47 - Til Death Do Us Part - Part 2

[00:00:04] At the intersection of true crime and real estate, you'll find Crime Estate. I'm Heather. And my name is Elena. As real estate agents and true crime junkies, we view crimes through a different lens.

[00:00:16] So walk through the door of some of the most notorious true crimes with us and discover how sometimes the scene of the crime has its own story to tell. Hey y'all, we are back with part two of the tangled story of the murder of Derek

[00:00:31] and Nancy Hasem in their home named Loose Chippings in Lynchburg, Virginia. I'm Heather. I'm Elena. And I'm Melanie. Now, if you haven't listened to part one of the story, just pause us right now. Go back and listen or you're going to be very confused.

[00:00:47] The backstory is important to what we're about to cover. And I should just mention that our format for this episode is going to be a little bit different. We're playing it a little bit looser today. And we want to know how you guys like this format.

[00:00:59] So if you like it better or if you hate it, be sure and let us know in your review. And if you hate it, I have to read their review. Elena won't read it, but either way, let us know. I'll be a blubbering this. That's right.

[00:01:09] Give us positive constructive criticism. Yeah, constructive criticism like TWJewer warning. So Elena, you would not stop at that. You would just keep reading. No, it's not. Yeah, like, oh, what do they have to say? It isn't not me. Yeah. Okay.

[00:01:26] Well, ladies, as a quick refresher on this case, shortly after Derek and Nancy are murdered in their home, their youngest daughter, Elizabeth, who remember now she is the only one, only child that the two had together because they were from like this big blended family.

[00:01:39] So I think Nancy had maybe three kids and he had two kids or vice versa. They had, they had a lot of kids separately and then Elizabeth together. And so Elizabeth and her boyfriend, Jens go on the run and they end up in Europe

[00:01:53] where they are eventually arrested for passing bad checks. Now after, I'm sorry, Malia, do you have a. I just had to jump in because just this morning I was teaching my kids what a bad check was. Why? How does that lesson come up now? Yeah, exactly.

[00:02:09] Now we were just getting a new fence put in on one side of the property and so it's sort of a little real estate related. And so we had worked it out with our neighbors that we were going to pay 50-50 for the fence.

[00:02:22] And so I paid to the vendor the whole amount. And then my neighbor had written us a check for the other part of it. And my son, I was showing him how like all the different parts of a check. Yeah, it's a few years late.

[00:02:37] We should have done this a while ago and we were talking about it. And then I was talking about how, you know, I could deposit at a bank, but I could also nowadays you can scan it and deposit into your bank account.

[00:02:47] And he's like, so what would happen if you just wrote a check and you didn't like the money? I'm like, well, that would be called a bad check. And so we had a whole discussion about bad checks.

[00:02:57] And then I realized that is something that our kids generation, like, I don't know. Like if you think they'll even use checks. I mean, I don't. But I don't. I mean, I used to write checks all the time. Not even that long ago.

[00:03:10] I used to write checks a lot. But in something like this, like the guy, my fence guy wanted to be paid and checked because it was probably a little too much more than than. I don't know. It's just an interesting thing that if you don't actually step back

[00:03:23] and deliberately teach your child, it probably wouldn't learn it until sometimes somebody wants to check. That's smart. I'm going to put that on my summer to do list of things to teach the kiddo because you're right. Um, Strolldown memory lane, my very first real job.

[00:03:39] I was a bookkeeper at a bank. I'm like, OK. And so I my job was, you know, you would get your statements back in the mail. Y'all remember this is a really long time ago. And your statements would contain all of your checks that you had written.

[00:03:53] And so if your statement said you'd written 27 checks, I had to pull your checks and like go through them and count them and make sure I was sending 27 back to you. It was a great job for a high schooler. But talk about things that don't happen anymore.

[00:04:05] I mean, we don't even get a paper statement anymore. Oh yeah. Anyway, it just it just reminded me about how things that were so normal, not that long ago. You know, our teenage kids generation, if we don't deliberately talk about

[00:04:20] that, it's going to completely go over their head. Well, and I'm trying to remember, I think this murder happened in like 1985 ish. So we were definitely in prime check era. But, you know, they had been having all these like alternate identities

[00:04:34] and writing checks on different names that didn't really. Yeah. So they were arrested for that rightly so. And after a really long extradition process, because remember Yens, his dad was a diplomat. So he's not even a United States citizen.

[00:04:52] His dad's a diplomat like that, brought all sorts of problems into. Yeah. Yes. And, you know, the United States at the time or I guess still now had the death penalty. And so a lot of Europe was like, well, we're not extraditing

[00:05:05] anything back to the United States if they could serve, you know, if the death penalties on the table. And so there was a lot of negotiation back and forth. So Elizabeth ends up being extradited first. And Yens then is extradited later.

[00:05:21] And the two are tried separately for her parents' murder. Now, she is tried as an accessory after the fact. And he has tried for the murder itself. And the two tell a really similar story, which is why determining

[00:05:34] who actually committed the crime is so challenging in this case. So just again, a little bit of a refresh. Elizabeth says that, you know, her and Yens went to DC on this trip for a weekend.

[00:05:48] And while there, Yens got really upset with her parents based on a conversation they had. So he just like drove down to Lynchburg and ended up murdering them and then comes back and tells her what he did. And initially, Yens corroborates this story.

[00:06:02] But when he's tried for the crime later, his story changes because he had watched her right on TV. Is that what it was? Didn't he her crime was or excuse me, her trial at first. Her trial did go first and he did watch her trial on TV.

[00:06:16] You're right. Maybe then that's why what you're about to tell us when maybe makes more sense. He's like, oh, she'd totally threw me under the bus. Maybe. I mean, it's a mystery as to what happened for sure.

[00:06:26] He says that he confessed to the crime to save Elizabeth's life. And so his thought process or reasoning here was that he's the son of a German diplomat, so he thought he won had diplomatic immunity. Oh, right. OK. I remember you saying this.

[00:06:39] And then apparently the European court system looks at minors. I want to say like 20 or 21. And so because he was 18 or 19 at the crime, he's like, well, even if I'm sent back to Europe and tried for this, I'm going to be convicted as a minor.

[00:06:54] And the most I can have is like a 10 year sentence. So he was so in love with her that he was like, I would rather give up 10 years of my life and have her be free than to have her put to death with a death penalty.

[00:07:07] So that's sort of what he's why he says he confessed to this crime. And look, kids are young and stupid. So I don't know that I. I can totally see that happening. Yeah. Yeah. Makes it makes sense. Other things to teach our sons this summer.

[00:07:22] Don't confess for women. Yeah. Don't confess to a crime to save somebody. Yeah. Yeah. Don't ever get talked into that. No. OK. So ultimately, both Elizabeth and Yens are convicted. Elizabeth was found guilty of two counts of being an accessory after the fact.

[00:07:38] And she received two 45 year sentences for a total of 90 years. And then Yens was convicted of the murders of Nancy and Derek Hasem. And he was sentenced to two consecutive life terms. And that's pretty much where we left off last week.

[00:07:54] It sounds like that should be the end of the story. Yeah, it should. But yet there is a part two. Right. I'm ready. Now remember, Yens is brilliant. And once in prison, he realized he was like, that was so stupid of me.

[00:08:07] I should not have confessed to this crime. I'm really the only one to blame for the situation that I'm in. And I should do something about it. So he he keeps thinking like there has to be a way to exonerate me

[00:08:19] if I did not actually commit this crime. And so he puts his brain to use and he starts reaching out to everyone he thinks they could help him. And he is a really proficient and persuasive is the word I'm looking for, writer.

[00:08:34] And so he ends up convincing Chip Harding, who's a former sheriff and an investigator to look into his case pro bono. And the guy goes on to just like really dig into the facts and the evidence of the case. In an article by Lisa Provence, Harding says,

[00:08:52] I spent 200 hours of investigating hefty case files. And then in a 19 page letter to Governor Terry McAuliffe, he says, in my opinion, yen soaring would not be convicted if the case were tried today. And the evidence appears to support a case for his innocence.

[00:09:09] I think that's huge coming from a sheriff and he's doing it pro bono. Yeah, that's big. Yeah. And apparently this guy like flew all over the country on his own time and his own dime and like interviewed all sorts of people and really just,

[00:09:23] you know, and this is like a sheriff who is obviously looking for justice and, you know, it's not going to be the first one to be like, oh, yeah, we got to release somebody that's innocent or that he doesn't think is exactly. Yeah.

[00:09:37] Even more disturbing recent DNA results from the crime scene indicate that not only was soaring not a contributor of the blood found at the crime scene, but actually two men left blood at the scene. And so his theory is that Elizabeth

[00:09:52] who had this uncommon type B blood, which was also found at the scene and who remember she claimed that her mother sexually abused her, right? So he says that she has the motive for killing her parents. And she was either using like this emotional connection

[00:10:09] or a drug connection to entice these other two like unknown accomplices accomplices, excuse me, to commit the murder for her. OK. So Harding goes on to say, I totally understand why the jury found him guilty, but multiple factors convinced me that the jury had been misled

[00:10:26] and that soaring had an inadequate defense, including a lead attorney who was, quote, mentally ill and later disbarred. Dang. Yeah. It's not good. No, that's really bad. It's really, really bad. I don't think those are things you don't want in your attorney, mentally ill. Yeah. For sure.

[00:10:44] So or medicated, you're mentally ill and medicated like me. Well, I mean, we're all a little mentally ill and medicated. Medicate yourself. That's right. More importantly, take your meds. So I'm unclear why this attorney was disciplined by the Michigan bar. And maybe there's like reciprocity there.

[00:11:02] And I'm not really sure. But they later determined that Neaton, who is Yen's attorney, failed to competently handle his habeas corpus appeal following his trial that he misappropriated five thousand dollars of Soaring's funds, lied to Soaring about obtaining witnesses created Thony Apidavids with fictitious notary signatures

[00:11:25] and refused to turn over files to Soaring. Isn't that crazy? It sounds really bad. All that stuff. Don't take other people's money. Don't lie. Yeah. Add that to the list of things that teach the kids this. Oh, yeah.

[00:11:39] We're just going to bring them over here for an all day. It'll be like when we had COVID and we were like, oh, let's teach them how to clean the toilets. Did that take my kids? No. OK. I'm just happy if he flushes the toilet.

[00:11:52] OK, so back to this attorney, though. So he was, you know, disbarred and he also admitted to having a drug problem while representing the ensuing. And you all would think that this would be enough for the court

[00:12:04] of appeals to determine that like maybe he had ineffective counsel during his trial. But ultimately, they were like, look, he admitted to this crime and there was like nothing he could do to present to the appeals court that would counter that initial confession.

[00:12:19] So we're still in the 80s. Is that right? At this time? No, I think at this point we're like probably mid 90s because it took several years for them to extradite him. OK. And then there was the trial and now we're to like the appeals process.

[00:12:31] It's crazy because we know so much more now about confessions and how those can be coerced in the intimidation practices that law enforcement are illegally allowed to use. So that's wild. Yeah, I think you're right.

[00:12:44] And but I think in this case, he was just so like dumbstruck and in love that I think she had this power over him. Young and in love, that's bad combinations. Yeah, it's bad. Wait till you get old. Is that what we're saying?

[00:12:58] No, I mean, like, like we're all in love with our spouses. I wouldn't do any of this for him. None of this. But when I was I mean, when I was younger, I don't know. I don't know what I would have done. Can with you. Yeah. Yeah. OK.

[00:13:11] So let's go back to this investigation that Harding is leading for a minute. So he finds quite a bit of evidence to support Yens's claim that like, hey, I didn't commit these murders, right? He found the blood samples of the crime scene.

[00:13:25] And apparently Virginia was going through this whole like sweep of old cases because now we're to the point where DNA is something that can be tested. And so they were going back through all their old cases and anything that had, you know, like potential DNA evidence on it,

[00:13:38] then they were starting to test that. That's amazing. Yeah. And so they tested everything they could find. They tested the blood that they found at the crime scene, which if you remember from part one, they really used to convict Yens. They were like, it's typo blood.

[00:13:53] He has typo blood. It had to be him. But that blood did not match in a DNA test. Yeah. And actually, it showed that there were two unknown men that bled at the crime scene. Now, this is where it gets really interesting because at Yens's trial,

[00:14:08] his defense team had actually presented an alternative theory for who had killed Elizabeth's parents. They suggested that it could have been these two men they called the drifters. These guys were arrested for a very similar crime in Roanoke, Virginia, not long after the haste of murders.

[00:14:27] And they're like, look, we don't think these people just like randomly stumbled across loose chippings and ended up killing them. What they think is there was a connection between Elizabeth and these guys because they were both known to be very involved in like the Virginia drug scene.

[00:14:42] Remember, Elizabeth was like into hard drugs and all sorts of things. So they think that the two knew each other or the three knew each other through the drug culture and that Elizabeth reached out to them and asked them to kill her parents.

[00:14:59] Now, that being said, these guys are in prison for this other murder. So their DNA is easy to get and it did not match. I know that would have made things like tie up in a nice little boat.

[00:15:10] And so, of course, that was like a big blow to Jens's case, but it does still show that there were more people there. And at this point they have no DNA to tie him to the crime scene whatsoever. So at this point, Jens's constant campaign that he's innocent

[00:15:24] is really starting to get a lot of like national and international attention. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is advocating for his parole and the former president of Germany, Christian Wolf, flies to Virginia to argue on Jens' behalf in front of the parole board. Wow. Yeah.

[00:15:40] And they're still like, we don't care about you guys. He confessed like they like he has denied parole time and time again. The former president of Germany says that, you know, he thinks politicians have great power and responsibility

[00:15:52] and they have to use this for the good of the people. And so when he was made aware of Jens's case, he had his staff look into it and he just felt like he had to act. I love him for that. Yeah, totally.

[00:16:03] So I'm sure they get like politicians and just celebrities get inundated with requests for this kind of thing. And also Jens had a long list of celebrity supporters. Get this. This is random. I scanned ahead and this is once again, just how weird things are.

[00:16:22] Yeah. That's why there's a part two to the story. So again, remember Jens is really bright. He's doing all this writing in prison. And so he publishes a book which Martin Sheen reads and Martin Sheen goes on to say he just has this very special writing gift.

[00:16:40] So he began corresponding with Jens and they had this 12 year back and forth correspondence while he's in prison. Wow. Isn't that crazy? That's super crazy. Truth is stranger than fiction sometimes. That's exactly right. Yeah. And so she was actually behind the documentary

[00:16:58] Killing for Love, which we used to research these two episodes. And I adore Martin Sheen. He's like one of my favorite people, but he's not quite like who you would expect to be trying to prove someone's innocence. Like that doesn't quite jive. Is he your old main crush?

[00:17:15] Oh, I don't. I don't know. I don't know. He was kind of sexy in the West Wing. Yeah, he was. I mean, he's no Steve. Steve Martin. Oh, my God. Never. No. For those of you who are newer listeners to our podcast,

[00:17:40] Elena, in an early episode, I don't even remember which one pronounced at her old man crush in big air quotes is Steve Martin. It's only at this point like all my old men crushes are not that much older than me.

[00:17:55] So I'm like, yeah, I'm like, are they old men crushes? Or are they just like my contemporaries at this point? All right. But back to Jens and his celebrity supporters, like luckily for him, he had another supporter who has a lot of experience in crime stories,

[00:18:12] the one and only John Grisham. Now, we all know John Grisham for his mystery novels, but did you guys know he wrote a nonfiction book called The Innocent Man? Are you familiar with that? I'm not. No.

[00:18:24] So this book recounts how a man was wrongly convicted of a crime in Oklahoma. And, you know, I don't want to spoil the book for you, but. He is later like paroled, so that's good. But John Grisham has this interest in these true crime stories.

[00:18:42] Actually, the Goodreads description of The Innocent Man says, if you believe that in America, you are innocent until proven guilty. This book will shock you. If you believe in the death penalty, this book will disturb you.

[00:18:54] If you believe the criminal justice system is fair, this book will infuriate you. The sounds right at my alley. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Well, I know what I'm giving you for your summer beach reading. I'm ready. John Grisham's The Innocent Man.

[00:19:09] Yeah, I think that's a good stroke of luck that John Grisham heard about his story. You know, well, John Grisham is from Virginia. And if I recall correctly, maybe Southern Virginia. I think I didn't look this up, so don't quote me on it.

[00:19:24] But I think you might be from Charlottesville or something like that. So very close to the scene. So this would probably have been something he definitely had heard about as like kind of a Virginia legal writer. But yeah, so he has a family farm outside of Charlottesville.

[00:19:40] Oh, OK. Oh, yeah. OK. So, yeah, this kind of scene of the crime is very close to it. Makes sense. Yeah. We've gone through, you know, since my one of my senses involved in mock trial but and it also loves films.

[00:19:55] We've gone through a serious John Grisham legal thriller movie watching phase that we've watched a lot of movies anything to do with like true crime, like in courtrooms. That's a good one to watch with the kids. And some of those. Yeah. Yeah. I didn't think.

[00:20:13] Yeah, great. And I think John Grisham would be on my like 10 people. I'd want to have dinner with list. Kind of curious. He's I think he'd be fascinating. Yeah, because he was a real lawyer before. But was he? I didn't know that.

[00:20:25] I'm up. I'm pretty, pretty sure he was. Yeah. I mean, if you go back and watch or read the firm, like not just even watch the movie, but like read the firm, there's like intricacies of the legal world that kind of would fly over our heads.

[00:20:40] Maybe not your husband's heads, but, you know, the normal people's heads. Yeah. Side note, my husband's an attorney. Yeah. But he's not like a. Not a criminal. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. No. All right. So yeah. So John Grisham says like, look, Yance served long enough.

[00:20:59] It is time to get him out of prison. And because he lives in Virginia, like Mal was saying, he has a lot of political clout. He is a staunch Democratic supporter, which I think you should take to say he gives a lot of money to the Democratic Party.

[00:21:13] And so he was able to use his influence to talk to the governor, the Democratic governor of Virginia. In an interview with the Washington Post, Grisham says, we are not going to stop, slow down or be quiet. We are just going to get more and more vocal

[00:21:28] and push harder and harder until we get justice. That's great. Talk about somebody you want to have on your side. I love that. And y'all, this worked after 33 years. 33 years. Sorry, I just had to repeat that again. 33 years, six months and 25 days. Yens was paroled.

[00:21:47] But now remember he was convicted of the murders. Elizabeth was just convicted of being an accessory after the fact. Which is crazy. Sorry to interrupt because she was committed to being an accessory after the fact. Well before he was convicted of the crime. Yeah, exactly.

[00:22:04] But he had he had confessed. Remember? Yeah. Yeah, you're right. OK. And we didn't learn about this new story until his trial. True. So but they were like, well, we can't let him go. He's convicted of the higher crime and not let her go to. Yeah.

[00:22:20] So they're both paroled. And Yens is sent to Germany and Elizabeth is sent to Canada. Who if you'll remember from the first episode, she had Canadian citizenship too. They were like world travelers. But neither are allowed to enter the United States again.

[00:22:37] Interestingly enough, bringing it back to real estate before the parole board decided to release Yens and Elizabeth. They returned to the house at least chippings to help them make their decision. Why? You know, I don't know. I don't know if they were trying to like

[00:22:54] parse through his story and see if it made sense. I don't get that. I don't either. But also, OK, let's think about somebody's bought this house. You're living there. You've gone on to make your life of it. I mean, it could have been totally remodeled.

[00:23:10] I don't think it was given what they say. The guy that owns it at this point actually is like quoted to say and he's like, yeah, they found her body like right there about that cabinet, you know, not quite that quote. But pretty much. Right.

[00:23:24] But wouldn't that be weird to have investigators back in your house? Yes. But you would kind of feel like for me an obligation, like, well, I guess I should open my door to let them. I mean, this is 33 years later.

[00:23:38] And we actually know that this house has passed through multiple hands. So it's not even like the people that bought the house after the crime. This is like people who bought the house from people who bought the house.

[00:23:50] So, yes, I mean, I think you as a true crime aficionado, you would feel, I mean, if well, if you had even bought the house to be right, but let's assume you had, you would feel this need to be open.

[00:24:03] But I could see on the alternative, somebody going, can we just move on? Come on, this is going to stir up. You know, it's been quiet. People have forgotten they think of this as my Melanie's house.

[00:24:16] They don't, you know, they're not thinking about something that happened 30 years ago. But once I started opening up the doors and the press will start coming back in now, people who may have forgotten or may never even known the story are going to be all engaged.

[00:24:29] I could see both sides. I think in this situation, that is always the hasten house. That house is never referred to as anything. Besides the hasten house. Yeah. Um, OK, so they went through the house. They made their decision to let them go.

[00:24:43] And since then, Elizabeth has kept a really low profile in Canada since the parole she's actually reconciled with her siblings on her father's side of the family and they have asked that she just not give any more interviews. So she's respected that request. Yeah. Yeah.

[00:25:02] I wonder what goes behind closed doors. Like I've read a couple of the same articles that she will not do any interviews in respect to her siblings. But then part of me also wonders, OK, how is she surviving?

[00:25:18] Like, you know, we know nothing about her life because she could have obviously published a book or something and probably got and used the proceeds to live. You know, she never finished college. She doesn't have any work experience.

[00:25:32] I mean, like she really is qualified for nothing beyond a minimum wage type of jobs, even though we both, you know, we all know she's a very brilliant person just from it. You know, she's from her experience. I don't know.

[00:25:46] I wonder if maybe her family said, we'll give you a little bit of a lump sum to start your life if you promise not to write anything or do any, you know, interviews with Oprah or whatever. That's a really interesting analysis because actually in prison,

[00:26:02] Elizabeth wrote like a column, a weekly column for like different newspapers. I think it was called. I'm going to call it life behind bars. That may not be what it was called, but it was something about just and it was a really well received column.

[00:26:16] And so she would have the ability to go on and maybe write for a living. But I had the same thought as you, Melanie. You know, there was a large estate there that was settled. You know, her parents were very wealthy. Yeah.

[00:26:28] If I'm an older sibling, I'm thinking what would my parents want me to do? Make sure she's comfortable. But I need her to like stop bringing this up for our family. Yeah. I mean, that's the cynical, but I mean, I just can imagine if I was in jail

[00:26:46] and rightly or wrongly, you know, for many, many years and you have no funding. I can see why a lot of times people write books because at least that gives you something to survive on. And I don't know at all.

[00:27:01] So this is just very speculative, but I would not put it over her if she had done that and even though that would have been, you know, once again hurtful for her her siblings. So I could see maybe that there was a little quid pro quo.

[00:27:15] Well, and that's exactly what Jens went on to do. He wrote a book. OK, well, and he becomes like quite the celebrity in Germany. You know, he's going on this like book publicity tour. And as he's giving interviews, he continues to say that Elizabeth is the real killer.

[00:27:31] Now, OK. So when we wrapped up last week, I think we all three sort of thought that Elizabeth was behind the crime. But does anything we've covered today make you think differently? Well, I have a follow up question. OK.

[00:27:48] So he did all the work and got a support to get himself out. And then she just was kind of like a. Just it just happened. Well, because yes, he did all the work, but because her crime was less than his. So they're paroling him for the murder.

[00:28:04] But she was just an accessory after the fact. So they're saying if we're going to let him go, then we would have to let her go. Gotcha. If it were vice versa and they had paroled her,

[00:28:13] they wouldn't necessarily have to let him go because it was a worse crime. And then so and then they just assume what? Like how did these people die? They're saying he didn't do it and then she was on.

[00:28:23] Well, I don't know that they're saying he didn't do it. I think they're just saying like, OK, we'll pull you and oh, by the way, you're no longer our problem because we're sending you to Germany. OK, that makes sense. Yeah, it doesn't make sense, but it makes sense.

[00:28:35] Yeah. I mean, I think that somebody can conversely say, OK, we actually think it was her. We're not going to go ahead and double jeopardy and try to try for this. OK. But we think we had the wrong person all along. And but someone says that.

[00:28:54] Well, and there's a big contingent in Virginia that believes they were both in on it together, which is not something we really talked about because they each had these, you know, rivaling stories. But what if they did it together from the get go?

[00:29:09] I mean, they were both brilliant. Like it's a that's a pretty interesting way to pair it play it off of one another. I mean, it could have been her alone. It could have been him alone.

[00:29:20] It could have been the two of them together or it could be a third party drug dealer, you know, which is weird, though. Why would that have happened if like why would either one of them admitted to it if it was 100 percent somebody third party?

[00:29:34] I think if it was like some drug dealers that she knew in a previous life, then how much he had to have known. Yeah. How would she just say, oh, by the way, last night,

[00:29:44] I got these two guys to call my I mean, he had to have known something. He had to have known that was going to happen. But I still feel the same way as I did at the end of episode one. I think she manipulated him.

[00:29:55] That's just my gut feeling that she manipulated him and. Well, and it's interesting because, you know, he's going on this publicity tour and saying that she was still the one behind the murder and her lawyers actually hear of this and like shut that down.

[00:30:11] They're like, you can't keep talking about this. And so there's some thought that like even now manipulation is not quite the right word, but she's still controlling what he's able to do and say from Canada. You know, and presumably they have no contact anymore. Zero contact.

[00:30:28] Yeah. And haven't for years and years and years. It would be even weirder though if they'd remained in contact like through prison, right? It makes sense that nothing makes sense. Like if they worked, if they were together doing this,

[00:30:40] then I feel like they would have some contact or if they actually I mean, well over 30 years. I think her family thinks she did it. I think if they didn't, well, one of her brothers, and I don't remember which side this was on,

[00:30:53] but during her trial is like he I am not satisfied with her answers to some of these questions. Yeah, yeah. Which is a very familial way of saying, oh, yeah. Maybe she's guilty. And I think if they didn't think she did it,

[00:31:07] they would be saying like go out there and clear your name and every interview you can like we will support you. I see that. Write the book, do the things. I think they just want this to go away. It almost makes me think again,

[00:31:19] I feel like everything comes back to John Benet, but one of the things we talked about was, you know, her dad keeps pushing for more information and more information. And if he knew who did it, why wouldn't he just shut up? Right.

[00:31:30] And I think that's what our family has done. They've just shut up. We're not talking about this anymore. I feel like, you know, when people know the most information, they're gonna be the closest to it. They're gonna have insight that obviously strangers and podcasters

[00:31:44] and even journalists are just not gonna be able to understand. So I sort of read, reading between the lines. So yeah, I think she was definitely involved in it. I am more suspicious that he may or may not have been actually involved in the beginning,

[00:32:02] but he absolutely knew about it post what happened and was okay enough with it post. Maybe because she manipulated him. But at some time, you're an adult, you have to be responsible for your own actions. And I guess it's the father's siblings,

[00:32:24] the siblings from the father that believed her maybe because of what she accused the mother of doing. Maybe those siblings are like, I don't even know. I mean, maybe I don't know. I haven't, I mean, they are very tight-lipped.

[00:32:35] Like I researched to the end of the internet on this and really could not find anything. But also they were much older, remember? And they were already living their adult lives when this happened. They have not gone out there. When we say that they've sort of reconciled,

[00:32:52] we're not, they've not reconciled in the sense of they're going out and saying, oh, I believe my sister, they are not vocally supporters of her. They're just basically being quiet to that. So it's sort of like a mutual agreement

[00:33:05] to be quiet and respect and like sleeping dogs die. Yeah, that's exactly right. Okay, so of course we have to chat about what happened to loose chipping. Oh yeah, yeah, well, yeah, because if you just jumped in for this episode, definitely go back to the prior episode

[00:33:21] because we go in much more in depth to the house in that episode. Yes. And so it's unclear to me what initially happened to the house, you know, records from like the late 80s are hard to dig into. But my assumption is that selling the house

[00:33:34] was not really a priority for the estate. Like we said, her siblings are already older, they're dealing with the death of their parents and now their sister has been accused of their murder. My gut and guess is that it probably stayed empty

[00:33:47] for several years while everything was going on. But I do know that the home was purchased by John and Suzanne. I think they pronounce it Pinché. I think that means something bad in Spanish. Okay, I do know that the home was purchased

[00:34:02] by John and Suzanne Panish is what I'm gonna call them. I don't know how you pronounce their last name. I always wanted to say Pinochet, but I think that like a, now that I'm thinking that's like a mis-rohop thing. Yeah, it's P-E-N-I-C-H-E.

[00:34:14] So how are you would pronounce that in Virginia? And so they were the owners at the time that the parole board walked through the house. See, yeah, go ahead, Mel. Okay, because, and maybe I should like pause this, but now I had read that during the trial

[00:34:33] that people, the original trial, there was one family that allowed them to walk through the house and then went and then more recently in the last few years it was a different family who had purchased the house. Okay, so I don't know who lived there during the trial.

[00:34:46] Okay, okay. But that would make sense to me that they came through during the trial. Yeah, for sure. Yeah, and because I read interviews with both people and like the people who had bought it right away were more welcoming. The people that bought it more recently

[00:34:59] were annoyed by it because it was 30 years later. Okay, okay. But sorry, we digress there. I'll let you say whatever you want. Well, so Suzanne is quoted as saying that they never regretted it. They love it here. I never really think about the murders.

[00:35:16] This is our home and we're very happy here. So you know what I'm gonna ask you? Would you live there or would you list it? I would list it. I think I might live there. It sounds lovely. It really does. It's kind of gorgeous.

[00:35:32] That goes to just show how we're always kind of, we go either way. It doesn't make any sense. Oh, a pretty cool. Yeah, there's no real analysis here. It's a gut feeling. It's a good gut feeling. Yeah, no, I think so too.

[00:35:44] I also think if it was more like kind of nowadays like 30-some-odd years later and more willing than if I was to be the first family that lived in it right afterwards. I think that would have been a lot harder

[00:35:54] but like, you know, when there's time in between I think that's more willing. Yeah, I would definitely list it. I think I would live there but I would probably do, it's not a huge house. So I think I would remodel the kitchen

[00:36:07] and maybe change up that kitchen dining setup so that it didn't feel like you were in the same space. You know what do we say? It was like 2,500 square feet or something. It was a modest house for a lot of the houses that we cover.

[00:36:19] I feel like it was modest sized but I think multiple acres. Yes, so it has like a tennis core. Yeah, well, in view of the mountain so I think they bought it for the outside. Absolutely. I mean in the house looked cute.

[00:36:34] But that makes it a lot easier to go in and just say like, okay, I'm gonna gut the inside of this and make it my own. And it wasn't a historic home. It was in the 50s. It was not a mid-century modern 50s.

[00:36:44] It was sort of a, I don't know like an elevated farmhouse. It actually reminded me a lot of my grandparents house. There's, and we'll post pictures online but there are the pictures of the cabinets or like that naughty pine or whatever. And it's, you know,

[00:36:58] and still when they came back through 33 years later like it was still like that. Oh wow. And I was like, okay, well it's time for a kitchen remodel anyway. I mean, it's cute. But at this point it's very farmhouse. And this brings up something.

[00:37:12] I wanted to talk about it kind of tangentially related but the idea that in trials like this that jurors either or during the original trial or subsequent parole trial can go and tour a home. That is such an interesting concept here.

[00:37:31] So we have never done one of the major homes that you hear about in true crime. And I think we probably will, we're waiting we're gonna get to it the OJ house. And the OJ house and speaking of like we were talking about how we've been watching

[00:37:46] in the John Grissom. Well, we also started watching The People versus OJ. And the sister told me that was really, really good. I pushed back for years on my husband wanting to watch it. And now we're like, oh yeah, it's actually good. My younger son is totally enthralled

[00:38:03] and it has- And it's so timely with his recent past. Yeah, exactly. That's what prompted us. Sure. And it is chock full of great actors like everyone you know is in it. Even just like little bit parts. But as I was sort of, you know,

[00:38:18] so researching the story and reminding myself of the story during the actual original trial itself they allowed the jurors to come in and drawer the house. Because the idea is that they're trying to get them to visualize what is going on.

[00:38:34] But I had heard that they had done some interior designer editing to the home during the trial. They had changed the pictures on the wall. Oh. And they had done some things to maybe make OJ seem a little bit more man of the people

[00:38:52] and less of his celebrity friends and more of his family friends. Like they had edited it in a way to make it seem, I don't know. They staged it. Yeah. They staged it for the jury. Yeah. And I just thought that was such an interesting part

[00:39:07] of the real estate of a home after a crime. And then- And at that point probably, and you're right, we're gonna cover the story probably over the summer, but my guess is that it was still owned by the estate. Yeah. So they could easily get in.

[00:39:22] But like in this case, it was owned by somebody else. You would, you have to get their permission, right? I was gonna ask that. Do you have to? I thought I read- I mean maybe there's a court order. I don't know.

[00:39:31] I thought I read that in this case that the people originally did not want the jurors to come into the house. But they had to. I'm not sure. We should probably research that. Okay, I'm gonna ask my husband who loves property law

[00:39:44] about whether or not you can have a court order to enter a home that is legal years if it's for something non-related to you. Obviously you get a warrant if they think you're in possession of illegal substances or whatever you can get a warrant for.

[00:39:59] But can they enter your home if you don't want them to, if it's related to something else? Yeah, I mean like in this scenario where the parole board 30 years plus later, I mean what is walking the house really telling them? I have no idea.

[00:40:13] Yeah, I don't like that. Now remember one of the big stories when we first started this podcast that was my obsession was the murder murders. And I'm betting most of our listeners are aware of it but just in case you don't,

[00:40:27] it's the South Carolina family in the last few years at multiple deaths and murders at the house and the husband has been subsequently convicted of the crime and they did have all the jurors. They took them out on a bus to go do a tour

[00:40:44] of the property in the house. But that one makes a lot more sense to me because it was a large property and I think so much of the story was where were they? Because they were down at these dog kennels and could you have heard it from here

[00:40:57] or I think it was harder to visualize than like a living room in a kitchen. Yeah, no absolutely. Yeah, because so much of the story was like that he was in the house and they were at the dog kennels and same with O.J. Simpson

[00:41:08] because a large part of that story was like a guest house was involved so how far away is that? Yeah, no I think there is actually something to be said but I do think that in some of these trials like this there's some theatrics.

[00:41:21] I've definitely have learned about the theatrics of a courtroom during mock trial. Yes, exactly about the theatrics of a mock trial or a real trial and I think there's something that gets the jurors attention and you're like really into it if you get at.

[00:41:36] But anyway, I didn't realize that was a thing until recently that jurors would actually be taken on like a field trips. Yeah. All right well ladies, that is our wrap on loose chippings and the murders of Derek and Nancy Haysam.

[00:41:50] And if you are intrigued by this case as we are you can find links to the documentaries and the podcast that we used in our research and our show notes so definitely check those out. Yes for sure and make sure you follow us

[00:42:00] on social media at Crime Estate Podcast on Facebook and Instagram. If you wanna see photos of loose chippings and the other interesting properties we cover. Yes and last but not least, make sure you tell your friends about Crime Estate and subscribe to the podcast on Apple Spotify

[00:42:16] or wherever you get your podcast so that you'll be notified when new episodes drop. We will be back next week with another episode, another fascinating episode I should say of Crime Estate. Bye. Bye. Hey y'all, thanks for listening and being a part of our Crime Estate family.

[00:42:33] If you're curious about today's featured Crime Estate you can find additional photos and details from today's episode online at CrimeEstate.com or on Facebook and Instagram by following at Crime Estate Podcast. Have a Crime Estate we should cover? Let us know.

[00:42:47] Shoot us an email at CrimeEstatePodcast at gmail.com. Until next week.