Buried Secrets
The Story
They buried the evidence, faked the grief, and moved on with their lives. But justice has a long memory. Three stories. One episode.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dark-american-crime--7005371/support.
Thanks for listening to Dark American Crime. The next episode is coming soon.
This episode includes AI-generated content.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to the show. I'm glad you're here. Grab
Speaker 1: something warm, get comfortable, and let's get into it, because
Speaker 1: tonight we have three stories that have been living in
Speaker 1: my head rent free for weeks now. Three cases, three
Speaker 1: sets of lives that were changed forever. And as always,
Speaker 1: we're not just going to tell you what happened. We're
Speaker 1: going to sit with it. We're going to ask the
Speaker 1: harder questions. Let's begin. Picture a Tuesday morning in Willowbrook, Illinois.
Speaker 1: It's a quiet suburb, the kind where people wave at
Speaker 1: each other from driveways, where kids ride bikes until the
Speaker 1: street lights come on, where nothing bad is supposed to happen,
Speaker 1: the kind of place that makes best places to raise
Speaker 1: a family lists, good schools, low crime, Saturday farmers' markets.
Speaker 1: On Cyprus Ridge Drive, there lived what the neighbors called
Speaker 1: the perfect couple. Dale Vesper was forty three years old.
Speaker 1: He was an insurance actuary, quiet, methodical, friendly enough at
Speaker 1: the neighborhood barbecue, but never the life of the party.
Speaker 1: He drove a silver Sedan, kept his lawn immaculate, and
Speaker 1: coached Little League on weekends, even though he and his
Speaker 1: wife didn't have kids. He coached because he said it
Speaker 1: was good for the community. Marlena Vesper was thirty nine.
Speaker 1: She was the one people actually remembered, warm, funny, the
Speaker 1: kind of woman who would show up at your door
Speaker 1: with soup if she heard you'd been sick. She worked
Speaker 1: as a dental hygienist on Oak Street and had a
Speaker 1: reputation for making even the most anxious patients feel at ease.
Speaker 1: She sang in the church choir. She had a best
Speaker 1: friend named Paula Oakes, who she'd known since the fourth grade.
Speaker 1: In September of two thousand and three, Marlena Vesper vanished.
Speaker 1: According to Dale, she simply left. He told police that
Speaker 1: the marriage had been strained for months, that Marlena had
Speaker 1: spoken vaguely about needing to find herself, that he'd come
Speaker 1: home one Thursday evening to find the house empty and
Speaker 1: a note on the kitchen counter. The note, in Marlena's handwriting, read,
Speaker 1: I'm so I can't do this anymore. Don't look for me.
Speaker 1: Police were initially inclined to believe him. There was no
Speaker 1: sign of a struggle, no history of reported domestic violence.
Speaker 1: Marlena was a grown adult who had every legal right
Speaker 1: to walk away from her life. If she chose to.
Speaker 1: Cases like this, missing adults who leave voluntarily are heartbreakingly
Speaker 1: common and often go nowhere fast, But Paula Oakes was
Speaker 1: not convinced. Paula told investigators that two days before Marlena disappeared,
Speaker 1: they had eaten lunch together and Marlena had been anything
Speaker 1: but emotionally distant. She was making plans. She was excited
Speaker 1: about a trip to Santa Fe she and Dale had
Speaker 1: booked for November. She was talking about repainting the living room.
Speaker 1: She had just signed up for a pottery class. You
Speaker 1: don't sign up for a pottery class on Monday and
Speaker 1: run away on Thursday. That's not how Marlena worked. Those
Speaker 1: were Paula's words to the detective who took her statement.
Speaker 1: That's not how any person works. Paula was right, but
Speaker 1: it would take eleven years before anyone could prove it.
Speaker 1: In the weeks following Marlena's disappearance, police did what they could.
Speaker 1: They interviewed Dale multiple times. His story never changed, or
Speaker 1: at least never changed in ways that seemed suspicious on
Speaker 1: the surface. He was calm during the interviews, displaying what
Speaker 1: investigators later described in their reports as appropriate sadness, not robotic,
Speaker 1: not hysterical, Somewhere in the measured middle. They checked Marlena's
Speaker 1: bank accounts, no activity after September eleventh, two thousand and three.
Speaker 1: Her cell phone had not been used, Her car was
Speaker 1: still in the driveway. Her passport was in the bedroom drawer.
Speaker 1: That last detail never left Paula alone. You don't leave
Speaker 1: your passport behind if you're starting a new life somewhere,
Speaker 1: You just don't. But in two thousand and three, without
Speaker 1: a body, without a witness, without anything that directly contradicted
Speaker 1: Dale's account, the case went cold. Marlena was listed as
Speaker 1: a voluntary missing person. Life in Willowbrook moved on. Dale
Speaker 1: Vesper stayed in the house, He kept his job, He
Speaker 1: kept coaching little league. About two years after Marlena disappeared,
Speaker 1: he began dating a woman named Susan Hartley, a divorcee
Speaker 1: with two daughters who lived across town. By two thousand
Speaker 1: and seven, they were married. By all accounts, Dale was
Speaker 1: a devoted stepfather. He attended school plays, He helped with homework.
Speaker 1: He brought a casserole to the neighborhood block party and
Speaker 1: Paula watched. She watched, and she stewed, and she never
Speaker 1: stopped calling the detective assigned to Marlena's case every few months.
Speaker 1: She checked in every few months, she got the same answer,
Speaker 1: no new leads. Then in the summer of twenty fourteen,
Speaker 1: Susan Vesper called the police. She and Dale were going
Speaker 1: through a contentious divorce. While going through his files, she'd
Speaker 1: found things, photographs, documents that she didn't fully understand, but
Speaker 1: that made something cold settle in her chest. She told
Speaker 1: the investigating officer about a garden Patiodale had installed in
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, right around the time they started
Speaker 1: getting serious. She'd thought nothing of it at the time,
Speaker 1: but now sorting through his papers, she found receipts, receipts
Speaker 1: for cement, large quantities of cement purchased in cash in
Speaker 1: late two thousand and three. In October of twenty fourteen,
Speaker 1: investigators arrived at four Cypress Ridge Drive with ground penetrating
Speaker 1: radar equipment and a warrant. Beneath the garden patio, they
Speaker 1: found the remains of Marlena Vesper. She had been there
Speaker 1: for eleven years. The arrest of Dale Vesper sent shockwaves
Speaker 1: through Willowbrook. People who had stood beside him at little
Speaker 1: league games, who had eaten dinner at his table, who
Speaker 1: had attended his second wedding, were stunned, And then they
Speaker 1: weren't because when you really looked back, when you paid attention,
Speaker 1: the signs had been there. Several former neighbors came forward
Speaker 1: in the weeks after his arrest. One woman recalled hearing
Speaker 1: aloud escalating argument at the Vesper house the night before
Speaker 1: Marlena was last seen. She'd thought nothing of it at
Speaker 1: the time, but she'd never forgotten the sound of it.
Speaker 1: It wasn't the kind of arguing that winds down, she
Speaker 1: told a local news outlet. It was the kind that
Speaker 1: gets louder. Forensic analysis determined that Marlena had died from
Speaker 1: blunt force trauma to the head. The supposed goodbye note
Speaker 1: on the kitchen counter was subjected to handwriting analysis. Experts
Speaker 1: found key inconsistencies, suggesting it had been coerced or forged.
Speaker 1: Cell tower data placed Dale's phone at or near the
Speaker 1: house all through the night in question. Financial records showed
Speaker 1: the cement purchase, four hundred pounds of it paid for
Speaker 1: in cash, had been made just two days after Marlena's
Speaker 1: supposed disappearance. A hardware store employee came forward to say
Speaker 1: he remembered Dale being in that day and that he'd
Speaker 1: struck him as oddly cheerful for someone who's wife life
Speaker 1: had just walked out. And then there was Paula Oakes
Speaker 1: on the witness stand. She testified for nearly four hours
Speaker 1: across two days. She was precise, composed and devastating. She
Speaker 1: walked the jury through every conversation she'd had with Marlena
Speaker 1: in the weeks leading up to her death. She talked
Speaker 1: about the Santa Fe trip, the pottery class, the meme
Speaker 1: Marlena had texted her about bad coffee on the morning
Speaker 1: of September tenth, the morning before she died. The jury
Speaker 1: deliberated for nine hours. Dale Vesper was convicted of first
Speaker 1: degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without the
Speaker 1: possibility of parole. After the verdict, Paula stood on the
Speaker 1: courthouse steps and said something I keep coming back to.
Speaker 1: She said, Marlena didn't get to be forty, she didn't
Speaker 1: get to go to Santa Fe, she didn't get to
Speaker 1: take her pottery class. The least I could do was
Speaker 1: make sure she got justice, even if it took eleven years.
Speaker 1: The Vesper case raises questions that are genuinely uncomfortable. How
Speaker 1: does a woman disappear and stay missing for over a decade?
Speaker 1: How does her killer attend her funeral there was a memorial,
Speaker 1: because of course there was, and then go on to
Speaker 1: build a new family and coach children's baseball for eleven
Speaker 1: more years. Part of the answer lives in the way
Speaker 1: our systems treat missing adult women in two thousand and three,
Speaker 1: without direct evidence of foul play, there was very little
Speaker 1: investigators could legally do. Marlena Vesper on paper, looked like
Speaker 1: she'd chosen to leave, and in a world where women
Speaker 1: are sometimes expected to quietly disappear from their own lives
Speaker 1: through divorce, through estrangement, through simply walking away from things
Speaker 1: that have stopped serving them, her disappearance didn't trip the
Speaker 1: wires it should have. The case became one of several
Speaker 1: high profile cold cases in the twenty tens that pushed
Speaker 1: legislators in Illinois to revise their protocols around missing persons investigations,
Speaker 1: specifically in situations with behavioral inconsistencies, leaving a passport behind,
Speaker 1: having just signed up for a class, making vacation plans.
Speaker 1: Paula Oakes became an advocate. She speaks at conferences. Now
Speaker 1: her message is the same every time. When a woman
Speaker 1: says her friend wouldn't leave, believe her. Now we're going
Speaker 1: somewhere completely different. We're leaving the quiet streets of the
Speaker 1: American Midwest and traveling to the south of France, to
Speaker 1: the wine country, to a world of grand estates and
Speaker 1: crystal glasses, and old money and older secrets. The Fonteine
Speaker 1: family had been among the wealthiest in the Bordeaux region
Speaker 1: for generations, wine estates, real estate, a banking concern that
Speaker 1: dated back to the eighteen hundreds. Cecil Fontaine grew up
Speaker 1: in a chateau outside the city, educated by private tutors,
Speaker 1: presented to society at seventeen, and married at twenty four
Speaker 1: to Henri Broussard, the eldest son of a rival wine dynasty.
Speaker 1: It was, by every account a merger as much as
Speaker 1: a marriage. The families needed each other. Henri brought land,
Speaker 1: Cecil brought the fonte name and the connection that came
Speaker 1: with it. What neither of them brought, apparently, was much
Speaker 1: in the way of genuine affection. By the time Henri
Speaker 1: Broussard was found dead, in his study on the morning
Speaker 1: of April third, twenty eleven, slumped in his leather chair,
Speaker 1: a half finished glass of Bordeaux on the desk beside him.
Speaker 1: The couple had been married for thirty one years. They
Speaker 1: had produced two children, maintained separate wings of the chateau,
Speaker 1: and had not, according to household staff, spoken more than
Speaker 1: the bare minimum necessary for at least a decade. Henri
Speaker 1: was sixty three. His death was initially attributed to a
Speaker 1: heart attack. He had a documented history of cardiac problems.
Speaker 1: The family physician signed the death certificate without much hesitation.
Speaker 1: Cecil inherited everything. She was fifty five years old, she
Speaker 1: was free, and she was extraordinarily wealthy. She threw a
Speaker 1: party framed as a celebration of Henry's life, six weeks
Speaker 1: after his death. The French press described it as notably festive.
Speaker 1: For a memorial event, she redecorated the chateau. She vacationed
Speaker 1: in Monaco, and then in June of twenty eleven, an
Speaker 1: anonymous letter arrived at the public Prosecutor's office in Bordeaux.
Speaker 1: The letter was typritten and signed, and it contained a
Speaker 1: single explosive allegation that Henri Broussard had not died of
Speaker 1: heart failure, but had been slowly poisoned by his wife.
Speaker 1: Whoever wrote it new things. They knew Cecil had purchased
Speaker 1: a book on rare botanical toxins in the months before
Speaker 1: Henry's death. They knew about a gardening supply account in
Speaker 1: her name that had been used to order potassium based compounds.
Speaker 1: And they claimed that Cecil had been having an affair
Speaker 1: with a younger man in Paris, and that she had
Speaker 1: recently discussed with this man the prospect of Henri being,
Speaker 1: in her words, out of the picture. The prosecutor sat
Speaker 1: on the letter for three weeks, then he ordered an exhumation.
Speaker 1: What the forensic toxicology team found in Henri Broussard's tissues
Speaker 1: was damning. Henri had not died of a heart attack.
Speaker 1: He had died of arsenic poisoning, administered over a period
Speaker 1: of several months in small, deliberate doses. His organs told
Speaker 1: a story his heart never could. Cecil Fontaine Broussard was
Speaker 1: arrested on a Tuesday morning in August of twenty eleven.
Speaker 1: She was on the terrace eating breakfast when the police arrived.
Speaker 1: She showed no particular surprise. She asked only that she
Speaker 1: be permitted to finish her coffee before being taken to
Speaker 1: the car. France, which has a deeply complicated relationship with
Speaker 1: its aristocracy, was absolutely rivetted. The trial opened in Lyon
Speaker 1: in March of twenty thirteen and ran for nearly three months.
Speaker 1: It became almost immediately something more than a criminal proceeding.
Speaker 1: It became theater a referendum on class on marriage, on
Speaker 1: what happens to women who are trapped in loveless arrangements
Speaker 1: by family obligation and social expectation and simply have no
Speaker 1: acceptable way out. Cecil's defense attorneys were among the most
Speaker 1: celebrated in the co and their strategy was audacious. They
Speaker 1: did not deny that Henri had been poisoned, the evidence
Speaker 1: was too overwhelming. Instead, they argued that Cecil had poisoned
Speaker 1: Henri out of desperation, a sustained act of survival against
Speaker 1: a man who had subjected her to decades of psychological
Speaker 1: and physical abuse that when entirely undocumented, because that was
Speaker 1: simply what you did in their world. You endured, You
Speaker 1: maintained appearances. You did not call the police on your
Speaker 1: husband when your families had been intertwined for three generations.
Speaker 1: The prosecution countered that there was no paper trail of abuse,
Speaker 1: no medical records, no police reports, no witnesses on record,
Speaker 1: and they pointed to the love affair in Paris. A
Speaker 1: thirty one year old art dealer named Theo marcellin visibly
Speaker 1: uncomfortable on the witness stand, testified that Cecil had told him,
Speaker 1: the only solution to my situation is for Henri to
Speaker 1: no longer exist. Defense counsel had a field day. They
Speaker 1: argued that that no longer exist was not a murder confession.
Speaker 1: It could easily be read as a desire for divorce,
Speaker 1: for separation, for Henri to simply be gone from her
Speaker 1: life in the ordinary way that people sometimes wish for.
Speaker 1: They questioned Theo's motivations. Was he a scorned lover? Had
Speaker 1: the prosecution offered him anything in exchange for his cooperation.
Speaker 1: The key witness for the defense was a household maid
Speaker 1: named Agnes Claremont, who had worked for the Broussards for
Speaker 1: twenty two years. Agnes testified that she had, on numerous
Speaker 1: occasions witnessed on restrike Cecil that she had cleaned up
Speaker 1: after incidents she had been trained by fear and loyalty
Speaker 1: to pretend had not happened. That there was a room
Speaker 1: on the second floor of the chateau where Cecil was
Speaker 1: sometimes locked inside for days at a time. Agnes cried
Speaker 1: on the stand. The court room cried with her. For
Speaker 1: three months. France watched newspapers, ran competing analyzes. There were
Speaker 1: dinner table debates. There were pro test groups, some calling
Speaker 1: for acquittal, framing Cecil as a victim of a system
Speaker 1: that had brutalized her, Others calling for the maximum sentence,
Speaker 1: arguing that wealth and beauty should not be allowed to
Speaker 1: purchase sympathy or soften guilt. The jury deliberated for four days.
Speaker 1: Cecil Fontaine Broussard was convicted of premeditated murder and sentenced
Speaker 1: to twenty years in prison. She served the sentence in
Speaker 1: its entirety. As for who wrote the anonymous letter, it
Speaker 1: was never officially determined. Many people believed it was Agnes
Speaker 1: Claremont herself, who had perhaps reached the limit of what
Speaker 1: she could remain silent about and found a way to
Speaker 1: act without walking into a police station. Agnes denied it
Speaker 1: every time she was asked, But she denied it journalists
Speaker 1: noted with a very particular kind of smile. The Fontaine
Speaker 1: Broussard case is maddening because it doesn't give you a
Speaker 1: clean moral conclusion. Was Cecil a victim almost certainly, at
Speaker 1: least in part. Was she a murderer? Yes, beyond any
Speaker 1: reason doubt. Can someone be both? That is the uncomfortable
Speaker 1: territory this case occupies and refuses to leave. The French
Speaker 1: legal system does allow for diminished responsibility in documented abuse cases.
Speaker 1: The problem is that word documented. When abuse happens in elite,
Speaker 1: insular worlds, where documentation is actively avoided, where the maid
Speaker 1: learns not to call the police, where the family physician
Speaker 1: learns not to ask follow up questions, where everyone around
Speaker 1: you has a financial or social interest in maintaining appearances,
Speaker 1: documentation becomes nearly impossible. What the case did do was
Speaker 1: spark a national conversation in France about domestic violence among
Speaker 1: the wealthy. It led to the creation of a confidential
Speaker 1: reporting program specifically designed for situations where victims fear that
Speaker 1: coming forward would damage family or business relationships, situations where
Speaker 1: the traditional safety nets are themselves part of the trap,
Speaker 1: and it produced one of the most memorable lines. Ever
Speaker 1: uttered at a criminal sentencing. When the judge asks if
Speaker 1: she had anything to say, she stood up, adjusted her jacket,
Speaker 1: looked at the jury, and said, what took you so long?
Speaker 1: Nobody was entirely sure whether she meant the jury had
Speaker 1: taken too long to convict her, or whether she meant
Speaker 1: the world had taken too long to understand what she'd endured.
Speaker 1: Maybe she meant both. Our final story, Tonight, takes us
Speaker 1: to Klamath Falls, Oregon, October of nineteen eighty nine, a
Speaker 1: small city in the high desert of southern Oregon, the
Speaker 1: kind of place where everyone knows everyone, which made what
Speaker 1: happened there all the more devastating. Diane Callaway was twenty
Speaker 1: two years old. She worked at a hardware store and
Speaker 1: played guitar in a local country band on Friday nights.
Speaker 1: Her sister, Renata described her as the person who noticed
Speaker 1: when you were sad before you noticed yourself. On the
Speaker 1: night of October fourteenth, nineteen eighty nine, Diane left work
Speaker 1: at around nine pm and began walking the six blocks
Speaker 1: to her apartment. She never arrived. Her body was found
Speaker 1: the following morning in an alley two blocks from her
Speaker 1: usual route. She had been sexually assaulted and strangled. The
Speaker 1: investigation was immediate and thorough by the standards of its time.
Speaker 1: Investigators interviewed dozens of people, collected evidence from the scene,
Speaker 1: and developed several persons of interest. But in nineteen eighty nine,
Speaker 1: forensic technology was an entirely different world. They had partial fingerprints,
Speaker 1: They had biological material from the scene without a suspect
Speaker 1: to compare it against. That evidence went into storage. The
Speaker 1: years passed, the case went cold. Diane's file sat in
Speaker 1: a cabinet, and Ranada sat with her grief. Ranata Callaway
Speaker 1: never stopped for thirty years, three full decades. She called
Speaker 1: the Klamath Falls Police Department on a regular basis. She
Speaker 1: attended every public forum on cold cases she could find.
Speaker 1: She wrote letters to the state Attorney General's office. She
Speaker 1: connected with advocacy organizations for families of unsolved homicide victims.
Speaker 1: She was not paralyzed by her grief. She channeled it.
Speaker 1: She made it move. In twenty seventeen, Rnada read a
Speaker 1: news article about investigative genetic genealogy, a new technique that
Speaker 1: had been used to identify the Golden State Killer. One
Speaker 1: of the most prolific and elusive serial killers in California history.
Speaker 1: The method worked like this. Investigators take DNA collected from
Speaker 1: a crime scene and upload it to public genealogy databases,
Speaker 1: the kind people used to trace their family trees. If
Speaker 1: the DNA matches any of the profiles already in those databases,
Speaker 1: even distantly, investigators can begin building out a family tree
Speaker 1: from that match, then narrow it down using public records,
Speaker 1: birth certificates, marriage licenses, voter registration data, obituaries until they
Speaker 1: arrive at a small pool of suspects who fit the
Speaker 1: geographic and age profile. Renata called her contact at the
Speaker 1: Klamath Falls Police Department the same day she read the article.
Speaker 1: His name was Detective Marcus Webb, relatively new to the
Speaker 1: cold case unit, and he had, as Renata later described,
Speaker 1: the rare quality in law enforcement, of actually listening. Together,
Speaker 1: they began pushing to have the Diane Callaway evidence submitted
Speaker 1: for genealogical analysis. It took two years of navigating budget
Speaker 1: approvals and bureaucratic channels, and coordination with a private genealogy
Speaker 1: lab in Virginia to confirm the DNA sample was still
Speaker 1: viable after three decades in storage, but in twenty nineteen,
Speaker 1: the sample was submitted for months later, they had a match.
Speaker 1: The match was to a family in northern California.
Podbean