Killer Twins - The Spahalski Brothers - Part 2

hearing our voice. But you are here for a podcast, for an episode, and for.

years that explains what was actually coming. But as they moved into their teenage years, things began to shift. Robert started getting into trouble, first stealing cars, setting fires, and getting arrested. In nineteen seventy one, everything changed when Stephen, the other brother, at just sixteen years old, killed a man named Ronald Ripley in a brutal attack using both a hammer and a knife. Now he confessed and claimed it was triggered by an unwonted sexual advance, and eventually

pleaded guilty to manslaughter. He was sentenced to prison from that point on, and Stephen's life became defined by the system, serving time, getting released, and then going right back in. Now, what stands out in his mindset, even years later on, was there was no remorse in the way he talked about what he did. He simply justified the murder of Ronald, and that was that. So while Stephen becomes a brother

who killed and got caught. Robert, on the other hand, stayed free on the outside, drifting through crime, addiction and unstable living in Rochester, and then in nineteen ninety he crossed the very same line his brother did. But how it differs is that no one realized it. He killed a woman named Maureen Armstrong, then willingly spoke to police during the investigation. He actually walked up to the police to talk about it, and then he got away scott free.

Then it happened again with Adrian Berger in nineteen ninety one. He was questioned but released. And where we left off was with Charles Grant. He was found dead and someone was found driving his car impersonating him during a typical roadstop. But however they didn't realize that fact until it was far too late. So that's where we are investigating the death of Charles grand and who was impersonating him. Does that all sound familiar?

nature of the attack wasn't exactly immediately apparent. Now, Charles had suffered multiple blows to the head, which was consistent with being struck repeatedly with a blunt object, and a hammer would later be identified as a weapon used in the assault, but the force of the blow and the number of times they had been delivered well indicated the attack was sustained instead of a single moment, and interestingly enough, there were additional details that suggested someone had attempted to

interfere with the later and following investigation. See the thermostat in the home. It had been turned up, significantly increasing the temperature inside the residence. It was a clear attempt to help accelerate the decomposition process of Charles's body.

You know though, if it was left for much of an extended time, if it was days, that's when it could have started affecting a lot more Like if they found Charles a week later and he was sitting in that hot temperature, it would have made things extremely difficult.

Because there were no signs of forced entries, it didn't support any idea of like a theft or a break in, so it indicated that the initial interaction between Charles and whoever attacked him had likely not been a situation where they appeared threatening. So, with all this information at hand, detectives began canvassing the area and speaking with anyone who might have seen something unusual, and one witness, a man named Alan Streeter, provided a detail that quickly became rather significant.

He reported seeing someone leaving the area in Charles's vehicle around the time the investigation believed the murder had taken place. Now, he did not know the individual's name, However, he was able to provide a description that was specific enough to be pretty useful, and when he was presented with a photo lineup well, Alan Streeter identified one of the images

without hesitation. The man he selected was Robert Spahalski. Investigators then went back and revisited the earlier traffic stop, the officer who had conducted it was shown the very same photo lineup, and he too identified Robert as the individual he had spoken with the man who had claimed to be Charles Grand while driving Charles's vehicle. So with those two identifications in place, the connection between Robert and the

case became suddenly much stronger. He was quickly located and taken into custody, but the charges brought against him, while they reflected the limitations of what investigators could prove at that point. See, while they had clear evidence that he had been in possession of Charles's car and that he had impersonated him during the traffic stop, they did not yet have the forensic evidence necessary to play inside the

home at the time of the killing. As a result, he was charged only with criminal impersonation and related offenses rather than murder, but that didn't mean investigators were moving on from him. Even when Robert was released. However, in Robert's mind for the third time, he had now been linked to a violent death questioned by police as well, and he had simply gotten away with it. And even though investigators had their eyes on him, the momentum around

the case began to fade. Without new evidence, and without a confession or a clear forensic link tying Robert directly to the act of the murder itself, the case stalled. Detectives who had been focused on it were pulled towards other investigations and other victims with other crimes that required their attention. In practical terms, the case moved from an active pursuit to an unresolved status. The same was true

for the death of Moraine Armstrong and Adrian Burger. Each case existed in its own file, with its own set of facts and unanswered questions. There were even similarities between them, but without a link, they remained separate in the eyes of the system, each one waiting for something new that might move it forward. Eventually, memories faded with the passing years, and witnesses became harder to locate, and Robert he continued

living his life. He remained in Rochester, moving between apartments and areas where people lived close to the margins of society, places where economy and stability and drug use and transient relationships were very common.

and even what risks he was willing to take. Supporting that habit required a steady flow of money, and without stable employment, he continued to rely on the same mix of activities that had honestly defined his life for years leading up to nineteen ninety one. He dealt drugs on a small scale, engaged in theft when necessary, and continued working as a sex worker. He was still arrested, periodically

processed through the system, and then released once again. The charges, however, remained relatively small in the grand scheme of things such as burglary related offenses and other crimes. Was just one of the many individuals moving through that same cycle in a system that was managing a large number of similar cases, so he didn't stand out at all. There were moments, however, when the past did seem like it was close to resurfacing.

In July of nineteen ninety two, less than a year after the death of Charles Grand, Robert was approached by two police officers while sitting on a bridge in downtown Rochester. Now it was a routine situation, as the conversation was deployed, and his response became noticeably defensive. He referenced without even being prompted, mind you, the earlier investigation into Charles Grand's death, describing it as something the police had already tried to

pin on him. It was an unusual detail to introduce voluntarily, especially in a moment like that, when it's just like a walk up check on a person sitting there on a bridge.

the area. The situation had nothing to do with any of the earlier murders, but Robert, for a brief moment, believed the officers were there because of something else, entirely that they had come to arrest him for those murders, but that was obviously not the case. The officers asked their question, determined he was not involved in the incident they were investigating, and they left.

sort of stuff. But one of those relationships was with a woman named Vivian IRASERI. Now, Vivian was fifty four years old and lived on the same apartment building as Robert on Spencer Street, and their connection wasn't as fleeting, I guess is a good word to put as many

of his other relationships and connections were. They were quite familiar with one another, spending time together and as neighbors or acquaintances, right, they weren't like an item per se, but they were definitely good acquaintances, and on November fourth, two thousand and five, Vivian was inside Robert's apartment. The two of them were getting high together on their good old favorite crack cocaine, and according to Robert, the amount he consumed that day affected him in a way that

disoriented his perception of what was happening around him. He would later describe experiencing hallucinations, and he claimed that Vivian's appearance changed and he no longer saw her as she was, but instead something else, something threatening, something he described in terms that suggested fear and confusion rather than recognition. Now, at some point during this high, he struck Vivian in

the head, leaving her disoriented. And now the exact sequences of events is difficult to reconstruct in precise detail, because remember this is reconstructed through Robert, who was extremely high at the time. But it is clear that the violence did not end with that initial blow. In the earlier cases, the attack progressed and Robert began to strangle her until she was dead. Now, what happened afterwards marked a very

significant shift from Robert's earlier behavior. In the cases from nineteen ninety and nineteen ninety one, Robert had left the scene distance himself from whatever he had done in allowing the investigation to unfold without his direct involvement. But this time, though, he did something extremely different. He moved Vivian's body into

the bathroom of his apartment and he began to wash her. Afterwards, he wrapped her and took her down to the basement of the building, where it provided a degree of concealment, but was not a permanent solution by any means. It was a temporary measure, and for several days nothing was reported.

Life in the building continued as it has before. People moved in and out of their apartments, carrying on with their routines, unaware of what had taken place or that there was a deceased person in the basement of the building, and during that time, Robert would return to the basement where Vivian was. According to his later statements, he visited her body during those days, standing over her and speaking to Vivian and expressing what he described as remorse.

For fourteen years, he had carried the weight of the earlier killings without any external consequence forcing him to confront them. But now, within days of his final act, the separation between action and consequence it began to collapse in on itself, and on November eighth, two thousand and five, four days after Vivian was killed, Robert went to the Rochester Public Safety Building. He approached the front desk and calmly stated

that he needed to speak to someone about a homicide. Now, people occasionally come forward with information that turns out to be incomplete, exaggerated, or even unrelated to an actual crime itself, but Robert didn't hesitate or attempt to soften what he was saying in his situation. He made it very clear when he told officers that he himself had killed someone and that if police went to his apartment they would

find a body with a claim like that. Officers were quickly dispatched to the Spencer Street address that he provided, and when they searched the building, they located Vivian iras Aari's body in the basement, exactly where Robert said it would be. Has a conscience somewhat, yeah, or he just.

one of the investigators asked him directly about Charles. There was a brief pause. Robert had already admitted to one killing, and after a moment, he admitted that he too, killed Charles grand He began describing the interaction inside Charles's home, explaining that there was an argument that had taken place and that it had escalated. He said he hit Charles in the head with a hammer, detailing the act in a way that corresponded precisely with the injuries that were

documented by investigators during the original investigation. He also addressed the events that followed too, including taking Charles's car and using it afterward, which directly connected to the earlier traffic stop where he was impersonating him and convicted of Now investigators soon also turned the conversation to another unresolved case.

They asked Robert about Adrian Berger, and when her name was mentioned, his response introduced a subtle but important shift, because, instead of immediately denying any involvement, he asked whether the woman had lived on Emerson Street, and then, when confronted with the implications of that question alone, Robert admitted he killed Adrian as.

but if you're keeping count, there's one remaining case. And when Moraine Armstrong's name was introduced, the pattern of the interview changed suddenly. This time, Robert hesitated. He denied knowing her, denied involvement, and avoided providing a direct answer in a way that he had with the other victims. Even when presented with her photograph, he remained steadfast, suggesting he didn't recognize her or hadn't committed any sort of murder or anything.

He didn't really acknowledge anything. His behavior during it was odd, defensive, and very hesitant, so after providing detailed accounts of the other killings, this stood out. And then at one point he made a very unusual request. He asked investigators for time to meditate. Now this was odd, but investigators allowed it. They stepped out of the room and gave him space. When they returned, his demeanor, though, was different, and he

appeared a lot more composed. Now faced with investigators again, and rather than continuing to deny any involvement outright, Robert decided to ask a question of his own. He wanted to know whether an iron had been used in the killing and that detail had not been made public, and when investigators confirmed that it had been because if you remember from part one, the cord of an iron was used to strangle her.

about it. Okay, So in his understanding, there was a threshold of what would label him as a serial killer, and he had attempted, however, briefly, to avoid crossing into that definition.

little different. It would catch me off guard for sure.

It must be supported by fact and by details that only the person responsible would know, information that had not been publicly released and could not have been guessed or reconstructed from outside sources. And in Robert's case those details were very much so present. For example, his description of Moraine Armstrong's death aligned with the use of the electrical cord taken from the iron, which was a specific element

that wasn't made public. Also, the account of Adrian Berger's death provided an example for a case where the cause of death had remained uncertain due to the condition of the body when it was discovered. The manner in which he described the attack clarified what investigators had been unable to determine through physical evidence alone, and it matched. In the case of Charles Grand, his admission connected multiple pieces of information that had previously existed without a definitive link.

The witness who had seen someone leaving in Charles's vehicle, the officer had conducted the traffic stop, and the physical evidence inside the home all pointed towards a single individual, and Robert's confession brought those elements together, providing a coherent narrative that explained not only how the crime had been committed, but also what had happened in the immediate aftermath. And as investigators worked through each and every one of these cases,

the pattern was undeniable. Now most important part of this all is yeah, the pattern between all of these They were very connected through consistent behavior, consistent methods, and consistent sets of circumstances. Each victim had been killed in a private space in situations where Robert had direct access to them. The methods, while not identical in every case, reflected a reliance on what was immediately available at the crime scene, rather than a pre planned tool brought to the scene.

Beyond the physical details, there was also a behavioral pattern that linked the cases together. Two In each instance, Robert had been present in the victim's environment, either as a known associate or someone who had gained access through brief interaction, and afterwards he had distance himself from each scene for years.

That approach had been effective, but ultimately he couldn't keep the guilt inside, and by the time Robert's case moved forward to the trial in two thousand and six, the foundation against him was pretty extreme, and his own words formed the core of the prosecution's case. They were detailed, specific and aligned closely with the evidence that investigators had collected over the years. From a legal standpoint, that created an extremely powerful position for the prosecution. However, the defense

did not dispute that Robert had made those statements. They weren't going against the fact that he had admitted these things at all, but it did challenge the condition under which they had obtained and the extent to which they should be relied upon these statements. One of the central arguments focused on the length and the nature of the

interrogation process itself. See Robert had spent an extended period in police custody during questioning, and the defense raised concerns about whether the duration and circumstance of that interview had influenced the reliability of his statements. There was also an effort to frame his actions within the context of his mental state as well. For example, his history of drug use,

particularly his heavy reliance on crack. Cocaine was introduced as a factor that may have impaired his judgment and perception at the times of the crimes, and the account he had given regarding hallucinations during the killing of Vivian. It was also used to support this argument too, suggesting that his understanding of events may not have been grounded in reality in the way the prosecution was now presenting it now. Despite those efforts, though, the broader contexts of the case

worked against that defense. Sure, you can argue things like, Okay, he may have confessed this and said he did that, but he also said he was high hallucinating, so how can you trust his word and what he said he did? Right? But the confessions were not isolated to a single incident or a single moment of vulnerability, and that's important. They spanned across multiple cases, and each were supported by independent evidence that existed long before Robert had even come forward.

He was only the stitch that pulled it all together. The consistency between his statements and the documented details of each crime only strengthened the prosecution's position, making it very difficult to argue that his omissions were unreliable or the result of even external pressure. During the trial, the jury was presented with a coherent account of the four killings.

They heard about the death of Moraine Armstrong in December of nineteen ninety the circumstances of Adrian Berger's death in July of nineteen ninety one, the murder of Charles Grand in October of that same year, and the final killing a Vivian iras Ai in November of two thousand and five.

Each case was examined in detail, with the prosecution outlining the sequence of events, the evidence collected at the time, and the way in which Roberts confess aligned with all of those findings, and the accumulative effect of that presentation was significant, because rather than evaluating each case on their own, the jury was able to see the pattern that connected them all together, and as the trial progressed, it became increasingly apparent that the case was not going to hinge

on a single piece of evidence or a narrow interpretation of the events. Instead, it was clearly built on the accumulation of consistent details, each reinforcing the other and creating a strong narrative that was difficult, very difficult to dispute. So when the case was finally placed in the hands of the jury. The deliberation process did not take long. After hearing the evidence, reviewing the testimony, and considering the arguments from both sides, the jury reached a decision in

less than two and a half hours. They found Robert Spahalski guilty on five counts of second degree murder, charges that collectively accounted for the four separate killings that had taken place between December of nineteen ninety and November of two thousand and four. Now, under New York law, a single incident can give rise to multiple counts of murder in the second degree, depending on how the prosecution frames

the charges and the elements they seek to prove. In Robert's case, the counts reflect both intentional acts and circumstances that met additional legal criteria under the statue. So while the number of counts five counts exceed the number of four victims, the underlying reality remained the same. Four separate lives had been taken, each in its own setting, each connected through pattern that they had now been fully established in court.

His life became one of repeated incarcerations, cycles that never truly broke, shaped by the decisions that kept bringing him back into the same system. Yes, he murdered one person, but after that it was petty crimes, theft Robert, those sorts of things. Robert's path, by contrast, had unfolded in a way that was far less visible. He had remained on the edges of the system, moving in and out of custody for smaller offenses too, never standing out in

a way that demanded sustained attention. The crimes he committed between nineteen ninety and nineteen ninety one existed without any sort of resolution, disconnected from one another and from him in any way that could ever be proven. For years, there was no clear indication that his life had diverged into something fundamentally different from what it appeared to be on the surface. It was only after his confession in two thousand and five that those two paths could be

seen together. The connection between the two brothers wasn't simply that they were twins who had both committed acts of violence, but that their lives had followed trajectories that ultimately led to very similar outcomes. Each had crossed a line that separated them from the life they had begun with, and each had spent signific portions of their lives within the criminal justice system, and each of them had become a murderer. However,

there is one major difference between the two of them now. Stephen, even years after his conviction, continued to speak about his actions in a way that suggested justification. His account of the killing of Ronald Ripley remained consistent He framed it in terms that placed responsibility on the circumstances rather than himself. Something that had to happen, and he didn't regret it.

That way of thinking appeared to remain intact despite the time he had spent incarcerated and the consequences that he had faced as a result of his actions. But Robert's perspective, on the other hand, it was a lot different. He seemed to hold some sort of regret, some guilt. He spoke about the impact of his actions, and about how the role of his mental state and drug use and how it had played in shaping what he had done.

Whether the remorse he held reflected a genuine shift in understanding or was influenced by the circumstances in which was expressed as something we cannot be determining with certainty, but it stands out with a very sharp contrast with the way his brother continued to describe his own past. Despite those differences, though the outcome for both of them was the same, in one fundamental way, their lives became defined

by incarceration. Looking back, there is no clear point where everything can be traced back with a specific cause, no single explanation that accounts for two individuals with the same beginning arriving at a similar fate. Instead, there is a sequence of events, decisions, and circumstances over time, creating a pattern that only becomes visible when viewed with its entirety. Could this be a result of nurture or maybe nature

that had caused this. It's such a unique look at this age old argument, and yet at the same time it doesn't seem to offer any new answers. The early years in Almira and the gradual shift into criminal behavior, with a first act of violence that defined one brother's path and the quieter progression that led the other down a similar road years later, all of it formed a timeline that is difficult to simplify. What remains at the end of that timeline is a story that is not

easily reduced to a single explanation. It's a story about two lives that began in the same place, then followed different routes, only to arrive at a similar destination with different feelings and emotions after it's all said and done. It's a story about how patterns can develop without being fully recognized, and how the absence of immediate consequences can follow those patterns to continue long enough to become something

much larger. And perhaps most of all, it's a story that leaves behind a question that does not have a clear your answer. How can two people start in the same place and still become something so difficult to understand? And that's the story of the Spahalski Brothers aka The Killer Twins.

that it's nature for both these individuals. Sure, maybe there's some nature in it, but you can also argue that is nature, there's some good too, So it's not fully nature, you know what I mean?

see our new reels that we're making. We're going to be doing a real hopefully on every single case we come out with, so you'll hear that little bit of an elevator pitch on it. And if you're coming from our reels, if you're new here, thank you for being here.

We appreciate you all. We are an independent podcast host, written researched all of it on our own in a little tiny home with our roosters and chickens outside, making far too much noise that often bleeds into our audio, and we are sorry for it, but we also love it and our unapologetically ourselves.