forum. I think that would be a good clue. It's a good clue in the beginning. It's going to be an amazing clue down the road. and we'll get into why that is.

Police took saliva samples of the bite, and they made a dental cast in the hopes that they could use it to match the bite mark of a future suspect. Detectives interviewed John, and they had him retraced the events of that day. And you know Gibbs right away. Right off the bat, they had to have been looking at John as a potential suspect.

They always do look at the spouse. John told the detectives what he had done that day, and it was pretty routine, right, work, this and that. The one thing he didn't do was offer up really anything regarding who he thought may have wanted to hurt his wife. Police asked John for the names of their friends, close acquaintances, because they wanted to interview them. John could only think of Sherry's sister and brother-in-law who had visited recently. a nurse who had lived with Sherry before she and John had met, and a woman by the name of Stephanie Lazarus, who John had known back in college.

Not a long list of friends and acquaintances and things like that, but we already know the killer is in that list. Here's the problem, or here's what would turn out to be the problem. Detectives very quickly developed a theory about what happened to Sherry Rasmussen that day. They theorized that she had surprised two burglars inside the house and they had killed her. Investigators pointed to the stereo equipment. We talked about it. It looked like it had been dismantled. Some of the components were stacked up as though they

would be if you were going to take them once you finished what you were doing. Yeah, grab them and go. They believed that the burglars were in such a hurry after the murder that they just didn't have time to take any of the items that they had planned to steal. And I think this theory got a pretty big boost from two events. You know, the first one was that Sherry's car was found a few miles from the couple's home 10 days after the murder. That kind of jumped out at me. Took them 10 days to find her car, which was only a few miles away. Seems strange. It's a really long time.

It does. I mean, if you know the 1985 BMWs missing, I think you'd have that out, right? Well, and how many 1985 BMWs are there in the area? Right. You know, it's not like Toyota Corolla. They sell or Camry. Right. Right.

That you know they sell however many millions and millions a year. And you're going to limit it down by color. Sure. So that did kind of jump out at me is a little bit strange. that it took that long. The other thing was that detectives learned that a few weeks after Sherry's murder, there had been a very similar burglary in that same area. Sketches were created from that burglary of two Latino men who had been seen at the

later robbery and police considered them suspects in the murder of Sherry Rasmussen. Now, I don't blame police for cops. coming up with this theory. I mean, I think if you look at these events, you can see where a lot of this makes sense. But there's one major thing that many people point to as a possible contradiction to that theory. It's the fact that only two things were taken that day. One was Sherry's BMW. Very large prize to a criminal. Well, a hell of a lot bigger than a VCR or a CD player. Yeah, you're going to make some money on that one. In terms of value.

But the second one was even more important. It was the couple's wedding certificate. Oh, that's bizarre. That is bizarre. Because when you think about it, Gibbs, what run-of-the-mill burglar would steal a marriage certificate? Yeah, I think it could be pretty minimal. I mean, unless you can do something with it to create a new identity or if it helped you sell the car, which it wouldn't. Yeah, it doesn't make any sense.

I think it's really hard to kind of think of a reason why a thief would steal that. So knowing all that, the question gets asked a lot, right? How could police not have placed some type of importance on this missing item, which would have led them to maybe think a little differently, right? Only a person possibly who had some type of issue with the marriage, between John and Sherry would take something like that. Right. So maybe you're looking at those type of individuals and not some random burglars.

It would come out later that police failed to interview a number of suspects who you would expect them to have interviewed. One guy, Alan Tarski, was a neighbor to John and Cherry back in 1986. He spoke to John, not like. long after he discovered Sherry's body. But Tarski later said that even though he lived only about 20 feet away from where the murder occurred, he was never contacted by police at any point in time. You can just see where the lack of diligence was.

Yeah. And again, when you're talking about people that have reviewed this case, I think universally they've come to that conclusion. you're telling me that a woman was shot and killed in her own home and you're not going to interview the next door neighbor that seems very odd i think anybody out there's thinking the same thing police also did not interview sherry sister teresa and we already said it teresa was one of the few people who had visited with sherry shortly before her death you know she saw sherry just the day before she died. So, you know, we went through the list that John gave. It wasn't a big list.

No. But you're not even going to interview potentially one of the last individuals to see the victim alive. Yeah, that way you could figure out what was her state of mind? Sure. What was going on there? Did she say anything out of the ordinary? Or what she say, period, because maybe there's something in there for us to look at. Yeah, was she worried, was she apprehensive about something? She, Sherry's parents, Nells and Loretta Rasmussen, they didn't buy the story of a robbery gone bad. Not one bit. Nells had his own suspect from the very start. Now, he didn't know the woman's name.

He only knew that she was a Los Angeles cop that was an ex-girlfriend of his son-in-law. And I think Nels had some very good reasons for believing that this woman may have been involved, he shared them with police, but basically was dismissed at every turn. It was as though, you know, they didn't want to hear it. I think because maybe they had tunnel vision Gibbs. They were really focused in on this burglary gone wrong. You've got these two suspects from another burglary. Well, we're looking for them. We're not looking for a female cop that you think had a vendetta against your son-in-law. Yeah. We're assuming. was the other. Well, yeah, and obviously we know they're going to be wrong because we know,

we know who the perpetrator is. Sure. That's why we're talking about it. You know, he told a number of papers that he was ticked at the way the police kind of dismissed him. I think they said, hey, you've watched too many crime dramas. You don't have any detective skills. Let us do our job. gives, it would be 23 years before Nell's suspicions would be proven correct. Now, I do have to point this out. Detective Lyle Mayer has refuted many of these claims over the years. He denies that Nell's ever approached the LAPD about his suspicions that his son-in-law's former girlfriend killed his daughter.

and that girlfriend obviously would turn out to be Stephanie Lazarus. He also has said that John Rutten never mentioned to him or anyone else at the Los Angeles PD, the name of Stephanie Lazarus. So the question is here, Gibbs, and it's a huge one. Is someone lying or is this a case of selective memory because it goes back so far? Sounds like selective memory to me. It's got to be one of the other. Yeah.

You know, if you have John saying he mentioned Stephanie Lazarus, you have Nils saying that he told police his suspicions, you have all these police and detective saying, hey, these guys never said these things. It's got to be one of the other. Right. We have to go back to 1978 on the campus of UCLA because it was there that students Stephanie Lazarus and John Rutton met. while living in the same dorm. Okay. Now we're getting a little spicing it up here. Yeah, we're doing it a little differently in this episode.

We'll backtrack. We normally kind of go more in chronological order. I thought we'd mix it up. Rutten was a mechanical engineering major. Gibbs, I mean, this was a guy. He was tall.

He was tan. He was a good-looking guy. Stephanie was studying political science. She played on the women's basketball team. The two became friends. but their relationship would ultimately turn into more. There's some discrepancies about what really happened around this too. John has said that while in college, the twofold around, but they never had sex.

I think maybe Stephanie has said something different. John eventually graduated in 1981 with his degree in mechanical engineering. Stephanie Lazarus graduated one year later in 19. and entered the Los Angeles Police Department Academy, Rutten and Lazarus began having sex on a regular basis after he graduated from college. But, and I think this is very important, I don't believe from what John has said, that he ever viewed Stephanie Lazarus as his girlfriend. Sure, he had sex with her, but he continued to date other women while maintaining,

this sexual relationship with Stephanie. And this was a relationship that lasted for four years, ultimately ending in 1985. But I think there are inherent problems with relationships like this, right? John has one view of it. The problem is Stephanie Lazarus didn't see it the same way as John Rutton did. Of course not. She viewed this as much more than, you know, a casual. fling, friends with benefits, sex buddies, whatever you want to call it.

Yeah. She didn't view it that way. She was all in. Yeah. I think she loved John Rutton. And it's this difference in views to me that would cause disastrous consequences down the road. In 1984, John Rutten met Sherry Rasmussen.

John was six foot three. And I mentioned it, right? regarded as pretty handsome guy. Sherry was tall in her own right. She was very attractive. They were both athletic. I think they made a striking pair, Gibbs, when you look at the pictures of them separately and together. Yeah, good looking couple. Sure. Sure. Now, the other thing was that Sherry was extremely intelligent. And her family has said that Sherry wanted to help people from a very early age. And I think to show. And I think to show, you just how smart she really was, she entered Loma Linda University at the age of 16.

Oh. So she's in that club with you, Dugie Hauser, Sheldon Cooper. She's in that, she's in that area. Good company, man. Good company. By the time she met John, she was in her late 20s. She had already advanced to be the director of nursing at the Glendale Adventist Medical Center.

The two hit it off immediately. And I really do think this was kind of a bombshell. They fell for each other and they fell hard. They were engaged in 1985 less than a year after they met. But I want to take a step back a minute because I mentioned just a little bit ago that the relationship between John and Stephanie didn't end until 1985. I think that's important. It is important.

because he met Sherry in 1984, he was engaged in 1985. Stephanie Lazarus did not take the news of John finding another woman very well at all. You know, by this time, she was a patrol officer with the LAPD after she found out that John and Sherry got engaged. Stephanie phoned John and asked him to come to her condo. And I think this was like a last ditch effort. Gibbs on the part of Stephanie Lazarus. She told John she loved him.

She pleaded with him to leave Sherry so that they could be together. You know, John wasn't looking forward to that meeting. No, no. I don't know that he thought he could escape it, though, right? He was going to have to have it. Better just do it, get it out of the way. Rip the Band-Aid off. Yeah.

In no way, in no dimension was John ever going to leave Sherry? for Stephanie Lazarus. But he and Stephanie did have sex that night. And that's something that John later testified to in court. Yeah. He said it was the only time he had sex was Stephanie Lazarus before Sherry's death. I don't know if everyone believes that, but because it later came out that he and Stephanie were intimate following Sherry's death.

Really? On multiple occasions. So I think that's why people have a hard time really knowing how much of what John has said is true, because obviously it doesn't make him look like a good guy. No. To say, yeah, I had met this new woman. We got engaged. But I continue to have sex with my ex.

My ex, Stephanie Lazarus. Yeah. But he had to admit in court some things that didn't make him look good. I just don't know, you know, is Robert. Dyr said, you know, do you tell the whole truth or do you leave things out? Selective truth. Yeah. Stephanie and Cherry had a few run-ins prior to John and Sherry getting married.

Lazarus showed up at the hospital where Sherry worked in November of 1985. She told Sherry that she had been John's girlfriend. And in fact, they were still seeing each other from time to time. That seems like, again, a desperate attempt to break up a relationship. Sure. You're going to go to the fiance's place of work and say, Nana, nana, no, no, boo-boo. Yeah.

I'm still sleeping with your fiance. What are you going to do about it now? He's still mine. And apparently this was when Sherry first learned about the meeting between Stephanie and John that had occurred at Stephanie's appointment. apartment. We talked about it. Sherry's father, Nels, has told a number of outlets about another incident that Sherry mentioned to him. It was Stephanie Lazarus showing up at Sherry's office, all dressed up and basically looking to start a fight. And at one point, she allegedly told Sherry

that if she could not have John, then no one could have him. Sounds like a threat to me. we've heard about this in a number of cases. And I don't know how you could take it any other way. Yeah. You know, if I can't have him, no one's going to have him either means I'm going to kill him. Yeah, or I'm going to kill whoever he's with. Exactly. I don't know how you take it any other way, Gibbs.

But I think it's the only way you can take that one. She allegedly also told Sherry that if this marriage doesn't work out, I want you to know. I'll be waiting to pick up the pieces. So I'm going to do everything in my power to break you guys up. Right. And then I'll swoop in and it'll be my shoulder that John's crying on. Yeah. I'll be there for you to cuddle with when this is all said and done. But that's not it. I mean, some of Sherry's friends came forward and said that she had told them about some other harassing behavior. She said Stephanie Lazarus started showing up basically wherever she went. She told her dad Nels that she thought she was being followed.

Stalked. Yeah. And I think stalked is what was actually happening. But I don't know that she knew for sure it was Stephanie because her father said that she told him that the person following her was dressed like a boy, but had what she called crazy eyes. And I mean, if you look at the pictures of Stephanie Lazarus, right. And there are a bunch out there.

She has some very strange eyes. And I don't know how to say it any crazy eyes differently. Her expression is almost like, I'm coming through this picture at you. Exactly. And the stalking didn't end after the marriage occurred. So, you know, again, we kind of. went back to give some backstory there, but more than 20 years went by before police began looking at Stephanie Lazarus as a suspect in the murder of Sherry Rasmussen. By this time, Lazarus had risen

through the ranks of the LAPD to become a detective in the art theft group. And really gives from everything that I read, she was a well-respected, highly decorated police officer. So she did her job well. I believe she did. And I think that's evident from the fact that she held some of the most coveted positions in the department. She worked in DARE. She worked in homicide.

She had a stint in internal affairs. Her reputation was that she did everything by the book. Well, you'd have to if you were able to walk yourself into internal affairs and be part of that group. Yeah, I don't think they're looking for. the people that bend the rules. No. That's not kind of how internal affairs probably works. Now, Lazarus did at one point marry a fellow police officer.

I think they even adopted a child. But once this case was reopened, basically investigators began to rework it from the very beginning using the evidence that had been collected from the crime scene. What they saw, this new group of investigators was. a very different set of events than what detective mayor had seen and theorized back in 1986. They didn't believe at all that Sherry Rasmussen had surprised a couple of robbers. What they thought, based on the evidence they had, was that it was Sherry, who had been

surprised and she had been ambushed by her killer. So now they're on the right track. yeah, they're getting there. They believed the encounter began upstairs and that the assailant fired two shots that missed Sherry. And it was those shots that ended up shattering the sliding glass door. They believed that the killer chased Sherry downstairs

and the two wrestled. And part of their theory was that, you know, at some point Sherry got the upper hand and had control in what was, you know, this pretty vicious fight, I'm assuming. And it was at that point that the assailant bit the inside of Sherry's forearm because they couldn't get Sherry off of them. You know, I mentioned it.

She was fairly tall. She was very athletic. Yeah. So it stands to reason that she would have been able to put up a pretty good fight, most likely. Or at least that's what investigators thought. Plus she was really smart. So, you know, she had that skill going for her, too.

And we know how much that helps you in some of your encounters. Trementously. I can see five steps ahead. So that's enough for you, huh? Five steps ahead? Five steps ahead, man. That's all you need. I knew you were going to say that anyway.

I'm five steps ahead. Because you already knew that. But I think this is big because I really didn't get a sense back in 1986. why investigators thought Sherry had been bitten. I don't know if that was ever theorized or maybe it was and I just couldn't find it. But I always thought that was strange, right? If you're a burglar, you obviously have a gun, at least one. Sure.

Because you're going to end up using it. Why do you need to bite the victim on the inside of her forearm? Well, this theory kind of seems plausible as to why that might have happened. They then thought that the killer smashed the heavy ceramic vase into Sherry's face, knocking her to the ground. The killer fired three shots into Sherry's chest. And it was determined gives that any one of the three shots would have killed her. When investigators started to piece it all together, no doubt.

It began to look less. less and less like a robbery and more like a person who went there with the sole purpose of killing Sherry Rasmussen. And I think I said early on, right, that bite mark was going to come back to be huge. Because I really think the cold case investigators, you know, that was the thing that really jumped out of them. They had saliva from the bite mark. They had the dental cast from the bite mark. Now, when we get to 2008, now we're in the territory where DNA has advanced significantly. Sure. They couldn't have probably done this back in 1986, but they could in 2008. So they took that saliva swab that was collected in 1986 and they ran the DNA. And it came back

that it was left by an unidentified female. That changes everything. I think it changes everything. Yeah. I think you're right because you can throw out the window certain things. Now, could you say it was a male, female tag team robbery? Yes, you could. But it's not a lone male.

No. You'd have to rule that out at this point. But then they found an entry in the case file. that was written by Detective Mayor back in 1987 that read John Ruttencould, verified Stephanie Lazarus police officer was former girlfriend. There you go. So that kind of goes back to what you and I were talking about. Who do you believe?

John, who said he named Stephanie or this detective who said he didn't. Well, it's kind of hard to refute that when you have it in your own note. Sure. Written, you know, by your own hand. Now, you could say John didn't say it at the crime scene in 1986. Because I do think it's strange that the note is stating that he called in in 1987. Right. When John has stated all along that he told him right up front, one of the names to look into was Stephanie Lazarus.

So an investigator called Sherry's dad, Nell's. And Gibbs, you can only imagine what Nells must have thought. He had been waiting over 20 years. It's big, big news for him. For the police to solve the murder of his daughter. And now he's being told that they're closing in. And again, he reiterated what he told them back in, I think, 1986. He believed that this LAPD cop.

ex-girlfriend of his son-in-law had murdered his daughter. They didn't believe him. They wouldn't listen to him back then. Well, they're sure listening now. Yeah. Because the evidence is kind of pointing to the fact that this guy might be right. And it didn't take them long to figure out that the person Nels had been talking about all along was Stephanie Lazarus, right?

They had her name. John had talked about her. They knew that she was an LAPD officer. So who else could it be? Yeah. Well, now they have something to look into or somebody to look into. Yeah. And they started to dig into the records of Stephanie Lazarus from the day of the murder.

Because one of the things that investigators theorized was that if a police officer was going to kill someone, they wouldn't do it on a day they were at work. they would do it on an off day. Make some sense to me because I feel like police officers are kind of tracked pretty well. You know, you've got the, even in the 1980s, you had to, you had the radio. Sure. Checking in, you're going here, you're going there. Yeah. It's not like BTK driving around in his truck.

Yeah. Looking for stray animals pretty much on his own. left on his own to do whatever he wanted. And could easily account for being where he was at by saying he saw a stray animal in this area or whatever. Yeah, he could make something up. Sure. No, I'm not saying that, you know, a police officer couldn't do that.

I just feel like the, their time is much more accounted for than many other jobs. I know back in the day, sometimes you would, you know, sneak out of the office for 20, 25 minutes. nobody knew where you were. I assume you were taking care of whatever business you needed to take care of. I just never asked what that business was because frankly, I didn't want to know. I didn't want to be an accessory after the fact of whatever the hell you were into. It's a good thing you didn't ask. I know.

And it's a good thing you only thought it was 20, 30 minutes, Max. I didn't keep that close to tabs, to be honest. But sure enough, Gibbs, when they pulled the records from 1986 on that, day, Stephanie Lazarus was off. So then they went to work trying to figure out what type of gun she might have used to commit the murder. They found out that Stephanie had purchased a 38 caliber Smith & Wesson after graduating from the police academy. When detectives started to trace the serial number of the gun that she purchased, they got a hit in the system because it had been reported stolen to the Santa Monica Police Department in March of 1986.

It's really convenient timing. Yeah, it is. And I'm sure they thought that as well. But really, I think what they thought most of all was that, you know what, things are starting to fall into place. It's starting to look as though Stephanie Lazarus murdered Sherry Rasmussen back in 1986. But here's the problem that the new investment. investigators had. All this evidence that they had before them was available to police in 1986.

So I think they had this nagging question of why didn't police look closer at Stephanie Lazarus back then and at the very least try to eliminate her as a suspect? And that's a just statement. Why wouldn't you want to do that at a minimum? I think you would. If you're doing your job, if you're doing what you're supposed to be doing. But I think that's the problem they had, right? They knew that if this thing was going to shake out the way they thought it was, it was going to make the department look incompetent. And that's something that police don't like. They don't want to ever look like they don't do their job. And we, we know LA has had issues in the past with how they handle things. Well, it's been one of the most heavily

scrutinized, maybe you could say criticized departments, probably in the country. Number one, they have a lot of high profile cases. Sure. A lot of high profile murder cases. So because of that, you're going to have a lot more opportunities to be scrutinized. Right. As opposed to small town USA, who I'm sure doesn't do everything correct every single time either. It's just not blown up. the way that some of these LA cases are. Yeah, because of where it sits and the popularity. Yeah. And who's on trial?

Who's on trial. Yeah, I'm specifically thinking like OJ. Yeah, that was one big one. Because of who he was. Now, one of the things I did find very interesting is that there were some reports that some evidence had gone missing from the case file over the years. So again, I think, you know, if you're the. current cold case investigators, you got to be asking yourself, was someone inside the police

force trying to protect Stephanie Lazarus? Or was she able to somehow over the years get rid of some of the key pieces of evidence? We're talking about like 23 years. Yeah. So maybe she did. Maybe she was able to penetrate into that zone, you know, get into that locked area of where the evidence is kept. I mean, she did work for internal affairs. But I think that in and of itself brings up an even bigger question. If she was to do that, why wouldn't she have gotten rid of the most crucial pieces of evidence that contains DNA? Because obviously over the years, she would have known.

Sure. Hey, DNA's a thing now. Yeah. you know, there's potentially some things in there that could contain my DNA. I need to get rid of those. Those are things that got to go. So then maybe you lean towards what we've seen in many other cases, which is just potentially sloppy handling of evidence.

And we know that happens from time to time. Unfortunately, too often. But they've got their site squarely on Stephanie Lazarus at this point. investigators put a tail on her. Basically, what they were trying to do was figure out how do we get a DNA sample from her to compare to the bite mark DNA. And one day as they were tailing her, they got their break. Lazarus was at a shopping area.

And investigators saw her throw away a cup and a straw. And as soon as she left, they wasted no time. They got the cup, the straw. and they sent both of them out for testing. Pretty smart. Patience pays off. Sometimes it does.

In this case, it did. The DNA that came back from the cup and straw was an exact match to the DNA that investigators recovered from the bite mark. Gibbs, the testing was so conclusive that the odds that it belonged to anyone other than Stephanie Lazarus were 1.7 sextillion to 1. I didn't even know that was a real number. That is a big number right there. Yeah, the number is so big it has 20 zeros in it.

Yeah. Much like your paycheck. Exactly. Except a little decimal point is on the wrong side. But this is what they needed, right? Police knew at this point that Stephanie Lazarus murdered Sherry Rasmussen. But again, they had the issue of Lazarus being one of their own. So they had to figure out how to proceed.

Yeah, nobody wants a dirty cop inside their unit. Nobody wants a murderer inside their unit. Unless you're also a dirty cop. And then you'd like to have a couple other ones with you. Well, that's true. So you're not the only one. Yeah. Really what they had to figure out was the best way to question Stephanie Lazarus.

They're not dealing with a lay person. No. This is a seasoned detective. Smart. Smart. Knows all the tricks that you're going to come. at her with and she worked on the same floor just across the hall from these detectives that were trying to put her away. So what they did was on the morning of June 5th, 2009, Lazarus went to work as

usual in the LAPD admin building downtown. One of the detectives came up with a ruse. basically he reached out to Lazarus and asked her for help. He said that they had arrested someone who said they knew something about an art theft. And they needed Lazarus's help. They asked her if she would go to the basement jail with them to interrogate this suspect. And this was an area, right, the basement jail where officers had to check their weapons before they went into the area. I'm sure it was pretty strategic.

Hey, you're getting ready to question and possibly point the finger at a detective. Yeah. Might be better if she's not carrying her gun with her at the time that she finds out you're about ready to lower the boom. So they got into this interrogation room, but they never brought anybody else in. She was asked to sit in the seat normally reserved for suspects being. interrogated. She was immediately suspicious and she kept asking detectives when they planned to bring the suspect in. Just wonder when she really felt the heat. Well, I think she started to feel the heat very quickly because the detective started to ask her questions about Sherry Rasmussen. And that

had to make her very uneasy. You know, again, I mean, what, you know, what, you know, I don't understand why you're talking about some guy dated a million years ago. Well, do you know what happened to his wife? Yeah, I know she got killed. At one point, I mean, he may have been dating her or, I don't know, maybe he was married. I don't even remember. And I'm like, you know what, why are you calling me if you're either dating her or living with her or married her? Because I honestly don't remember the time frame.

And I'm like, come on, knock it off. And now I'm thinking, I may have gone to her and say, hey, you know what? you know what is he dating you he's but he's bothering me um and so i'm thinking that we had a conversation about that um one or two maybe you know it could have been three i don't want to say i had three conversations with her like i like at her work or at their at their house or no i'm thinking that i you know he obviously must have told me where she worked i'm thinking it was a hospital somewhere no because i'm i mean i'm trying to i'm looking at the notes and people are kind of I mean, they're pointing the finger at you.

Well, I mean, that's not ringing a bell to me, so, you know, I don't know, you know, it's, I don't know what to tell you. I mean, that just sounds crazy to me. Yeah. So you offhand, you don't recall ever going into her house and having words and physically, you know. No. I mean, her attacking you. No. Nothing like that?

No. I mean, that's no. Nothing. No. No. Not at all. We're going to hear a couple of clips from this interview. This first part is interesting to me.

Yeah. Because she knows she's not in there to do what they asked her to do. So she has to be pretty wary about what's going on. I think they were really smart about how they did this questioning. they started out with very easy questions, nothing too intimidating. Yeah. But even there at the end, I think the key was they were trying to get her to say that she was not inside that apartment. Yeah.

And that she never had an altercation because they didn't want her to later on be able to explain why she had bitten Sherry. Exactly. And I'm sure a lot of thought went into how are we going to ask these questions. How are we going to walk her through this? I find that part fascinating. The buildup, yeah. The buildup to get to where you ultimately want to be. I also like how they handle it because you know it took her out of her game, right?

Oh. Because she didn't think. It's not about 20-some years later. She's not going to be thinking about it next thing. She sees it. She's on center stage now. It really was kind of an ambush. you think you're going down there to do something in your professional capacity.

Right. Now, all of a sudden, you're being asked questions that you don't want to be asked about something that you know you did 20-something years ago. You don't have that time to think about it, you know? It's not like they said, hey, we want to question you about this. And here's the questions we're going to ask you. Yeah. Prepare.

Yeah, exactly. At one point in the interview, detectives asked Stephanie if she would be willing to give a DNA swap. Obviously, you know about all the DNA stuff and things of the nature that, you know, gets done on cases nowadays. You know, if we asked you for a DNA swab, would you be willing to give us one? Maybe. Because now, now, now, I'm thinking I probably need to talk to a lawyer. Our job is to identify and eliminate substance. I can't believe this.

So if we ask you to a point to give us a DNA sample, a bugle swab, so we can identify or eliminate you, would you be willing to do that? Maybe. Because I know this. That's where we're at to. I mean, because right now, from looking at the evidence, it's, you know, it's possible we may have some DNA at the location. That's great. And we're going to do what we can to try to put this thing together. And your name's in the book.

These people are pointing at you for whatever reason. I don't know why. That's just crazy. I mean, that's just, that's absolutely crazy. And it would be irresponsible in our. part not to look at it. I know. You guys have to do your job.

And I guess I'm going to have to contact somebody. I mean, I'm shocked. I'm really shocked. That somebody would be saying that I did this. I mean, we had a fight and so I went and killed her. I mean, come on. Now gives you know. Oh, yeah.

That she's panicked at this point. She says, yeah, maybe I'll give you a DNA. You know damn well. She knows in her mind. She cannot give a DNA. sample. The last thing in the world she can do is voluntarily give up her DNA because she knows if they have DNA to match she's done for. Yeah. I'm not a big fan of giving up your DNA anyway. No, I'm not either. So at one point, you know, she got up to leave and she thought that, okay,

they're done with me for now. I can regroup and try to figure out how I'm going to get out of this, but it didn't go the way she probably thought it would. Thanks for giving me the courtesy. Thanks for your time. Yeah, thank you. All right. This is absolutely crazy. Let's see it, Stephanie.

It's insane. Okay. Okay. Stephanie, you know you have the right to remain silent. Do you understand? Yes. Anything you say may be used against you in court. Do you understand?

Yes. You have the right to the presence of an attorney before and during any question. Do you understand? Yes. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you free of charge before any questioning if you want. Do you understand? Yes. Do you want to talk to us right now?

No. All right. This is crazy. I'm like, I'm like in shock. I'm totally in shock. I think the funny part about this for me Gibbs is that they actually let her leave the room as though she was going to be okay, allowed, you know, allowed to go home. she barely made it to the hallway. Yeah.

Before they brought her back and arrested her. You know, this was a longer interview. I'm only using portions of it. Right. But the number of times that she said, this is crazy, or I can't believe this, I mean, you'd have to keep a tally sheet. Right. That it was so many.

I just think she really felt as if this was never going to come back on her. I guarantee you. 23 years. You and I have talked about this in other cases, and it's why the DNA stuff is so important nowadays, because a lot of these perpetrators, a lot of these killers have thought for so many years that once they got past a certain point in time, they were Scott free. Right. But now the new DNA techniques, the forensic genealogy, it's changed to all of that. They're coming for you, man.

If you got good T&A out there, no matter how old it is, it seems like they're going to find a way. The arrest of Stephanie Lazarus, it shocked the city of Los Angeles. I know it shocked most of, shocked her, but it shocked, you know, most of the LAPD. And I think it shocked the citizens because here's a cop, a police officer who is now being arrested for an old murder. Lazarus was known as a good cop. We talked about that. And not a single one of her coworkers ever came out and said that they saw any signs in her that would make them think she was capable of this type of behavior. Right.

Stephanie's trial lasted five weeks. More than 60 witnesses testified. The state presented, I think about 400 exhibits. That's a lot of exhibits. It is. In his opening statement, Deputy District Attorney Shannon Presby said that the case against Stephanie Lazarus came down to, quote, a bite, a bullet, a gun barrel, and a broken heart. I think he said it pretty well. No doubt. The prosecution portrayed her as a jealous woman who couldn't handle the decision

made by John Rudden to marry another woman. And at trial, they produced her diary as evidence. And in the diary, there was a line that read, I found out that John is getting married. I was very depressed. John Rutten took the stand. And this was big because really John did not speak publicly about his wife's murder and hadn't since it happened in 1986. But this is where, you know, he had to admit. to some of the things I talked about earlier. Sure. He told the jury about the meeting he had with Lazarus at her condo just before the wedding.

He said she was extremely upset. She cried. She begged me not to get married. He admitted that they had sex that day. And then he went through with the wedding just two weeks later. I'm just thinking if you're having sex at that point with your ex, maybe you don't move forward. Two weeks before the wedding. Yeah.

Like I said earlier, it doesn't make John look like a great guy. No, doesn't it? I mean, that's cold feet is one thing. Cold feet and like one more for the road, honey. Two different things. Yeah. It definitely didn't make him look great, but he had to tell the truth, you know, on the stand. And I think between that, the diary, some other witnesses, it really gave the jury some

insight, I think as to Stephanie's mindset around that time after John got married. Her defense team basically tried to attack the evidence. They questioned the integrity of the DNA bite mark evidence. They argued that the file it was stored in was not properly sealed and the envelope that contained the sample was ripped. And I think one big piece of evidence they did have on their side was the fact that there was some blood found at the crime scene that was from an unidentified male. It was analyzed. Yeah. It didn't match John. It didn't match Stephanie or Sherry. So who did it come from? That could be a game changer if they could have figured that out. But could have been a game changer even if they didn't know who it was from. If the jury viewed that as

reasonable doubt. Yeah. But I think you could also make the argument that, I don't know, a guest could have been in the house weeks before and cut himself, who, you know, who knows. Stephanie's defense team did everything they could to show the jury that she wasn't this obsessed jilted lover that the prosecution was making her out to be. And they made a big deal about the fact that John Rutten had continued to. pursue Stephanie, even after becoming engaged to Sherry. But I think when it all boiled down, Gibbs,

the DNA in this case was just too strong. Pointing to the guilt of Stephanie Lazarus, it took the jury, eight women and four men, just a day of deliberation to find her guilty of the murder of Sherry Rasmus. And I get it, right? We've talked about a number of things. But when, you have the defendant saying, I wasn't in the house. I didn't have a fight with the victim. And you can conclusively prove that this woman bit Cherry. Yeah. How do you get out from under that? Well, that's it, right? I mean, it's, you boxed yourself in because you said, I didn't do this. I didn't do that. And they're like, well, this DNA says you did. And the murder weapon could have been a gun that we know you purchased. Now, you reported it stolen, so nobody knows where it is, but was it really stolen or

did you throw it in the ocean? Right. And there was motive there for sure. Yeah. Yeah, I think jealousy was clearly established through not only her diary, testimony of friends, but her own actions, right? Showing up to this person's work, starting fights, saying the things that she said, following her, stalking her. On May 11, 2012, Stephanie Lazarus was sentenced to 27 years to life in prison with the possibility of parole for killing Sherry Rasmussen.

The prosecutor said in a statement that Lazarus misused her police training and experience to commit murder and to cover up the crime. She betrayed the trust placed in her by the L.A. Police Department and by the people of Los Angeles. She betrayed this trust to pursue her own murderous ends. Pretty well said.

Yeah, it really is. And it's kind of a little bit what we talked about in the very beginning, right? Specialized training. Yeah. Knows what the police are going to be looking for. So also knows maybe how to dilute that or put them off the scent. And for that, I think she should get a little bit of extra time. I do. Sometimes I think when you have that duty to be on that side of the fence, right?

Oh, you're saying because she was in a position of such trust and power and she misused it. Yeah, I get that. There should be a little add-on for that. I get that. I don't think the law looks at it that way, but I get what you're saying. Yeah, I mean, I think it helps discourage. It could help discourage things in the future like that. Well, 27 years to life is no joke. No. So if that doesn't discourage you from committing murder, I really don't know what else is going to. You know, the death penalty, life in prison, if either one of those exists. Right.

And you're willing to take that risk. Oh my gosh. What are you thinking? I don't want to give up a single second of my freedom. No. So, you know, what I'm not going to do, I'm not going to kill anybody in cold blood. Put yourself at that risk. Yeah.

Especially over somebody that didn't want to be with you anyway. Yeah. I mean, move on. Exactly. I never understand. I really don't. I never understand why people will go to such extremes to keep somebody in their lives when they don't want to be in your life anyway.

Yeah. I get exactly where you're coming from. The obsession. Yes. That obsession angle is very hard for me to understand. And I love my wife. Yeah. I don't think I've ever been obsessed with anyone.

You know, even if it's like a fan who's obsessed with a pop star. Right. Or, you know, I just, I don't understand the obsession angle to get to the point of stalking, wanting to hurt somebody. That's foreign to me. I don't get it. The most thing I ever seen you so crazy about was share. Oh.

Yeah. And I think that was more because, I think it was more because of her hair. You were so far off the beaten bat. I'd never listen to Shere in my life. Hmm. Now, Neil Diamond, you know. Yeah. Then we got something.

Now we can talk? No, Elvis Presley. Okay. I'll go there. The Rasmussen sued the LAPD, but ultimately their suit was dismissed. Now, the LAPD did conduct their own investigation into the LAPD. into the handling of the evidence. And they concluded that there was no evidence of any type of cover.

Now, make of that what you will. I'm always a little suspicious of people, entities conducting an investigation of themselves. Because they have a really good reason not to come back with anything damaging. Let me audit myself and I'll let you know what I find. Exactly. I did everything right. Yeah.

According to me. All of those tax deductions were perfectly legitimate. I see nothing wrong. The evidence missing from Sherry's murder file, as far as I can tell Gibbs, it remains a mystery. I don't think there's ever been any resolution, any concrete evidence of what, either what happened to it or who was involved. I did see where the criminologist who discovered the bite mark DNA filed a hard. a harassment lawsuit against the LAPD. She claimed that the cold case detective ignored the evidence.

And I'm not sure she was wrong about that because I think she was going back way back. Right. You know, older cold case detectives. Now, she eventually lost the case. It spent years in the court system, but it sounds as though she still works for the LAPD. So the court basically said, okay, you might be correct, but you weren't harmed in any way. They didn't fire her. She's actually been promoted a couple of times.

So it's hard to win that when you know. Yeah. Yeah. Stephanie Lazarus is now 60 years old and housed in the California institution for women. She's got a number of years to go before she will come up for parole. Well, she's right where she needs to be. Oh, I don't think anybody's going to argue that. I think what will be interesting is what happens when she does come up for parole because

she'll probably be in her, what, mid-70s, I'm just guessing, time frame. She'll be in her mid-70s. I think what she did, and like you said, the power she abused. Sure. All of that was so atrocious that to be 27. years isn't enough. She swore an oath. Yes. She broke that oath over some guy. Yeah. I think it would be a travesty if she was let out in 27 years after serving 27 years. Now, I'm sure she gets credit for time in jail and all that. I did see at one point, I think her bond was like $10 million. Was it? Yeah,

they weren't taking any chances that she would get out because of her position. Yeah. And the that she had access to guns and all of that. Yeah, good for them. But that's it for the case of Stephanie Lazarus, just an evil woman. Yeah. And the other thing I kind of thought about as I was going through the case was, what's it like to live with the knowledge that you took someone's life? And then, you know, for the next 20 plus years, your life kind of went on.

Yeah, moves forward. You got married, adopted, rose up through the ranks. How would you not be eaten up by guilt? Almost every day, every day. Unless you just didn't give a shit because you don't have those feelings. Those feelings. And I think about that one couple that we did that episode on where they were sitting on their front porch. You know, retired and next thing you know, here comes the cops pulling down.

They finally have them. Johnny Law. But, you know, took that long. Yeah, I guess some people are able to. just put that out of their mind. Or like you said, they just don't have those feelings or those, you know, they don't have any issues with what they did. So they're easily able to move on.

Yeah, maybe she figured in her mind, you took my man, you got what you got. But, you know, that's not the right thinking. We've got some voicemails. You want to check those out? Let's hear him. Hi, Mike. Hi, Gibby. My name is Jen.

And I started, I kind of fell upon your podcast a couple months ago. So I've just been bouncing around listening to a bunch of different episodes, and I just listened to the episode you did on John Collins. And, I mean, I never thought that I would honestly be crying, laughing, listening to a true crime podcast. I mean, I was literally, tears were coming out of my eyes. If you said that it was better that a construction worker found the body than a couple frolicking through.

Sorry, I don't mean to laugh, but, and then you were questioning his use of the word frolic. So just the two of you together are amazing. You know, Mike, you do an incredible job breaking down the story. It's really well put together, well thought out. You know, you really give the listener a good idea of what, a great picture of what happened in these cases. And Jimmy, I mean, I just want to have a beer with you because you are hysterical. And I think that I would just laugh forever. So thanks for all you do.

Keep on, keeping on and keep your own time ticking. Thanks. Mike does tell a good story, man. Well, and you are funny. It's interesting because you and I were doing our weekly Patreon video. Right. And I felt like I couldn't stop laughing. Yeah.

And you know, you don't hear it so much in the TCAT or, you know, the regular episodes because they are edited. Sure. If it's laughter that is misplaced, then, you know, I'll edit that out. But we don't really edit the weekly video. So if I crack up or get on a laughing kick, then you just get to see it. It's just something about when we're together, man. It's always been that way. We, I don't know.

Well, we enjoy each other's company. And we always have, you know, get along. So we have fun. Yeah. You find a way to laugh at my stupidity. And you almost said that wrong. I did too. And that's funny.

Hi, guys. So I was just looking around on TikTok, actually, and I found a case from my state of Texas. Oh, I'm Danielle, by the way. I've called the Fork. But it's Dina Schloffer is from Texas, and she is a killer mom. Spoiler alert. I think you guys would have a really fun time with this case, and I'd love to hear you guys cover it.

Keep your own time ticking. All right. I'll make sure it's on the list. Gives, I have to admit, I have never been on TikTok, and I'm not exactly sure what it is other than, I think, short videos.

Yeah, that's what it is, yeah. Yeah. They kicked me off after I did all those shuffle videos, and it took off really big. Well, it's because you were naked. Well, I didn't know. I'm sure they have terms of service. I just said, yeah.

You know, when you get those terms of service, to get past it. You just got to check the mark and say yes to move on. I mean, you can't let it all hang out while you're playing shuffleboard or whatever it is. It was a shuffle dancing, but it was not good. Well, that's even worse. Yeah, it was like, what's a shuffle dance? I used to have to watch.

Okay. Yeah. I'm not going to because I don't want to see that. Hey, guys. This is James Busby. I just wanted to call and tell you how much I enjoy the show. I've been listening to it constantly. I think I just finished episode 41, the men, first episode of the menend.

brothers. I've been listed to you guys for about three weeks. We've been a little town in Gulf Breeze, Florida. Turned a lot of people on to it. Hopefully they're listening to. Never have been a big true prime fan, but been in the site field for about 20 years and immensely interested in the ends and out of why these guys do what they do. And never really thought about the background of them quite as much as I have. So I started listening to you guys. Anyway, keep up the good work.

Keep it up, guys. Talk to you later. Owen, Gibbs, you rock. Gibbs you do rock Now he's got a long ways to go Before he's gonna hear this voice mouth Yeah he's really got a long way to go Well depending on yeah he might listen to 10 a day for all I know He's on a roll though

Yeah Keep it rolling Hey guys my name's Sarah I called him like I did like last year I saw sort of fallen off the radar When it comes to T-Cat But I've been catching up over the last few months

And I listened to The Martin Bryant's episodes yesterday and I actually I used to live about 40 minutes away from Port Arthur and you guys are very correct it's still incredibly it's an incredibly tough thing to talk about up there and I know people who are personally affected and the people and I also know people that know people who were injured and it's so as when I say that you guys did a really good job in talking about it because it is for someone who I didn't live through it personally but I lived

through it through other people's experiences and it is a hard one to talk about when it actually affects you that you guys did a fantastic chill. Anyway, keep up the great work and just a suggestion maybe if you could do it in an Australian case, I'd be awesome Tiari Palmer look her up. She was a foster child that was murdered by the foster father very very. very sad story. All right. Well, we will check that out and appreciate the nice words about the Martin Bryant case. I knew that was going to be a tough one. It really was. Because, you know, here in the United States, we, you know, you and I were aware of the case. Right. But it didn't hit us the way it hit people in Australia. And I think that happens. It's normal. Sure. You know,

if something happens here in our state of Ohio, it's not going to. It's not going to. It's not going to affect or hit somebody in Australia the same way that it would hit us because we're just so much closer to it. But I did read a lot of the social media post that derived from that. And man, you can tell it really, really hit home. Oh, yeah. And I knew that going in that it was going to be one that really affected people. And, you know, everything you kind of read says, you know, even today, it's just so raw still. People were deeply affected and they remained so. Yeah, yeah. Gibbs, no bail bag this week. Oh, okay. So I'm out of licorice. Okay. I'm sure you'll get some. All right. But that is it for another episode of true crime all the time. So for Mike and Gibby,

stay safe and keep your own time ticking.