School of Humans.
Helen Got Murder Line actively investigates cold case murders in an effort to raise public awareness invite witnesses to come forward and present evidence that could potentially be further investigated by law enforcement. While we value insights from family and community members, their statements should not be considered evidence and point to the challenges of verifying facts inherent in cold cases. We remind listeners that everyone has presumed innocent until proven
guilty in a court of law. Nothing in the podcast is intended to state or imply that anyone who has not been convicted of a crime is guilty of any wrongdoing. Thanks for listening.
Sometime after ten pm on April twenty first, two thousand and six, twenty one year old college student Nina Ingram was brutally murdered inside her apartment, Unit number one at the Law Quad Complex in Fayettvile, Arkansas. The cause of death was ligature strangulation, and the Arkansas State Crime Lab ruled the death a homicide. Despite the fact that detectives interviewed dozens of Nina's friends, co workers, and her significant other,
they had no viable suspects for years. One big question was how did Nina's killer get access to her apartment.
One of the theories that police.
Had early on was that Nina's killer rushed her at her apartment door and pushed her inside when she put her key into the door, which could explain why none of the neighbors who police spoke to reported hearing screams on the night of April twenty first. But Nina's door was locked from the inside, her keys, purse, and all of her belongings, including her cell phone, were with her,
and there was no sign of forced entry. She was violently strangled, which must have taken several minutes, and yet there was no sign of anything taken from.
Her residence or of sexual assault.
So if Nina's killer did force their way in, that would mean that they either locked the door behind them or locked the door from the inside and then went out another way, probably through the unlocked front window. But if they did that, that would mean that they carefully replaced the screen and pulled the window down to the
exact same spot where it was opened before. The Fayetteville Police Department considered this a cold case, one of the only unsolved cases since the nineteen seventies, but then in twenty twelve, they arrested and charged twenty six year old Rico Tavarius Cone with Nina's murder, but the case against Rico Cone was not as solid as it appeared to be on the surface. He spent over three years behind bars, and then the case against him was dismissed.
Three years later.
In twenty eighteen, Rico filed a civil lawsuit against the Fayetteville Police Department, detectives, and employees at the Arkansas State Crime Lab, who he alleged violated his civil rights. The allegations made in Rico Cohne's lawsuit are obviously only one side of this story, but it is a completely different story than the one that has been put out, at least so far, by the fate of a police department.
The lawsuit claims that there were several people of interests who police interviewed over the years, people who were, according to the lawsuit, potential suspects. The lawsuit alleges that these potential suspects were overlooked. This case is still unsolved. The person who murdered Nina Ingram has never been arrested or charged, so this person is still out there and we have access to part of this case file through a Foyer request. Could the clues to the killer's identity be in this case file?
I'm Catherine Townsend.
Over the past five years of making my true crime podcast, Helen Gone, I've learned that there's no such thing as a small town where.
Murder never happens.
I have received hundreds of messages from people all around the country asking for help with an unsolved murder that's affected them, their families, and their communities. If you have a case you'd like me and my team to look into, you can reach out to us at our Helen Gone Murder Line at six seven eight seven four four six one four or five. That's six seven eight seven four four six one four or five, or you can send us a message on Instagram at Helen Gonepod. This is
Helen Gone Murder Line. Rico's lawsuit, and again this claim is just one side of the story, alleged that multiple and credible direct reports and evidence had been submitted to the Fayetful Police Department and other law enforcement agencies over
the years, but the lawsuit alleges that detectives ignored this evidence. Instead, they laser focused on Rico and quote missed multiple opportunities to investigate and perhaps actually solve this unsolved crime end quote, So they were chasing what the lawsuit called a wrongful
and unconstitutional conviction against Rico. The lawsuit alleges that the arrest warrant was obtained under fraudulent pretenses because the police claimed they had three independent witnesses, but in fact, the lawsuit pointed out all they had was a single person, Randy Applewhite, because the second person Brenda case was a friend of Randy's and she was repeating what Randy told her. Now, the arrest warrant claimed that there was a third person,
an ex girlfriend of Rigo's named Kathleen Slaughter. The warrant stated that Kathleen had shared intimate details about Nina's homicide with detectives, but the lawsuit said.
That information was incorrect.
The lawsuit says that this third person was quote never specifically or sufficiently identified, and never existed at all, conclusory, at best, fabricated at worse end quote. These are serious allegations. Basically, the lawsuit claimed that the police attempted to get an arrest warrant, but the prosecuting attorney would not grant that
warrant because the evidence was insufficient. So the lawsuit stated that after that police went back to the prosecuting attorney with essentially exactly the same evidence, but now there were three people instead of just one, and this time the
warrant was granted. Rico's attorney, Tony Pirani, claimed that on Wednesday, January TEWOD twenty fourteen, he and the rest of the defense team met with Detective Carlton, the lead detective on this case, Detective Brooks, and the prosecuting attorney and his chief deputy at the Fayeteville Police Department. They were there to review the physical evidence still in the police department's possession.
Their purpose there was to figure out the current status of all DNA testing, to figure out what had been tested, what the results were, and what the communication was between the Fayetful Police Department and the Arkansas State Crime Lab regarding this case. Two days later, Rico's attorneys had another meeting with personnel at the Arkansas State Crime Lab. Now, the lawsuit states that during this meeting they realized there were irregularities in the testing and procedures in this case.
They said some pieces of evidence in Nina's case had not been properly labeled or tested, and that safeguards had been failed in regards to DNA tape lifts that were done from Nina's clothing. On April twenty six, twenty twelve, Officer Carlton called Brenda Case later labeled Confidential Informant IE in the search warrant documents, She told defendant Carlton that her friend Randy Applewhite had a detailed account of the Nina Ingram homicide allegedly from Rico Cone.
Now.
Rico Cone allegedly told Randy that he was at the Law Couad apartments to buy marijuana, that he saw Nina in the parking lot, and that he hit on her, and that Nina turned him down. Brenda Kay said that Randy told her Rico came back later and went to Nina's apartment, using the excuse that he needed to borrow something. He knocked on the door, Nina opened the door and then tried to shut it, but it failed to close all the way, and at that point Rico entered Nina's
apartment and strangled her to death. So Randy Applewhite became Confidential Informant number two. But Rico's lawsuit claims that Randy's story did change over time, and that the second time that Detective Carlton spoke to Randy, on May first, twenty twelve, quote, she had already significantly changed her own reported timeline, substantially altering her earlier story, which should have given an early
clue that something was amiss end quote. The lawsuit also alleges that Detective Carlton helped Randy apple White financially, that he encouraged her to contact crime stoppers so she could collect the cash reward if she continued to cooperate, which she did, and the lawsuit claimed that Detective Carlton, in what they called a highly unusual move, destroyed his own
investigative field notes. Rico's defense attorneys were preparing for his trial, so they contacted Randy apple White, and on December seventeenth, twenty thirteen, according to the lawsuit, when Rico's legal team spoke to Randy, she told them she did not believe
that Rico was guilty of the murder. The civil lawsuit also claimed that Randy said she was quote no longer certain exactly what, if anything, she recalled Rico, ever having said regarding any alleged involvement in the Ingram homicide, and that she wanted no part in a criminal prosecution which could potentially see Rico convicted of capital murder and sentenced
to death end quote. The lawsuit alleges that on several occasions that Detective Carlton gave Randy apple White money, including thirty five dollars in gas money on May third, twenty twelve, and also a hotel room that he booked for her and her children for two nights at the Clarion Inn for one hundred and twenty four dollars and fifty eight cents. Now, this apparently happened after Detective Carlton got a call from
Randy apple White alleging that Rico had assaulted her. After that incident, they did DNA testing on Randy's shirt and they found no match to Rico Cone. During this time, detectives were doing a deep dive into Rico Cone's history and his employment record. They were conducting follow up calls and visits with current and former residents of the Law Quad apartments.
While this was going on.
On May fourteenth, twenty twelve, Rico Cone got wind of the police investigation against him, and that's when, according to his attorney, He decided to voluntarily talk to police because, according to the civil lawsuit, Rico wanted to be cleared. At this interview, police gave Rico a doctor pepper to
drink after he said he was thirsty. Then Detective Carlton told Rico that they had taken a DNA sample from that doctor Pepper camp and that they had matched the DNA on it to a DNA sample taken from the crime scene, meaning the detective told Rico that Rico had been inside Nina Ingram's apartment. This, however, was not true. I want to point out by the way that we can't know the inner workings of Detective Carlton's mind at this point, but it is not illegal for detectives to
light to suspects. Often it's encouraged. I've actually taken the read Interrogation seminar as part of my private investigator training. That's the same one the police take, and in that seminar they actually teach you how to lie. But Rico Cone's civil lawsuit alleges that the police didn't stop there. The lawsuit alleges that not only was the case against Rico Cone weaked to nonexistent, but that the judge who issued the search warrant, and the public were actually being misled.
They were being told that Rico Cone was the only Bible suspect, But in fact, as we got into last week, Rico Cone was not the only man questioned, and there's nothing about Rico Cone in the case by up to the year two thousand and eight, at least nothing that's
been publicly released via FOI request. I could not find any mention of Rigo Cone in the pieces of the case file that we were given, though again we can't be sure that we have every document because much later after the case against Rigo Cone was dismissed, Rico Cone's entire criminal case was sealed by a judge. There is no mention of Rico Cone's name in connection with the Nina Ingram case anywhere in the Arkansas court system. After that,
Nina's case went cold again. And while of course we can't know for sure what was happening behind the scenes of the investigation, publicly, the statements made by police appeared to indicate they believed they did have the right person, but they did not have enough evidence to prosecute Rigo Cone. They had one year to refile charges, but they never did, which means Nina's killer was.
Still out there.
One of the things that police were trying to figure out early on was was this a random attack or someone whom Nina knew, because even though everyone they talked to said Nina was this super nice person and they couldn't imagine anyone would want to hurt her, the fact is someone did brutally strangle her, and her cell phone was in her pocket, She had no defensive wounds on
her hands, and she was not sexually assaulted. Also, her purse was found near her body with money inside it, and nothing obvious was taken from her apartment, so, at least on the surface, the motive did not appear to be robbery or sexual assault. And I keep coming back to the locked door because I believe it could.
Be a crucial clue.
When Nina's brother, Noah and his roommate Chad got to her apartment the day her body was found, the door was double locked. Her brother had to crawl in through an open window next to the door, then he unlocked the regular.
Lock and the dead bowl.
So if the killer left through the door, how did they lock it behind themselves?
Police asked several people about.
Nina's keys, including Nina's boyfriend, Josh Stewart.
We talked to Josh.
He said that he met Nina in March of two thousand and five when they started working at the same Walmart. They started dating later that summer.
There's a new store that's being open and Rogers Arkansas. We were helping you get that store set up and so met her at that time, but we didn't start dating more over the summer. By midsummer May of late summer, say I was bye. We started dating, So we didn't date for very long. At the most seven eight months we were seeing each other exclusively. You know, we have started talking about getting the place together because we spend
our time together. Anyway, She spent a lot of time at my apartment changedly move along grade.
Josh said that he did not have a key to her apartment, and even though she had a key to his place, and even though they regularly switch vehicles, He said they did this because he had to commute for work. He worried that his older truck wouldn't make it all the way to Bentonville, so on the days he had to make that drive, Nina would lend him her two thousand and two Toyota Corolla.
Josh told detectives he.
Had not actually been inside Nina's apartment for a couple of months. Their routine was she would get off work, usually shower, and then come to his place to hang out. Sometimes they would go out when she came to his place. Sometimes she would stay over there. Sometimes she would go back home, but he pretty much never stayed at her place. He also told detectives that Nina often felt he would
get angry with her if she didn't stay over. In two thousand and six, Josh told detectives that his relationship with Nina had been going great. He said Nina planned to move in with him when her lease was up. He said she was easy going and they got along super well, that they came from similar hard working family backgrounds, and that they had shared values. They were both working their way through college. He said, I was going to marry that girl. He cried as he told detectives quote,
it's the best relationship that I've ever had. Police asked about the keys several times. Josh clarified that his truck keys were on a removable ring, so when they swapped vehicles. He said he would take the truck keys on their little silver ring and give them to Nina and vice versa, so that allowed them to swap vehicle keys without swapping the entire key ring. Police also asked Josh if Nina had noticed anything at work or at home if there
was anyone who would want to hurt her. Josh said not at work, but he said Nina had told him about some guys at her apartment complex who were cat calling her. He told detectives this happened five days before Nina's murder on Easter Sunday, April sixteenth, two thousand and six. While Josh said he hadn't been inside Nina's apartment in months, he said he had waited for Nina in the parking lot of her complex on Easter Sunday, April sixteenth, two thousand and six. He said on that day, both he
and Nina had the day off. He said they hung out together and went to Walmart to buy some stuff. After that, they swung by her apartment complex so she could run inside and change before they went out to eat. Josh said that while he was waiting for Nina in the law Quad parking lot, he noticed two or three young men, who he had described a police as young male kids aged fourteen to fifteen years old, and at
least one of them driving a truck. He said that Nina had told him on that day that one of these guys had been cat calling her and called her a bitch, and that he had considered confronting them but didn't.
She guys just said something to me, and I'm like, well, whe they say, she's whether he was hollering at me and trying to get come talk to them, and I just ignored them. And she's kind of shaken up by that enough to mention it to me, and I, well, do we need the same thing? And she was like, well, now they drove off, so it was from like a vehicle. She just kind of shook it off, and you know, I don't know, it's not that big deal. Let's just
move on. That's the only time that I recall her being uncomfortable about anybody in the complex.
Later, Rico's defense team talked to Josh as well. He told them that the mental image he had in his head from that day was that it could have been a couple of white guys and that they were definitely younger than him.
And Nina.
Another former law squad resident named Catherine Austin, who lived in apartment number eighty two, told police on April seventeenth, two thousand and seven, that around the time of the murder, there were four men. She described them as clean cut, white males hanging around in that parking lot in a white four door pickup truck. Catherine said two of these guys came up to her apartment door and asked her
what her name was. She said that this made her very uncomfortable because they invaded her personal space.
Again.
According to the lawsuit, there were several potential people of interests who the suit claimed should have been thoroughly investigated.
The lawsuit alleges that the lead detective, Scott Carlton, when he took over the investigation, very quickly became totally focused on Rico Cone, and that Detective Carlton was quote exhibiting clear signs of cognitive bias, repeatedly assisted Josh in matching up his answers with his prior statements by telling him what an excellent job he was doing and even providing him with a transcript of his prior statement with highlighted portions, and it was only after that happened that Josh then
changed his statement back to having been present in the parking lot end quote. The lawsuit alleged there was really no evidence, physical or otherwise against Rico Cone, but there were pieces of evidence that could have pointed to other people of interest.
There was the text message. Josh told police.
That Nina had communicated with someone online prior to leaving his residence. On April twenty first, two thousand and six, detective found a text message on Nina's cell phone from a contact listed as Joey. The message read quote I see be careful, be one hundred percent see ya end quote. But that person Joey was never identified in the case file. So who was Joey? Was he the last.
Person who Nina messaged? What did he mean by be careful?
Was this just a random occurrence or could it be a clue. Several potential pieces of evidence were sent to the Arkansas State Crime Lab, including Nina's clothes that she was wearing, plus other items of clothing including jeans, towels, and socks, the dead bolt and doorknob from the front door, a small black elastic cord with a white button that was found under the bed, Nina's betting, and the black leather belt that was found in the kitchen trash can.
They also found other items, including a Valentine's card that was from Josh and a poem that Nina had written to her mom. The lawsuit mentions the fact that the DNA evidence collection procedures were much less advanced in two thousand and six than they are today. The training of law enforcement and the procedures at the Arkansas State Crime Lab were also not what they are today. This would become a crucial component of Rico's lawsuit.
Another question that we had when.
Reviewing this case file were who were the men whom Nina was seen talking to at her apartment complex in the days before her death. Detectives talked to a neighbor of Nina's who said she saw Nina sitting on a bench in her apartment building on April twentieth, two thousand
and six, the day before she was murdered. Nina was talking to a white male described as having slightly bigger than medium builled, with blondish brown hair and a pasty white complexion, approximately five foot eight to five foot ten inches tall. The neighbor told police she had seen Nina come home with a similar looking mail on multiple prior occasions after dark. Now remember, Nina's boyfriend, Josh, told police
that he had not been inside Nina's apartment in months. However, he did say he had been in the parking lot a few days before her murder. This neighbor also said that she saw Nina that same week with another different white male with lighter brown hair and a medium build between five foot ten and five foot eleven inches tall, that the two of them had walked together to Nina's apartment, standing very close with the white male than following Nina
into the apartment. This could have been Nina's brother or another friend, but this information, to our knowledge, was never followed up on in the police file. Another question we had was could someone have been stalking Nina. Police did
talk to a friend of Nina's named Samantha Stevens. She said Nina had told her in the past that someone had been stalking her at her apartment and following her around, but there are no more details about this in the case file, including when they had this conversation and how recently it happened.
It just as in the.
Past, the Fayetteville police department asked the FBI to get involved with Nina's case, and they did. In March of two thousand and seven, Detective John Gentry of the Faetful Police Department worked with a crime analyst named Tom Dover of the Behavioral Analysis Unit of the FBI as part of the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program or VISCAP. They prepared and generated a criminal investigative analysis of the Nini Ingram homicide,
including a very detailed profile of potential suspects. So ViCAP has a few different functions. One of them is the one that most of us have seen in the movies where the FBI criminal profiler comes in. They have a big marker board with a bunch of unsolved homicides on it. They analyze major violent crimes and can link cases based on behavioral and geographical similarities. Basically, they find patterns, but ViCAP also looks at individual cases and from the information
in the case file. By examining the crime scene, they can give a profile of the unsub short for unknown subject or unidentified subject. This is meant to help local law enforcement narrow down their search. On April sixteenth, two thousand and seven, the FBI gave the profile that they produced to the FFUL Police Department. The VISCAP profile was
pretty much the opposite of ricocone. The VISCAT profile stated that Nina's killer was likely a Caucasian male, familiar and comfortable in the area, and that they were likely living in or near Fayette, Arkansas. In terms of the man being Caucasian, that would track with the initial interviews, not one single person mentioned a person of color as hanging
around the apartment building. So, in addition to believing that the killer was local and not a transient, the VISCAP profile stated that they believed the evidence suggested that the killer knew Nina and may have had an intimate relationship with her, and that they were familiar with her schedule. Again, this is the opposite of ricocone. He was a stranger to Nina. To the witness Randy Applewhite story, Rico only saw her briefly and attacked her because he just happened
to see her coming home. The FBI stated that Nina's killer, according to the profile they provided quote, knew his or her proximity to her would not cause her alarm end quote, So they believed that Nina's killer was someone who if she saw them in line at Taco Bell or hanging out at Walmart, or maybe even in her apartment complex, maybe would not be immediately freaked out and shut the
door in their face. The VISCAT profile suggested that Nina and the offender may have gotten into some kind of a conflict in the past, but they believed that it was likely that the offender had been nice to her in the run up to the killing. So the FBI seemed to think that this murder was something the killer had planned out fairly carefully. And this next part of
the FBI's report is interesting. Quoted in court documents, it read, quote offender may have been excessively nice to the victim in the time preceding the homicide, in hopes this behavior would deflect law enforcement's attention away from him after the homicide.
End quote.
The final note was that the offender may have executed a well constructed plan in committing the homicide, so the profiler believed this was not a random attack, and finally, the profiler believed the offender was likely satisfied that the victim is dead. The VISCAT profile also stated that the offender was quote likely monitoring this case through the media, and may have already been contacted by law enforcement regarding the incident.
So they were looking for someone.
Who knew Nina, who maybe had been rejected by her, who was potentially inserting themselves into her case to help law enforcement, and who may be monitoring the case through the media.
Now.
The lawsuit stated that none of those details matched Rico Cone, but almost all of them matched the person that the lawsuit called person of interest A Josh and another person the person they called person of interest B. Based on the FBI's assessment of Nina's case, Rico Cone did not
fit the profile of her killer. The lawsuit alleged that the lead detective, Scott Carlton, and his colleagues were quote seeking solely to obtain a conviction and close out a politically difficult case, without regard to where the facts or
evidence may lead end quote. The lawsuit also accused the lead detective and his colleagues of conspiring with the Arkansas State Crime Lab to hide or manipulate evidence and intentionally and deliberately misleading both the Office of the Prosecutor Attorney and the general public about the relative strengths and weaknesses of what the lawsuit called an improper, illegitimate, and unconstitutional case.
The lawsuit mentioned someone else who they called person of interest B. Now, this person is not named in the lawsuit, but by comparing the civil lawsuit to the part of the case file that we have access to, this person appears to match the description of a man named Jarvis Harper. Jarvis was someone who first came up in the case file in two thousand and eight.
On August fifth, two thousand and eight.
Officers from the Fayetable Police Department went to a residence where a woman was requesting help to obtain an order of protection.
The woman's name was Nicki Perry.
She wanted the restraining order against her boyfriend, twenty nine year old Jarvis Harper. She told officers that she and Jarvis had been living together for about five years. She said that he was a quote controlling individual who monitors her every move end quote. She said Jarvis had a camera inside the house. She said he installed it there to track her. She claimed that it recorded twenty four
hours a day. She said she was afraid of turning the camera off because Jarvis allegedly had a bad temper. Nicki also said Jarvis had done something to the back door, basically disabled it so she couldn't get out of the apartment the back way, meaning Nicki told officers that she would always have to go through the front door to leave the apartment. Jarvis, also, according to Nicki, asked her to change her name and start going by the name
Lindsey Knight, which she said she agreed to do. The latest incident that led to her calling the police had actually started three days before. She said that on that day, on April second, two thousand and eight, that Jarvis had tied her hands together with black drawstring cords that he took out of a pair of athletic shorts. Nicki said that he left her tied up for half the day,
starting at around two pm. She said, while she was tied up, Jarvis sat on top of her and held his Bretta nine milimi a pistol to her head, demanding to know the truth about her activity. Apparently he believed she had been lying to him. Nikki said that she complied because she was terrified. She said she had been too afraid to call the police. On the police report, it noted detectives took away the drawstring cords from the athletic shorts as evidence. But there was something else at
that residence. In the living room, Jarvis had a framed photo of Nina Ingram. It was the same photo that had been passed out to Walmart employees after Nina died, and in fact, Jarvis worked with Nina at the Sixth Street Walmart. But Jarvis, apparently, according to the lawsuit, didn't actually get the photo that way. In fact, Rico's lawsuit claims that Jarvis wanted a way to remember Nina, so he went and tracked down the photo from another employee.
The lawsuit claimed Jarvis was not aware that the framed photograph of Nina Ingram that he had on his wall was the same one they handed out at Walmart. Police later questioned Nikki about this photo. Nicki said when she had asked about the photo of Nina, Jarvis told her the photo was there because Nina was a friend of his, and also he was good friends with her boyfriend, Josh.
Jarvis told her that he had worked with Nina at Walmart and that he quote was pretty sure he knows who did it, meaning knows who killed Nina, but that it could not be proven. So we have a person with a definite connection to Nina Ingram, someone who worked with her and her boyfriend, who was accused of choking his girlfriend with the cord of his athletic shorts, and
who allegedly exhibited violent behavior. We know that, according to the autopsy report, Nina was strangled with an object that was between one sixteenth of an inch and one eighth of an inch wide, and that the murder weapon was never found. In addition to the photographs of Nina on the wall, Jarvis also had photographs of other women in
a filing cabinet next to his computer. Nicki told police Jarvist told her one of the women was a missing person, but did not give her any more details about that woman, about the case, or where or when the woman supposedly went missing. Nicki told police she didn't remember a lot of details about the files she saw inside Jarvis's office, other than the fact that she said the name McMillan was written on the bottom front of one of those photos.
Nicki said that again, besides Nina, who she had specifically asked about, she did not know who any of these other women were. Police also talked to Nicki's mother, Susie Susie told detectives that Jarvis was a martial arts expert, that he had various martial arts weapons and guns and ninja items in the home, and that he was quote as self proclaimed ninja and black belt end quote. Jarvis
confirmed to police that he did practice martial arts. Police searched the bedroom and remove some items, including a black scheme mask. Next week, We're going to hear more from Nina's boyfriend at the time, Josh, about his relationship with Dina, his relationship with Jarvis, and his theories on the case. We're also going to try to figure out who the other women were on Jarvis's wall. I'm Katherine Townsend. This is Helen Gone Murder Line. Helen Gone Murder Line is
a production of School of Humans and iHeart Podcasts. It's written and narrated by me Katherine Townsend and produced by Gabby Watts. Special thanks to Amy Tubbs for her research assistance and James Wheaton for legal review. Noah camer mixed and scored this episode. Our theme song is by Ben Salep. Executive producers are Virginia Prescott, Brandon Barr, and LC Crowley. Listen to Helen Gone ad free by subscribing to the iHeart True Crime Plus.
Channel on Apple Podcasts.
If you were interested in seeing documents and materials from the case, you can follow the show on Instagram.
At ellen gonpot.
If you have a case you'd like me and my team to look into, you can reach out to a at our Hellngong Murder Line at six seven eight seven four four six one four five. That's six seven eight seven four four six one four five.
School of Humans