Showdown in mom's murder trial. Verdict in Microsoft employee murder. Plus, what is postpartum psychosis?

I hope everybody's having a good morning. You're listening in to the Dateline Morning Meeting. They have dropped the case on basically the eve of trial. Our producers are catching up on breaking crime news. It's all over social media. The DA is joining in on the investigation as well. Welcome to Dateline True Crime Weekly. I'm Andrea Canning. It's August 27th, and here's what's on our docket. In Florida, a verdict has been reached in the trial of the man accused of hiring a hitman to murder father of four and Microsoft employee Jared Bridegan. In the defense, please rise and hearken to the jury's verdict. In Dateline Roundup, we'll check in on the trial of Keefie D. Davis, the former gang leader accused of masterminding the murder of rap legend Tupac Shakur. And Donna Adelson, the Florida grandmother convicted of murdering her former son-in-law, FSU law professor Dan Markell, is demanding a new trial. According to the appeal, Donna was repeatedly warned by the judge to not show emotions during the trial. Plus, postpartum psychosis. We've been hearing a lot about it at the murder trial of former labor and delivery nurse Lindsay Clancy. But what exactly is it? At some point, you may start to lose touch with reality. But before all that, we're in Massachusetts, where the Clancy trial is winding down. But not without some legal fireworks in the courtroom. For the past five weeks, we've watched Lindsay Clancy stand trial for the murders of her children. Dozens of witnesses have talked about what might have driven her to kill them. Prosecutors say it was planned, the act of a woman who didn't want to be a mother anymore. The defense says she was not in her right mind. She was overmedicated and suffering from undiagnosed postpartum psychosis. Now, in the final days of the trial, the prosecution has done its best to undermine that theory with three rebuttal witnesses who spent hours evaluating Lindsay Clancy. Here to tell us what they had to say is Nate Eaton of East Idaho News and the host of the podcast, Courtroom Insider. Nate, welcome back. Thanks for having me. Good to be here. Yeah. So, Nate, as the trial winds down, fair to say this has been maybe the most contentious week of testimony we've seen yet? For sure. You know, this is the final stretch, and the defense really has to nail its arguments home while the prosecution. has to land their case. It's a battle of the experts. That's what we're seeing play out in court. Which expert is right? Nate, before we get into their testimony, we should warn listeners that some of what we're going to be talking about is distressing and includes discussion of suicide. So, the first rebuttal witness the prosecution called was Dr. Avram Mack, a forensic psychiatrist who met with Lindsay in April of this year. Nate, what did he have to say? Well, he evaluated Lindsay over the course of two days. He observed her behavior. And went through her medical records from immediately before and after the deaths. And he reached this diagnosis for her. Her description of her experience, in my view, that, sorry, matched a major depressive episode. Did he explain what that meant? Well, he said that the diagnosis means that an individual displays problems with their mood, experiences guilt or worthlessness, can't sleep, and has a preeclampsia. He also said that Lindsay suffered from psychosis or was overmedicated. He also said that she was very aware that killing her children was wrong. So, this is a complete rejection of the defense's theory. How did the defense handle this expert on cross-examination? Kevin Reddington, Lindsay's attorney, really questioned Dr. Mack's experience. He was quick to point out that during his direct testimony, the doctor incorrectly described what an episiotomy is. That's a medical term for a surgical incision used during childbirth. The doctor referred to it as a "tear." Did somebody tell you that you were way off base on that testimony Friday, sir? I'm not sure what you're referring to. I'm referring to you saying that you were way off base on that testimony Friday, sir. That an episiotomy is a tear. And it's not. And, Your Honor, is there a question before the witness? I already asked the question. I'm looking at him staring back at me. So, Dr. Mack is a forensic psychiatrist. I'm just curious, do we know why they were even asking him about episiotomies? You know, that's something in the delivery room. I'm sure he probably learned about it in med school, but that was probably a long time ago. That's right, Andrea. And that may actually be Reddington's point. That he's arguing a psychiatrist meeting with Lindsey weighing in on her mental health after having a baby should have the expertise dealing with patients who have given birth or experienced post-pardon. Now, Reddington made a huge point to the jurors when he went through Dr. Mack's resume that he really didn't have the experience. Where in here does it say that you ever came within breathing distance of a pregnant woman and your practice and your interest? Dr. Mack responded that he did have experience with pregnant women, saying he had treated around 10 patients who experienced post-partum psychosis since 2001. So, the prosecution not only had Dr. Mack evaluate Lindsey, but they also had another expert who happened to be their second rebuttal witness, a forensic psychologist named Dr. Kirk Halbrin. They did, and Andrea, the new doctor, Dr. Halbrin, said that Lindsey experienced. So, a different diagnosis than Dr. Mack. And this is just indicative, perhaps, of how subjective all of this is. Even the prosecution experts can't agree. But one thing they did agree on is that Lindsey knew what was right and what was wrong when she killed her children. And because of that, she should be criminally responsible. What's he basing that on? Well, remember how Patrick, her then-husband, went out to pick up some food and visit the CVS? Dr. Halbrin. talked about the moment Patrick returned home. He found Lindsey on the ground outside of that second-story window. She was semi-conscious after she had jumped from that window following the killings of her children. This expert said something Lindsey told Patrick at that moment was inconsistent with psychosis. He said his first question was, What did you do? And her response was, I tried to kill myself. He went on to testify that someone. experiencing hallucinations would have instead said something like this. I did what I had to do. I did what the voice said. Or something like that. Nate, the doctor then went on to talk about something that brought the trial to a screeching halt. Tell us about that. Yeah, Dr. Halbrin's testimony veered into a topic that shouldn't be brought up in court. And that's religion. One of the things that she said when asked about what happened is that. in the course. of strangling each child, she said, Go to God, baby. Go to God. She was raised as a Catholic. And this. as I understand, Catholic considerations, that's not necessarily what happens. But when I asked her about that, when I said, Isn't suicide a mortal sin? Let's move, Jeff. Yeah, can I see counsel over here? Now, the jurors were sent out of. the courtroom, and the defense immediately filed a motion for a mistrial, claiming intentional misconduct on the part of the prosecution, saying that they injected religion into the case, and that this is completely inappropriate. What did the judge decide? Well, he was clearly angry, agitated, irritated, but he didn't grant the motion for a new trial. He said, I'm not going to give a new trial. Instead, he told the jurors to completely disregard that, that it was inappropriate, and they should not. consider it. At the time we're taping this, the state's third rebuttal witness is on the stand, and closings will likely be taking place when this episode airs. And we'll be covering those, and maybe a verdict on next week's episode. But I think the big question in all of this, as we head into deliberations, is how effective do you think the prosecution has been in proving their case that Lindsay deliberately planned these murders? It has people torn, Andrea. If you look at the. If you look at the prosecution's case, they've had a lot of witnesses, over 70, including these rebuttal witnesses. And what's fascinating is that some of them contradict each other. We talked about the two rebuttal witnesses with the two different diagnoses, and in their opening arguments, the prosecution suggested that Lindsay staged her suicide, but one of the experts they called said it was actually not staged, that it was a serious matter. And it seems like sometimes the prosecution has been throwing every theory, at the jurors, other than psychosis. So you have to wonder if it's going to work in their favor. Lindsay Clancy's defense attorney has presented very strong arguments that she was indeed psychotic, and that's why they are asking the jury to find her not criminally responsible for committing these alleged crimes. Yeah. Nate, thank you so much for being on this. We will see you next week for what will very likely be the last chapter of this trial. Thanks for having me, Andrea. Coming up, a verdict in the trial of the man accused of. hiring a hitman to murder father of four, Jared Bridegan. For our next story, we're heading to Florida, where we're at the trial of Mario Fernandez Saldana, one of three people charged in connection with the murder of 33-year-old Microsoft employee Jared Bridegan. Back in February 2022, Jared was driving home through Jacksonville Beach with his two-year-old daughter in the backseat when he stopped to move a tire blocking the road. When he got out of the car, he was ambushed by a gunman. Prosecutors allege Fernandez and his wife, Shanna Gardner, who had previously been married to Jared and shared twins with him, hired a hitman to murder Jared. Fernandez is the first of the three defendants to go to trial and has pleaded not guilty. Dateline producer Mike Nardi has been following the case closely and is here to bring us the latest. Hey, Mike. Hey, Andrea. So, Mike, it took three years for this case to get to trial, but the trial itself actually moved very fast. Before we get into that, catch us up on what we know. Why do prosecutors think Mario Fernandez and Shanna Gardner wanted Jared dead? Shanna and Jared shared twins, as you said, and the prosecutors say that the two of them just could not agree on pretty much any of the decisions involving those kids. There had been repeated disputes over things like school, medical expenses, again, pretty much every decision involving the twins. Mike, Fernandez never tried to hide his feelings about Jared from police. Jurors heard an interview he did with detectives that he gave about two weeks after Jared was killed. Let's take a listen to that. It's one of those things where it's just like, man, you need to get in line because I know people that don't like him. I told you I don't like him in particular. I don't care for that dude. Prosecutors allege things got so bad, Fernandez hired a hitman to kill Jared. They believe the hitman is a man named Henry Tennon, Mike, remind us how the two are connected. So Mario Fernandez owned some rental properties and Henry Tennon was one of his tenants. He rented a house from Fernandez. Now, Tennon denies shooting Bright again and his trial is going to happen next year. But what's important to note in this trial is that Fernandez's own defense attorney is not denying that Henry Tennon is the killer. They're just saying Fernandez had nothing to do with the messages showing that he hired Tennon and no murder weapon has ever been found. What have prosecutors done to try to convince the jurors that Fernandez was involved? Well, first they started, they wanted to sort of give the jurors a sense of what happened to Jared. So they showed crime scene video from the night. You can see how dark it was. It was drizzling rain and Jared's body is in the roadway covered with a blanket. Shell casings are nearby. It was just to sort of paint a picture of what happened to Jared. And then they asked the detective to watch the video. And then they walked the jury through security camera footage from the area around the shooting that night. They pointed out that a blue two-tone Ford F-150 was seen on footage in the area before Jared was killed and driving suspiciously. Are they able to say for sure who owned the truck? Yes, they were able to trace that truck back to Henry Tennon's father. It was registered to him. And also they found a tire very similar to the one found in the middle of the road at that rental property owned by Fernandez where Tennon had lived. So they're able to tie Tennon back to the tire and the truck, but it's not exactly hard evidence against Fernandez. So there was a gunman and a driver present for the murder. And here's what's important about that is that the man the prosecutors in defense say was the gunman, Henry Tennon, is seen leaving the crime scene on foot, which means he wasn't driving the truck. Someone else was. Mike, are prosecutors suggesting Fernandez was the driver? I think suggesting is probably the right word. You know, they can't say for sure who the driver was, but the implication that they're making is that Fernandez was the one in the truck. Okay. So if they can't confirm Fernandez was on the scene, how are they connecting him to the crime? Well, I think the biggest piece of evidence here is the fact that Henry Tennon had no connection to Jared Bridegan except through his landlord, Mario Fernandez. He had no reason to kill Jared, no reason to know who Jared was. And the prosecution presented, evidence that Tennon had detailed knowledge of Jared's pattern of life. And they're saying, how else would he know this if it didn't come from Mario Fernandez? So to prove that, the prosecutors relied heavily on cell phone evidence, showing that the two men were communicating in the months leading up to Jared's murder. They use location data to highlight what they say are some important movements before and around the killing that the two of them must have been together. But the defense spent a lot of time attacking that cell phone evidence, pointing out that location data can tell you where a phone is, but not necessarily where the person who owns it is. Prosecutors have also shown checks to the jury, which they say Fernandez made out to Tennon. Right. So it's three specific checks that the jury saw. And they were from Fernandez's rental company made out to Henry Tennon in the months after the murder. One was for $2,000, one for $3,000, and one for $5,000. So that's $10,000 in total. And prosecutors say those are the payments. And they're saying, well, that's a lot of money. And they're saying, well, that's for Jared's murder disguised as legitimate business expenses. The defense countered saying it's a much simpler explanation. They said, you know, these aren't secret cash payments. They're traceable business checks. Prosecutors played jurors a recorded conversation between Fernandez and one of his friends. And he talks about the work that Tennon did for him. He was working for me for a bit, like after it. Oh, really? For real? Yeah. Yeah. He did. He did a lot of work, dude. It seems like that could support this defense theory that Fernandez was just paying Tennon for work he did. Right. Right. In this phone call, Fernandez says that Tennon was doing yard and landscaping work. But, you know, the state focused on another part of that call, where Fernandez is talking about getting a quote to take a tree down. And the quote was for $3,000. And he laughed and said, there's no way I'd pay that much money. And I was like, yeah, no. Go f*** off, dude. No f***ing way. So the state is essentially saying, if Fernandez is saying he wouldn't pay that much for the work, what is that check really for? Prosecutors have also argued that Fernandez can be connected to the type of gun used in the killing. But again, it's not conclusive. Tell us about that. Right. Right. First and foremost, the murder weapon has never been recovered. So this is all sort of speculation and trying to connect the dots. But investigators say that Jared was shot with a 10-millimeter firearm, which is not a very common sort of caliber. type of gun. And prosecutors put a friend of Fernandez's on the stand, a man named John Biggerstaff. And he had owned a 10-millimeter Glock. And they believe that Biggerstaff gave it to Fernandez so that he could in turn give it to Tenon for the murder. Biggerstaff himself testified that he never gave a gun to Fernandez or Tenon and had nothing to do with the murder. Biggerstaff has never been charged in connection in the crime. Correct. Correct. Tuesday, the defense, called just two witnesses. And these witnesses worked at the school the twins attended. What was the purpose of their testimony? Both spoke to Shanna Garner and Fernandez as parents and said they were friendly and involved, you know, just sort of basically painting a picture of them as a regular family. It seems a little, I don't know, I'm trying to figure out why they would call these two people, if this is your whole defense. What are you getting from this? I agree. It was seemed a little odd, other than trying to normalize the relationship between Shanna Garner and Mario Fernandez. And closing arguments also began on Tuesday. What were the highlights? Prosecutors were, their goal was really to put all of these pieces together. Every little piece might not add up, but when you look at things as a whole, you realize that Fernandez had to have been involved. It was almost the perfect crime. He almost got away with it. What did the defense choose to point out in their, in their closing argument? Well, they reinforced what they've been saying throughout the trial, that there is no physical evidence that Mario Fernandez killed Jared or had anything to do with his murder. And they also say there was no motive. They pointed to the custody dispute prosecutors focused on and argued that the most recent family law case had been closed about four months before Jared was killed. So what they were really trying to stress to the jury is that whatever conflict existed, that case was over. There is no evidence they had any motive to take one single day away from Jared Bright again. Okay. So on Wednesday afternoon, after just four hours of deliberations, the jury reached a verdict. Let's listen to that. We, the jury, find the defendant guilty of first degree murder as charged in the indictment. Fernandez was found guilty on all counts, including first degree murder. His estranged wife, Shanna Garner's trial is expected to start in September. So we will be on the lookout for that. Thanks, Mike. Thanks, Andrea. Up next, it's time for Dateline Roundup. We've got the latest from the trial of the former gang leader accused of murdering Tupac Shakur and all the details from Donna Adelson's request for a new trial. Plus, the Lindsay Clancy trial isn't the first to raise awareness of postpartum psychosis. 25 years ago, Texas mother Andrea Yates stood trial twice, accused of murdering her children. Central to her defense? Postpartum Psychosis. Welcome back. Joining me for this week's roundup is Dateline Digital producer Veronica Mazzica. Thanks for being here, Veronica. Okay, so first we are in Las Vegas where the murder trial of Dwayne Davis, or Keefy D as he's known, is underway. Davis is accused of helping to orchestrate the 1996 shooting that killed rapper Tupac Shakur while he was riding in a car on the Las Vegas Strip. Davis has pleaded not guilty. Veronica, this is a murder mystery that has gone unsolved for nearly 30 years. What is the prosecution's case against Davis? Yeah, so the prosecutor's theory is that Davis organized the shooting of Tupac to avenge his nephew, Orlando Anderson, after Tupac and a gang of other men beat up Orlando. at the MGM Grand Casino on September 7th, 1996. So we should make it clear prosecutors are not trying to prove that Davis is the trigger man, right? Correct. Just that he was involved in the orchestrating of this crime. Yes, they are alleging that Davis is the one who got hold of the gun that killed Tupac and was in a car, the white Cadillac, along with Orlando and another two men who ambushed Tupac on the Strip. Okay. So something the prosecutors have focused on during the early stages of the trial is trying to help jurors understand the context in which the shooting happened, that some of the players involved were members of gangs, and that helps to explain the motive. How have they gone about trying to educate the jury on what they believe happened all those years ago? So according to prosecutors, they explained that Orlando was a member of the Southside Compton Crips, and that Tupac was a member of the Southside Compton Crips, and that Tupac was a member of the Southside Compton Crips, and Suge Knight, who was with Tupac and got shot too, was associated with Mob Piru, the Compton Crips rival gang. The prosecutor asked a former gang member called James, Mob James McDonald, to testify about all of this. McDonald made it very clear that he did not want to testify, but he did explain the street rules surrounding an attack like the one on Orlando. Is it fair to say that your reputation and your standing in the neighborhood would require you to do something if you're going to get shot? You would have to go back home and fight everybody that called you a punk. Certain things need to be dealt with, adjusted, live in that life. And when I was living that life, it wasn't no ifs, ands, or buts. It wasn't no, oh, you get a pass. No, I was shot. To be honest. When we talked about the case before, Veronica, on the podcast, we mentioned that a big part of the prosecution's case is what, DeWayne Davis himself has said about the crime. And this week, the jury got to hear hours of recordings of Davis talking to investigators about the shooting. Right. So back in 2008, an LAPD-led task force was investigating the murder of another rapper, the Notorious B.I.G., and investigators believed that Davis might have had information. Davis essentially told investigators that he was not involved in Biggie's death, but he could tell them about Tupac. What did Davis tell investigators? He gave them a really detailed account of what he says happened that night. He admitted to being in the white Cadillac. And Davis said that there were three other men in the car. He named them Terrence T. Brown, DeAndre Big Dre Smith, and Orlando Baby Lane Anderson. He described coming across Tupac and Suge Knight in their BMW. So you were going to, you were fitting a blast if you had to, or you were just. If it would have been on my side, I would have blasted. Okay. So you hand the gun to the backseat? Yeah. You hear Lane? I gave it to Dre. And Dre was like, no, no, no. And Lane's like, dude, he popped it. Seems like powerful evidence for prosecutors, Veronica. Davis putting himself at the scene of the crime. How is the defense fighting back? The defense is essentially asking jurors, which version of Dwayne Davis are you supposed to believe? Because those recordings are not the first time Davis talked to LAPD. about Tupac. Former FBI agent Wade Lee also took the stand and told the jury that he interviewed Davis back in 1998. And Davis denied having anything to do with Tupac's murder. Very interesting case. Veronica, we now have an update on the case of Donna Adelson, the 76-year-old Florida grandmother convicted of orchestrating the 2014 murder of her son-in-law, Florida State University law professor Dan Markell. Last year, Adelson was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Now, she is asking the Court of Appeal to grant her a new trial. So, Veronica, what is she saying are the legal grounds for this appeal? So, Donna's lawyers filed a 90-page appeal arguing that she did not get a fair trial. One of the legal issues that they raised is that according to the appeal, Donna was repeatedly warned by the judge to not show emotions during the trial, which her lawyers say violated her right to a fair trial. The appeal also claims that the judge should have granted a change of venue because of the public attention in her case. And it argues that the pre-trial publicity in Tallahassee influenced the jury to find her guilty. During the trial last year, Adelson, she chose not to testify. How is that factoring into all of this now? Right. So, her appeal argues that the trial judge pressured her into making a decision on testifying, even though she said she needed more time to speak with her lawyers about it. The appeal claims that her decision to not take the stand wasn't a, quote, knowing, intelligent, and voluntary decision. Okay. So, what happens next? Donna's lawyers have asked for the appellate court to hear oral arguments, and we can expect this appeal to play out in the courtroom. Thank you for these updates, Veronica. Absolutely. Thank you. Over the past two weeks, hundreds of women wearing pink shirts have gathered outside the Plymouth County Superior Courthouse to show their support for Lindsay Clancy. Some of them sharing their own story about the appeal. Some of them sharing their own stories of mental health struggles after giving birth. But the Clancy trial is not the first time a criminal case has prompted a national debate on postpartum psychosis. Tonight, Andrea Yates sits in a Texas jail cell. Twenty-five years ago, the country was transfixed by the case of Andrea Yates, a Texas mother accused of murdering her five children by drowning them in the bathtub. In that courtroom today, it all came down to one overriding question. Did she know it was wrong? It made us want to find out more. We want to find out more about how our understanding and perception of the illness might have changed since then, both inside and outside the courtroom. Here to break it down for us is psychiatrist Dr. Katherine Berndorf, who is co-founder, CEO, and medical director of the Motherhood Center of New York. Dr. Berndorf, welcome to the show. Thank you for having me. So, doctor, most of us have heard of the baby blues or even more serious postpartum depression. What makes you think that? What makes postpartum psychosis different? It's more urgent, right? Absolutely. We consider it a medical emergency because it needs immediate treatment, often in a hospital, and medication invariably is used to help manage this illness so that it is not lethal, as we have seen in some very tragic cases. So, what are the symptoms? Often you see someone who. Doesn't really need to sleep. They're not sleeping. They may be overproductive or doing things in kind of a fast and agitated way, talking quickly. And you start to see all that in what we call mania, right? That may be the presenting symptom as it's going to emerge into a psychotic state. And that is an enormous red flag. And Lindsay Clancy claims she was told by a voice in her head to kill her children. Doctor, what is going on biologically that could cause such a severe symptom where she is saying that she's hearing a voice? So, at some point, you can become psychotic. You may start to lose touch with reality, okay? There can be fixed false beliefs, which are called delusions, where you believe something to be absolutely, unshakably true. Going back to the Andrea Yates case where she believed that she was not. A good person and her kids' chance to be saved, to ascend to heaven, was to kill them. Andrea Yates, she was convicted of capital murder at her first trial in 2002. In 2006, Andrea got a new trial and was found not guilty by reason of insanity. She is still in a Texas psychiatric facility to this day. It was a different time. Yeah. You know, you didn't have people out at the courthouse in pink, you know, supporting Andrea Yates. Yeah. Not as far as I. I remember. I don't think there was anything like that. No, I don't remember it either. Why do you think that this case, in particular with Lindsay Clancy, has gotten so much attention? I think, to some extent, I want to believe that we're ready for it, that we're ready to talk about it as a society. She could be our sister, our, you know, a relative, a friend, ourselves. And I think that the groundswell of support for her, not for murder, but for her, and what's happened to her, is a little bit of there, but for the grace of God, go I. Lindsay's defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, asked. one of her treatment providers, Dr. Jennifer Tufts, how often she comes across postpartum psychosis. Let's take a listen. Dr. Tufts testified that postpartum psychosis is rare. Catherine, is there research on this? There is research, and the data supports about one to two cases of postpartum psychosis in new moms per thousand patients. However, while people want to call that rare, I would say it's instead uncommon. And when I say that, what I'm referring to is the idea that that can be 8,000 a year, new moms a year. That's not a small number. That's the prevalence as we know it. As determined today. And I actually think that there's more of it out there. You see moms going to drop off or going to the pediatrician appointment and not disclosing what's in their mind because, one, why would they? They're going to scare somebody. They're going to make somebody, you know, they're going to draw attention to themselves, perhaps have the baby taken away. There's tremendous stigma. And they don't know if they're going to be helped or believed. You can agree or disagree with what's happening in that courthouse. Of course, everyone's entitled to their opinion. But I don't think it's a bad thing that people are talking about this at all. And what is the first step if someone is feeling like they need help? Where should they go first? Be as candid as you can and tell someone who you believe will hear you and believe in you and take you seriously. Because a lot of people say, oh, that's just how. Everybody feels postpartum. They're not eating well. They can't concentrate. But that's different than I am not myself in such a profoundly different way. And I don't know what's wrong with me. And should they go to their OBGYN first? Yes. Or should they go to a psychiatrist first? Yes. A psychologist? Who? All of the above. I would say whoever you can get to. And again, it's whoever you can get to that will believe something's wrong. Well, Dr. Berndorf, thank you so much for all of your. Incredible insight into this topic. Thank you. That's it for this episode of Dateline True Crime Weekly. But check out the latest season of the Webby Award-winning podcast, Dateline Missing in America. Josh Mankiewicz is taking a look at six new cases. The first five episodes are out now. To get early access to the final episode and listen ad-free, subscribe to Dateline Premium. Coming up this Friday on Dateline, we've got a classic Keith episode for you. Dateline True Crime Weekly is produced by Carson Cummins, Caroline Casey, and Kiani Reid. Our associate producers are Ellery Gladstone-Groth and Aria Young. Our senior producer is Liz Brown-Kurloff. Veronica Mazeka is our digital producer. And we'll see you next time on Dateline True Crime Weekly. Rick Kwan is our sound designer. Original music by Jesse McGinty. Paul Ryan is executive producer. And Liz Cole is senior executive producer of Dateline. Thanks, everyone. Bye.