True Crime Stories

This is one of the most confusing cases that I have ever tried to research. In fact, I attempted to do it one other time but became overwhelmed and frustrated at all of the issues at hand. A social worker involved in the case was quoted as saying that this was one of the most dysfunctional family situations that she had ever dealt with. While I agree that the dysfunction was a huge issue in my research as it led from one strange fact to another, it was only part of the issues I had in keeping things straight. Around 1996 Angelina Young and Joshua Gouker had a son. He was also named Joshua but did not carry his fathers surname. He maintained his mother's maiden name. So father and son were both name Joshua but they had different last names. For purposes of this blog I will use the phrases “Big Josh” and “Little Josh” to try and lessen the confusion, if that is at all possible. About a year or so after Little Josh was born there was another boy born in the Lo...

You have seen several cases from the Oklahoma City area from me lately. Sometimes that happens due to how I make my list of cases and whether they grab my interest when I am going through the list. This all started with the case of Curtis McCarty, a man who was sentenced to death three times but later released from prison. Often when I read about one case others are mentioned and that was such the situation with McCarty. Much of the information on his case centered around the local prosecutor at the time, a man named Robert “Cowboy Bob” Macy and a lab technician named Joyce “Black Magic” Gilchrist. In the process several other cases, such as this one, relating to Robert Lee Miller Jr. was mentioned, as questionable cases. Robert Lee Miller Jr. was convicted and sentenced to death in the murders of eighty-three year old Anne Fowler and ninety-two year old Zelma Cutler. Both of the elderly women had been raped and murdered in their homes. Anne Fowler had been foun...

You have often heard me give my thoughts on the death penalty. I believe that in someone is sentenced to death, let alone actually executed, there should be absolutely no question as to whether they are guilty of the crime. Now, some would say that there is no way to come to that conclusion but I do not necessarily believe that. I believe that in most cases DNA can absolutely determine the guilt of someone, at least someone who has physically committed the crime. Of course there are cases in which DNA really makes no difference. Those are the cases in which the defendant's DNA is all over a home and crime scene but then again it is generally their home or property they use on a regular basis. Now, DNA cannot prove the guilt of someone accused of hiring someone else to commit a crime and investigators have to look elsewhere for evidence. Murder for hire cases can be difficult to prove. I'm currently reading a book on the murder of Dr. John Hill in Texas in...

As I was researching this case I often thought of Charles Manson. I believe few would argue that Manson was a few cards short of a full deck. I think the same could be said about both Ron and Dan Lafferty, two brothers from Utah who were convicted in the murders of their sister in law and their niece. Every interview I ever saw with Manson he was spouting off and ranting. From everything I have heard or read about the Lafferty brothers, it seems after more than thirty years in prison they still have the same demeanor. The only difference now is that one believes that he is a “child of God” while his brother is a “child of the Devil.” It is not completely clear why Dan Lafferty would believe that his brother is a child of the devil when they committed their crime together and Dan has been quoted as saying he has no remorse and “you don't repent for things that aren't wrong.” For me, this case brings back the question of insanity. I have never really agreed w...

When a case goes to trial it is only on the rare occasion that every detail is known by the prosecution. Sure, we see confessions from people and there is always the evidence that is used to point to the defendant. Confessions are a tricky thing. When they are not coerced or proven to be completely false confessions, they are still almost always riddled with inconsistencies and falsehoods. This should come as no surprise considering the fact that those who give the confessions are generally involved in the crime. Perpetrators normally do not want to come off as a “monster” and for that and other reasons will often lessen their role and culpability to a crime. Most often a prosecutor is forced to come up with a “theory” when it comes to the motive behind the crime, but in cases in which there is not a confession they are also forced to come up with a theory on how things took place. It is not unheard of to hear of a “strange” theory or one that seems implausible, but...